Dear Editor,
Sunday evening last, September 21, I happened upon an interesting conversation moderated by Carolyn Walcott. The panel consisted of Lance Hinds of the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Coretta McDonald, General Secretary, Guyana Teachers’ Union – both more familiar to me than Mortimer Livan, introduced as Senior Vice President, Guyana Public Service Union.
Those parts of the discussion I heard had Mr Hinds dilating on the urgent need for ICT development, and the promulgation of the relevant legislation and enabling environment to make the ICT sector and businesses in Guyana, as a whole, more competitive. One could neither miss the sense of urgency, nor but admire the conviction with which he articulated his case on behalf of the private sector, as well as the implications for national development.
While one could detect the speaker’s limited acquaintance with trade union and worker issues, it was instructive to observe his efforts to touch base with the expressed concerns of his counterparts – particularly in the case of Coretta McDonald’s expansive portrayal of teachers in the education system. All agreed on her position that teachers initiated the development of every other skill. They further empathised with the view that they deserved greater priority in the public sector system of remuneration. At one stage the General Secretary argued the case for housing assistance, and some form of transportation subsidy. One rebuttal, logical in my view, was to insist on a level of pay that would allow provision for purchasing the needed goods and services comparable to, say, public service workers.
There lay the rub, however, as the GPSU Senior Vice-President appeared to argue not only a reasonable case for a substantive salary increase in the public service, but justifiably complained of the unacceptable differentiation in pay between what are called contracted employees, functioning mostly in traditional public service jobs. Mr Livan had written requesting information on this topic but to no avail.
At that point I could not help recalling the published statement by the recently re-appointed Chairman of the Public Service Commission, to the effect that the latter would look into such matters. Mr Livan will then be advised to seek assistance from the PSC Chairman in accessing the information requested earlier.
There was much more in the discussion to apprehend. But it was heartening to note the consensus arrived at in the closing stages – for the urgent need to speak with ‘one voice’, meaning not only between public sector employee representations, but also with the latter finding some common ground with their private sector counterparts.
I was pleased with this unintentional climactic declaration.
On the other hand, my only and insistent reservation is of the GTU’s representative not being far more assertive about how comparatively underpaid teachers were. After all, by her own account, a teacher had also to be parent, pastor, counsellor and even part-time healthcare practitioner. How many other jobs can compare with this multiplicity of roles?
Surely, the Teaching Service Commission should be asked to undertake a review, given the increasing rate of resignations among this specially migrant category.
Finally, the GTU should take advantage of their regional links and arrange for a comparative study to be conducted of the various salary structures, particularly examining the overall terms and conditions for which our specialist teachers would be eligible.
The results of such a study should inform a substantive basis for renegotiating a complete package for the union’s membership.
Yours faithfully
E B John
