‘Dukernomics’ and the public service

THE EDITOR: Fresh on the heels of a march that was only able to attract the participation of 250 (conservative) people, the leader of Natuc and president of the Public Services Association (PSA), Watson Duke, has proven that the majority of the public service is very sceptical of his demands or of Duke himself.

The theme of negotiations being used by Duke to solicit the support of PSA members and the wider public service for the collective period 2014-2016 is “a living wage.”

Duke is demanding that his living wage for public officers begins at $10,000 for the lowest category of worker, which is range 4. At present an entry range 4 worker at the minimum wage in the salary scale is receiving $4,537. The difference between the two figures is $5,463.

In other words, Duke is in fact demanding from the Government a 120.4 per cent salary increase. Is this sustainable for our economy while both oil and gas prices are suppressed at this time?

The political reality of these negotiations is predicated against the fact that Duke is a political foe of the current administration and is desirous on becoming the next prime minister. Will the current or any administration accede to a 120.4 per cent salary increase to make Duke appear politically attractive for the upcoming general election?

Is Duke negotiating in good faith on behalf of public officers or is this a political strategy to stymie agreement between both parties, thereby frustrating public officers to vote against the current administration? What will a 120.4 per cent salary increase for public officers mean on the cost of living and overall economy?

Duke’s usual attack against the forgoing will be to accuse me and other logically thinking public officers of being political. However in the event that Kamla Persad-Bissessar forms the next government, how will she deal with a 120.4 per cent salary increase to public officers and by extension for teachers, daily paid workers, police, fire and prison officers etc who will likely demand the same if Duke is successful.

Duke’s strategy, if successful, will likely lead to increased borrowing to meet TT’s recurrent expenditure. At that rate our country will eventually end up on the doorstep of the IMF.

My experience of the austerity measures by the international lending agencies in the late 80s and early 90s is to attack the public service first. I fear this strategy will result in salary cuts, mass retrenchment for temporary and contract officers in the central public service, WASA and other state enterprises.

The public officers who have been in contact with me and others are indeed anxious to obtain a long outstanding salary increase, but not the personal and politically motivated demands currently before the CPO.

We believe that Duke’s physical presence at the negotiating table is counterproductive to public officers attaining the reasonable and timely salary increase they deserve, because of who he is and what he represents.

ORAL A SAUNDERS

former general secretary, PSA