Dear Editor,
Curiouser and curiouser are the ways of management (or risk-management) of the state-owned Guyana Sugar Corporation. Those who have participated in better management models, including that of the predecessor organisation Booker Sugar Estates, are not allowed to be weary of wondering about the convoluted devices constructed by the various levels of the current under-informed decision-makers in the industry, of recognising the repetition of their errors, the predictability of the failed outcomes, and the decreasing performance, both in production and productivity.
The persistent evidence of the refusal to come to grips with the chronic organisational corrosion, culminates in a disposition towards obfuscating the facts, in the vain attempt at deluding the public; notwithstanding the existence of many who know the sugar industry better than the current ‘players’.
It is against this background that, earlier the South Africans, and now reportedly Tate and Lyle, representations are projected as shadowy actors. One insinuation must be the determined reluctance to engage local expertise most relevant to retrieving the sinking prospects of the titanic disaster that is the Skeldon project (both field and factory). Several names have ever since been submitted to the respective Ministers of Agriculture, albeit without acknowledgement.
It takes no rocket science to appreciate that no one stranger can heal Skeldon’s afflictions, without the requisite skilled support – a conditionality which, from the beginning, never appeared readily satisfied. The extant approach could be nothing more than a pretence; while, on the other hand, common sense (as well as best practices) would point to the advantages to be derived from a coordinated team effort. Such a relevantly expert team is immediately available.
In the meantime one continues to wonder whether the public’s inaccessibility to basic production and productivity indices, eg, the average yields of cane harvested, as well as those standing; factory sugar processing per tonne per hour, is in fact a reflection of the mis-confidence felt by those who prefer spin. Here again, a simple example – rainfall is too often mentioned as influencing production, without ever any reference to actual volumes or trends.
One critically important statistic would be the cost of production – a target factor that would normally influence the construct of any strategic plan. From what one recalls from published commentaries on the latest plan, it is uncertain whether the plan took account of the recent 4% pay-rise offered to GAWU categories of workers, the possible spill-over impact of the increase on the pay levels of their NAACIE counterparts – particularly in the new dispensation of a 40-hour week, restricted to Mondays-Fridays.
By any unbiased standard the wage bill in the industry is disproportionate to its other costs – ranging over 60%. One is forced to ask: to what extent is the wage hike related to the announced intention to seek more billions of funding for the sugar industry? Were these billions also anticipated in GuySuCo’s 2013-2017 Strategic Plan.
Yours faithfully,
EB John