For what is unquestionably a landmark industrial relations engagement, the current wages and salaries talks between the government and the Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) are, at least up until now, proceeding in a decidedly low-key manner. Just over a month after the commencement of the negotiations there has been no public disclosure on the status of the engagement.
One hastens to add, of course, that the absence up until now of an update on the status of the talks is not altogether surprising. The two sides would have agreed on protocols to govern the dissemination of information, presumably through joint media releases at mutually convenient intervals in the course of their exchange. That approach would be intended to circumvent the pitfall of ‘negotiating in public’ that can arise out of an unchecked flow of information which can give rise to an unhelpful dissonance that might result in public disagreements that impact negatively on the process.
Of course, it has not always been the case that mutual agreement on the dissemination of information has worked satisfactorily. There is really nothing that prevents either party from ‘going public’ in circumstances where there is some advantage to be derived therefrom. A breakaway from the agreed protocols for information dissemination usually tends to occur too when one side or another perceives itself as having been placed at a disadvantage during the process of the negotiations and feels that getting back on even terms might require unilateral resort to a wider audience.
None of this, of course, necessarily precludes the Union from providing its members with periodic briefings on the progress of the talks. This can only be done publicly and such exercises will allow the media some measure of access to the unfolding negotiations. Naturally, public servants, will expect to be kept abreast of the progress of the talks and the leadership of the Union will, presumably, be aware of its responsibility to be responsive to that wish.
It will be recalled, of course, that comments made by Finance Minister Winston Jordan immediately prior to the start of the negotiations had triggered an expression of concern from the Union about precipitate public statements that might prejudice the negotiations. However, that particular issue appeared to come and go quickly though there is no certainty that, depending on how the talks go, it may not arise again.
It is the GPSU, to a greater extent than the Government of Guyana, that would have an interest ensuring that the general public (more particularly public servants) is kept abreast of the progress of the talks. Arguably, this is its most important assignment since the May-June 1999 industrial action that ushered in the Armstrong Arbitration Tribunal. From the Union’s standpoint successful negotiations could significantly alter the image of a Union that is perceived as having failed to halt the erosion of the collective bargaining process under the previous political administration. From the government’s perspective, an outcome that realizes a meaningful upward adjustment in public servants’ wages and salaries will better position the employer to demand its own proverbial pound of flesh in terms of higher levels of both competence and output in the Public Service. Satisfactory conclusion – to both sides, that is – of the negotiations also has the potential to commence the process of bringing an end to the cataclysmic decline in the national industrial relations climate that had impacted on the entire tapestry of union/employer relations in Guyana.
The importance of ensuring an outcome to these negotiations that is acceptable to public servants and their union would not, of course, be lost to the government. The APNU-AFC alliance’s public commitment to bettering the material lot of public servants was one of its standout pre-elections promises. In that context, its decision to increase the salaries of ministers of government ahead of raising public servants’ wages and salaries was a calculated risk which probably did not go down well with public servants as a whole but which the Union allowed to pass without a great negative comment. Thereafter, the position of the GPSU on the issue of wages and salaries increases was significantly buttressed by the pronouncements of the Lutchman Commission of Inquiry, leaving the government with not a great deal of wiggle room for an agreement that falls too far short of public servants’ expectations.
In principle, at least, the two sides would appear to be at one on the desirability of a meaningful Public Service pay hike though there are indications that they may have differing formulas for arriving at a rationale for granting increases. The Union, we are told, may have been envisaging an across-the-board increase in the region of around thirty-five percent. Minister Jordan is on record as saying that there might be an option to an across-the-board increase and it is by no means unlikely that the government will put such a proposal on the table. Whether, after a succession of paltry pay hikes public servants will find anything less than a significant across-the-board increase with some meaningful degree of retroactivity satisfactory is anyone’s guess.
There is, of course, always the likelihood of a multi-year agreement hinged to various considerations including the performance of the economy though such considerations will depend on, among other things, the spirit in which the negotiations proceed and the preparedness on both sides to demonstrate compromise and magnanimity. From the GPSU’s standpoint a great deal will depend on what its members find acceptable. The government, in the wake of its commitment to make the lot of public servants better, over time, will be expected to give expression to that commitment in a manner that guards against loss of face with public servants.