Is the leader of the GPSU an employer because he sits on the Public Service Commission?

Dear Editor,

I note the letter from Mr EB John – ‘GRA employees are not public servants’ – in of Saturday, July 23.

Now I do not know enough about the matter (and, indeed, do not have sufficient interest even) to offer a public, informed comment. However, Mr John’s statement: “… the leader of the GPSU ... sits as an employer on the Public Service Commission ...” startles me. Mr John seems to be of this mind from his interpretation of Clause 2 (1) (c) of the Revenue Authority Act 13 of 1996, amended by 16 of 2003 which he quotes as follows: “(c) the discipline and control of all members of staff of the Authority appointed under this Act.”

This quoted wording seems quite similar to the wording in the Guyana Constitution that gives authority to the service commissions to appoint, remove and exercise disciplinary control over persons in their assigned groupings. For the Judicial Service Commission, see Article 199(1); for the Public Service Commission, see Article 201(1); for the Teaching Service Commission, see Article 209(1); and for the Police Service Commission, see Article 212(1).

As a member of every Teaching Service Commission (TSC) appointed between 1994 and 2008, I always believed that while the TSC had authority to appoint, remove and exercise disciplinary control over teachers in the public service, the employers of those teachers were the Government of Guyana (through the Ministry of Education). That, I felt, was the general position with the other service commissions in relation to the persons they had authority to appoint.

Could I, with respect, invite Mr John to examine this matter again (including the Miscellaneous and the Interpretation Articles at the end of the Guyana Constitution) and advise his current thinking on the matter of the President of the GPSU as a member of the Public Service Commission?

Yours faithfully, George N Cave