The ‘heartless servants’

 -
-

Part II

IN OUR first submission, we highlighted the plight currently being faced by teachers as they fight for what is rightfully due to them.

The response to their actions surrounding the negotiations point to a retrograde mode under the disguise of responsible fiscal and economic management. The economic pundits are convinced that the only way the economy will prosper is via the economic deprivation of teachers. The position of the employer inadvertently serves to undermine the moral authority of teachers.

Without any analysis or assessment of the contribution of teachers to the gross domestic product of the country to inform priority areas of expenditure, the Government has unilaterally decided that teachers must abandon the use of an external labour market survey approach and accept an arbitrary salary increase that bears absolutely no correlation to the prevailing economic circumstances.

The position adopted by the employer is tantamount to a blatant disregard for the process of collective bargaining. Its take-it-or leave-it position, while not new to the teachers of this nation, is archaic and reflects a new level of contempt and condescension. With soaring food, transport and energy prices, teachers are challenged to maintain their social parity.

They are thus forced, after exercising more than eight years of patience and understanding, to express their discontent and disgust with the latest position of the employer. A vow of poverty cannot be the basis of the social covenant between the teacher and the society. The “labour of love” cannot by itself purchase groceries or pay utility bills, but must be translated into a monetary commodity that ensures a certain social standing for the teacher.

Unfortunately, the strategy of prolonging salary negotiations over several bargaining periods and then claiming that the country can ill-afford retroactive remuneration is nothing new. This is the ideal scenario for the declaration of a breakdown in the negotiation process and referral of the matter to the special tribunal where a settlement is imposed for a minimum period of five years, as obtained in the eighties when similar economic arguments were advanced by the government.

TTUTA was always ready and willing to ensure that salary negotiations remained current, mindful of the “can’t pay arrears” argument.

Having insisted on the completion of the scientifically sound external labour market survey which unsurprisingly revealed a huge disparity between teachers and other positions that require similar qualifications/skills/competencies, TTUTA is/was prepared to negotiate the closure of the gap as was done in the past, through a hard, tough exchange of arguments.

But “negotiations” assume two or more parties are willing to sit and talk in an atmosphere of mutual respect. The current predetermined position of the Government regarding salary negotiations for public workers precludes any notion of “negotiations” and is rather an imposition, a posture of master and the governed.

This is a social climate that breeds anger and frustration among a large segment of the society. If urgent and concrete steps are not taken to close the seemingly distant positions of the employer and the union, the long-term social and economic cost to the country will far outweigh the short-term financial savings being contemplated. Surely a more flexible position can be demonstrated by the Government through the chief personnel officer; one that opens the door to more creative solutions via unconventional thinking.

Before the poaching resumes by other countries that have made the same mistake and undervalued and disrespected their teachers, we have the capacity to avoid the catastrophic social and economic damage it threatens. Many younger teachers have already signalled their intention to exit the profession in search of greener pastures.

The failure of the profession to attract and retain bright young minds compromises its quality. The persistent incompetence of the Ministry of Education, its failure to provide basic necessities for the operation of schools and this insulting salary increase proposal has precipitated a renewed level of demoralisation among teachers.

Like it or not, professional qualifications give people mobility which they are prepared to use if they feel undervalued and disrespected. Hoping for a teaching profession where people will labour to the point of economic and social deprivation is heartless, selfish and exploitative.

Teachers, like any other professional, must have the right to negotiate the exchange of their labour for remuneration commensurate with the true value of their output and use every lawful means to express dissatisfaction if they feel the negotiation is not transactional in nature. They are also morally obliged to teach the nation’s children to stand up and fight against injustices, especially when they shoulder such a huge burden of social, moral and economic responsibilities.

Comments

"The ‘heartless servants’"

More in this section