When a President addresses the nation it is usually with respect to a situation or occurrence which affects everybody, or at least is of direct relevance to everybody. And so it was on Friday, although his statement, videoed in the balmy surroundings of the State House grounds, appeared on the face of it directed only at a specific group in the society, to wit, certain unions and their membership. His topic was the widespread criticism of the government’s 7% payout to public servants, made without any negotiation with the unions involved.
He was hardly discreet and presidential. He summarily dismissed the heads of the GPSU, GTUC and Guyana Teachers’ Union as “so-called” union leaders, who were in reality “political operatives”. He expanded on this by saying, “If you look at their attitude and behaviour and their level of activism now, compared to when the APNU+AFC was in government, you would see that they are driven by an agenda…” Listening to the President anyone would believe that GAWU was apolitical.
“I appeal to the unions to take off their political hats and put on the hat of reality, the hat of fairness, and in a comprehensive way, they too should applaud the government,” he went on. “I have spoken to many public servants who are fully on board.” However many public servants he may have spoken to, and in practical terms it can’t be all that many, he is the one who is not wearing the hat of reality if he believes that the mass of them would describe the 7% payout as fair.
But his assertion that this is not a wages dispute but a political conflict was made clear in the words: “When you have people who are driven by a particular agenda, then they try to distort the facts, they try to distort the truth, and they try to manipulate information…what I’ve seen since the announcement of this increase, however, is a concerted attempt to distract our people from the destruction the APNU+AFC caused in our economy and more importantly to distract them from the positive agenda that the Government is pursuing.”
One has to wonder whether the government really believes that this is yet another manifestation of the ongoing confrontation between APNU and the PPP/C, or whether they just want to translate the issue into political terms as a means of self-justification for public consumption. Certainly, the President spent a good portion of his address emphasising the difference in treatment of the public service between his administration and the coalition, so the population could appreciate which government had done more for the development of that service. He referred as well to the “broken relationship” between public servants and the APNU+AFC administration, not omitting to remind them that in 2015 they had been promised a 10% annual increase, while they had been given only 5% that year when ministers had been accorded a 50% raise in salaries.
There has been considerable criticism of the amount to be paid out by the government to public servants, teachers, the Disciplined Services, constitutional office-holders and government pensioners, but the head of state reminded his audience of all the measures the government had put in place to cushion the impact of the pandemic and reduce the cost of living. There were, for example, the one-off Covid-19 cash grants and the reintroduction of grants for school children. It was the welfare of the people and not just salary increases which the government had in mind, he said.
First Vice President of the GPSU Dawn Gardener was not impressed. Referencing the increase in the cost of living which the President himself had told the country to brace for, she pointed to the fact that “then he gives [a] 7% increase that does not work. He does not shop at the same place we do and he enjoys a tax-free salary while we have to pay taxes.”
While the size of the payout in relation to the current cost of living is not an insignificant issue, it is not the fundamental one. The critical question which affects everyone in the nation and not just the unions and their membership, is why the government has adamantly refused to engage the union in a collective bargaining process with a view to reaching an agreement. It constitutes a breach of the law, a breach of the Constitution and a breach of the ILO conventions to which we are signatory.
The GPSU has homed in on this: “The GPSU would like to reiterate that the government’s conduct in this matter was unconstitutional and unlawful, as well as, in conflict with the relevant legally binding agreement between the GPSU and Government of Guyana. It is also a departure from recent personal public commitments given by President Ali to act in accordance with the Constitution and Laws of Guyana and consistent with his Oath of Office,” its leadership said in a statement.
As we reported, earlier last week the GPSU and the GTUC had written the President requesting a meeting to further discuss wages and salaries for public servants. Towards the end of the week Ms Gardener told this newspaper that there had not even been an acknowledgement from the government. As for union leaders being characterised by the President as “political operatives” her response was, “H[is] eyes pass us.”
The point is this: even if 7% were a very reasonable payment; even if the union leadership was politically aligned and doing APNU’s bidding; and even if the government had achieved miracles on the cost-of-living front, it has still broken the law. And that is a concern for all of us. It might be said in addition that the public servants and teachers are taken up with issues of survival, not political games, and they want their leadership to secure the best wage deal possible for them. It is difficult to believe the government really doesn’t know that.
From the period of the return of free and fair elections this country has been an illiberal democracy. That applies as much to the coalition government as it does to PPP/C ones. Control and unilateral decision-making is still the name of the game, and the government is allergic to the checks and balances which are expected in a normal democracy. Our regulatory agencies are few in number, and sometimes fragile and capable of being undermined, so the rule of law is really not as well entrenched as it should be.
The fact that government is still determined to take critical decisions without consultation or in compliance either with the law or ethical principles, is apparent in all departments of our economic life. Its indefensible management of the oil industry is apparent to all, but there are many other areas of concern, such as the environment, to cite but one example. But we are into a new era, and people are beginning to speak out. What we want in the first instance is a government which adheres to the law where one exists in a given instance. And one does exist in this instance.
The PPP/C got into the habit after 1999 of imposing wage increases on the public service union. It is time for it to start behaving like a rule-governed administration, rather than an autocratic one. It doesn’t matter what the leaders of the various unions are like; that is the whole point of democracy. You have to seek consensus with any number of groups with whom you are not in agreement and who you may not even like. Democracy is the framework for accommodating a variety of sometimes incompatible views. The PPP’s idea of sidelining political forces which will not accede to its monolithic view of the world cannot work in this polity nowadays.
And for the public at large, they should demand that the government adheres to the law, even if they too have little sympathy for the public service unions and their leadership.
In his address President Ali said: “Your President would ensure that all of you, all of us are part of the strengthening, deepening, widening of democracy, freedom, prosperity and the ability to live a life that is full here in Guyana.” Where prosperity and ability to live a full life are concerned, we will have to wait and see, but as for strengthening, widening and deepening democracy and freedom, that does not look to be on the horizon at the moment.
