Safeguarding one’s interest

IN ACCEPTING the recommendations contained in the 120th report of the Salaries Review Commission (SRC), the government has sent a clear message to the citizenry; spoken and unspoken. The argument of affordability to pay can no longer be used as an excuse to counter the demands of public officers for enhanced remuneration packages.

The substantial increases proposed by the SRC for the holders of high public office who fall under its purview is in stark contrast to the paltry increases offered by the government, which continues to display disdain and contempt for the collective bargaining process.

The colourful, even sensational, political commentaries and banter will now ensue in the hallowed halls of both parliamentary chambers as the report is debated, but this will be only of academic value. For even if some parliamentarians express vehement opposition to the recommendations contained in the report, at the end of the day the government will have its way by virtue of its simple majority.

The parliamentary stage is now set for the government to be formally accused of being insensitive and self-serving, even guilty of double standards, given the tone and content of the political commentaries that have been stimulated by the generation of the report.

Several questions remain pertinent regarding these recommendations, which have unsurprisingly generated healthy debate in the national community, from political voices as well as civil society. While one does not begrudge a salary increase for those people who hold some of the highest public offices, the basis for the recommendations remains unclear and even curious.

Many have rightly questioned the metric used by the SRC to generate its recommendations in light of the positions advanced by the Minister of Finance and, more recently, the Special Tribunal of the Industrial Court regarding salary negotiations with various public sector trade unions. The inconsistency is alarming.

While there may never be a "good" time for a salary increase for such people given the cut and thrust of local mauvaise langue politics, many commentators have expressed indignation with the quantum of increases proposed when juxtaposed against the measly take-it-or-leave-it positions adopted by the government. The double standard is glaring.

There is no doubt that officers holding high public office deserve salaries commensurate with the important roles they perform, especially when compared to positions in the private sector, including state companies. However, the argument of affordability must be applied equally across the board, with leaders leading by example.

It is noteworthy that the remuneration package currently enjoyed by these officers was pursuant to the SRC’s 98th report, which was laid in Parliament on February 14, 2014.

Just like many of the workers who are currently locked in battle for salary increases covering a roughly similar period after said government had, on the basis of affordability, imposed an unofficial moratorium on salary negotiations when it assumed office in 2015, these officers may just as well argue that they are due for an increase as well, having foregone increases for the past decade and mindful of the rise in the cost of living.

In its defence the SRC, a creature of section 140 of the TT Constitution, would argue that it would have fulfilled its mandate to review the salaries and terms of service for the public offices that fall under its remit and is thus under no obligation to justify the basis of its recommendations, being an independent entity.

The SRC must be thanked for its eye-opening report. The government has also quite rightly indicated that it has the power to accept the recommendations of the report.

Having regard to the adamant position the government consistently enunciated for fiscal prudence and responsibility in the management of the economy since it assumed office, it is indeed sad and disappointing that such consistency was not maintained in its treatment of the report.

The legal/moral leadership argument is hard to escape here, especially when it comes to a case of self-regulation and moral legitimacy.

The industrial relations climate in the country is highly charged with several trade unions engaged in negotiations for enhanced remuneration packages for their members. It remains to be seen how the plethora of public sector unions will factor in the non-rational used by the SRC to generate its recommendations in their negotiations with the Chief Personnel Officer.

Workers made huge sacrifices when called upon in the interest of the country and would be justified to demand what they think is compensation consistent with the work they do, taking their lead from the government.