Dear Editor,
Permit me to respond to Mr. Lincoln Lewis’s letter published in Stabroek News on March 6th, 2022 edition, under the caption: `I am redirecting Tacuma to his own advice’.
As I said in my previous letter, Mr. Lewis is seeking to continue polemics which I prefer not to have. For the simple reason that the more he speaks/write the more counter-productive his endeavour gets as it relates to my intent. Forcing the Guyana Trade Unions Congress (GTUC) and union leaderships to be combative in defence of their members, working people and the poor and powerless. The GTUC’s General Secretary seem to have a lot of time on his hand which should be directed to doing his job of defending workers, and not himself. Most of what his present missive contained is not new that warrants serious consideration, except the following:
“The Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) is guided by its membership. It is not for him to determine `….to push the union leaderships to a combative response….’ He is not part of the membership. And whereas I and the GTUC are not opposed to friendly voices engaging us privately with advice or expressed criticism, Tacuma’s approach leaves much to be desired.”
Here Mr. Lewis is engaged in a futile effort to rewrite and deny the history of struggle and solidarity culture of the Guyanese worker’s movement. His backward position that friendly criticism or advice must be restricted to the private domain and not public is to say the least, ridiculous. A reading of the history of trade unionism will show that unions received advice and criticism in the public space from both friends and foes. This is nothing new. What is new is the new level of the weakness of unions, and the pettiness which Lewis’s response represents. While not a member of the GTUC, or any union, but as a supporter of workers and their unions for more than half a century, I contend that that record of solidarity permits me, in the context of the government’s treatment of the public sector workers in the budget, to raise the absence of allocations for increases in wages/ salaries. I am also entitled to make a statement in the public domain on the unions and GTUC’s muted response to these conditions. My criticism is justified. Mr. Lewis construes it otherwise. May I remind him that I am a political activist who is very often approached by workers requesting that I defend their interests by the way of the letter column of newspapers and on Walter Rodney Grounding? These workers usually ask that I put pressure on the union’s leadership to spur them to militancy. My criticism seems to have sent Lewis out of control and out of orbit.
Mr. Lincoln Lewis restated his accusations against two former WPA ministers who served in the APNU+AFC government. In the context of my reply to address new issues, a response to the above “white mailing” is a retrogression. However, there may be some value in doing so. Lewis’s contention is: “… the Guyana Teachers Union was unable to sign a new Collective Agreement under the direction of a WPA co-leader, Minister of Education Dr, Rupert Roopnaraine.” And later, “ …why under Minister Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, the Guyana Public Service Union didn’t have a Collective Agreement signed and they did not get the return of the Agency Shop which is vital for union functioning.” These are important matters for workers and warrant an additional response to what I gave in my previous letter. When the WPA entered the coalition government, we did so accepting the political principle of “collective” responsibility for government actions and policies. And cabinet decisions are collective decisions. Ministers’ actions are expected to reflect the mandate and decisions of that organ. No minister is an independent actor and he or she serves at the discretion of the President. It is public knowledge that Minister Sarabo-Halley was the subject of a Presidential Inquiry for actions that led to three workers losing their employment – in short, the President sanctioned the minister in a very public manner. By any standard industrial or political, Mr. Lewis’s allegations against the ministers are serious. Their “crimes” would have had negative implications for the regime’s governance record. Interestingly, the alleged failures were not corrected by the President and the cabinet. Why? One recalls that both ministers were subject to the wrath of David Granger not for accusations made by Lewis. In the case of Roopnaraine, he was accused by Granger of being responsible for the poor performance of the nation’s students. In support of his contention, the President cited a commission report that the minister had commissioned to study and make recommendations for reforms and strengthening of the education system. Roopnaraine was removed from the Ministry of Education and demoted to the Ministry of Public Service. I have already mentioned the Sarabo-Halley matter, no need to repeat it. The experienced Lewis is well informed on these issues. Yet he asked of me, “ …. don’t blame David Granger, the partnership, or seek to draw nexus to the termination of my contract with the Guyana Chronicle”. How laughable!
In short, the more the GTUC General Secretary writes, the more he exposes his shallowness and contempt for the workers. His engagement in these polemics has been counter-productive to his reputation, the interest of unions, GTUC and the nation’s workers.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye