Dear Editor,
The temperature at the GWI remains high; so is the interest in what is really happening at this vital entity. I thought I would inquire into the other side of the conflicts. That is, what the CEO, Dr. Richard Van West-Charles, would be willing to share. For purposes of full disclosure, Dr. Van West-Charles and I share a relationship of several years duration.
As is now well known, there were sharp issues with Sanata, Guyana Stores, sole sourcing, and a particular hiring, among other roiling matters that seeped into the media, and led to firestorm after firestorm. There were hard issues on the part of the board (or parts of it). There were issues with management style and management ways.
I absorbed and sifted. Then, I thought that the CEO is either a corporate despot; or he is rocking a long anchored boat. In terms of the former, the CEO has been around the block here and out there, so I thought he would know better having learned a thing or two along the way; as for the latter and anyone inclined to rock moored boats, that is asking for trouble, serious trouble. Thus, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and adopt a wait and listen attitude.
On Sunday morning, I listened to the CEO’s side of the unsettled controversies. It was neither exhaustive nor all-inclusive, but still is sufficient for this writing and to shed some clarity and balance to some of the developments as known.
According to the CEO, his attention to Sanata alerted him that he was in for a turbulent time. There is a friendship between the Chairman of the Board and a former top executive of NICIL; and this interfered with and prejudiced actions initiated at Sanata. Thus, horns were locked with no party prepared to give any ground.
Next, there was the matter involving Guyana Stores, inclusive of a huge bill, and the subsequent discovery of illegal connections. Now, another relationship intruded and took precedence; on this occasion, it was one that entangled a media house, and ended up colouring matters to the disadvantage of the CEO. His world was shrinking; he made for a favoured target; and he was attracting some muscular foes.
Then, there were the employees from different levels within the GWI, and their written public stance inimical to the works of the CEO. This one caught me off-guard and I found myself thinking that the CEO had to be really yanking some people’s chains and straightening out some workers for such an unheard of step to be followed. Apparently, he had become Corporate Enemy No. 1, and a stumbling block to a continuance of the good old days. The story from the CEO is that several disgruntled employees with documented histories were marshaled to lead the charge in a counteroffensive, a public one, aimed at unseating him.
When asked about the differences on sole sourcing, the CEO responded that workers were exposed to hazardous conditions, and, given that time was of the essence, the circumstances necessitated that he move ahead, and unilaterally, and quickly. On the recruitment of Mr. Goring, his comment was that the man was long walking the straight and narrow after his prior troubles, and that it was regrettable that things could not be seen in this light.
Editor, what follows is my personal take on the overall situation; it does not speak to the merits or demerits of the CEO’s responses. Utilities can be a law unto themselves. Officials get mired in certain rigid-at times improper, at times indifferent, at times unacceptable-ways of executing tasks and responsibilities. Anyone who dares to unravel and press that concretized labyrinthine mentality ends up being put in a spot (It should be remembered that Al Capone coined that phrase and the associated consequences ought not to be minimized).
It is where employees band together, rise up, and agitate against, for their lifelong culture is now threatened; it is usually a work ethic that feeds a certain financial culture and return. Damnation is directed at anyone brave enough to bring about change. I think that this is what is happening at the GWI. Also, anytime I hear certain names from this country, there is outrage that these people are still around and that they still feature. Such names include old NICIL brass, and those who were part of the financial and national betrayal that took place.
Separately, I am all for a hands-on activist board. Still, there must be recognition and regard for lines that, if crossed, end up overreaching. Boards are about policy and generalized oversight; management (CEOs) is about day-to-day operations, implementation, and performance through delivery and fulfillment. I detect that the board not only overreached, but overreacted. This was avoidable; also, it was best handled internally.
Editor, it is my impression that the head-butting and confrontations at the GWI are part of a bigger picture. Lots of occupied citizens are loud in their ventilations (and that is what they are) that they voted for change. Unfortunately, the change that they have in mind must not intervene into, or impact negatively, the unsatisfactory (and sordid) ways of doing the people’s business. And most sensitive of all, any change must not touch or deplete the unaccounted for, unearned, and unofficial stream of income into private purses.
Given my conversation with the CEO, I am of the opinion that he is committed to floating a stuck aircraft carrier; unsurprisingly, the regulars are up in arms. I could see myself being more hardnosed (and hardheaded) and draconian. I have little use for warm and fuzzy, touchy-feely, and political correctness. I do respect people’s dignity when such is deserving; when hands are clean. In all of this there is a waiting public to be served.
Even if I am only partially on the money, Dr. Richard Van West-Charles has his work cut out for him; so, too, those new arrivals in other places who are similarly inclined, and see themselves as so mandated.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
