Dear Editor,
The recent allegations of the firing of both a production manager and head lab technician at GuySuCo’s Rose Hall Estate raise disturbing questions about the potential for coordinated fraud within the company. The lab technician, who controls crop analysis, essentially determines the reported tonnage of sugar expected from each harvest. If these figures are intentionally manipulated to report a lower yield, it sets the stage for the production manager to take advantage of the discrepancy.
In this hypothetical scenario, the head of lab technicians and the production manager could be partners in crime, profiting from the sale of the unreported extra tonnage—a phantom quantity that slips through official records and into illicit sales. This collusion would not only drain financial resources from GuySuCo but also undermine the transparency and trust essential to its internal operations.
To prevent such schemes, GuySuCo must implement robust cross-verification measures that align lab reports with actual production figures, ensuring that no single department holds the power to manipulate data unchecked. Independent oversight is critical to safeguarding the integrity of the company’s processes and financial well-being.
Sincerely,
Keith Bernard
