Salary adjustments

Thursday’s announcement by President Ali of increases in the minimum salaries for various categories of the Joint Services would no doubt have been heartily welcomed by the beneficiaries.

According to the President, the revisions will benefit an estimated 8,000 persons and cost $1b.

In an address to the nation, the President said that the adjustments to the minimum salaries are additional to the eight percent across-the-board increase for public servants which was announced last week.

“…..These revisions to the salaries of the members of the Disciplined Services will benefit an estimated 8000 persons and will increase the disposable income of our men and women in uniform by over $1b annually,” the President announced.

He added that among the factors taken into consideration in determining the adjustments was the need to resolve anomalies and disparities across the various services.

“We were also mindful of the need to ensure that we improve our competitiveness, particularly at the entry level so that our Disciplined Services continue to be an attractive employment prospect for our young men and women,” the President added.

The Sunday Stabroek Editorial of November 20th has already addressed the unilateral announcement of the 8% across-the-board pay increase for public servants and its transgressions of the government’s obligations to collective bargaining, the law and international conventions. The adjustments announced by the President on Thursday, with others likely to follow, compound the undermining of the tenets of good governance.

No one will deny that there is a wage deficit that has to be made up by the government as it relates to all parts of the public service. Low pay to members of the Joint Services has long been seen as one of the contributors to their poor performance and rampant corruption although that is not the only factor. Therefore, raising the minimum pay for the various categories is to be welcomed although there are several caveats which would call into question the wisdom of the President’s unilateral intervention.

The first point that has to be made is that rapidly growing – but volatile - oil revenues have both empowered and emboldened President Ali to make these extra-budgetary allocations to various groups: residents of indigenous communities, rice farmers, fishermen, flood victims, squatters etc. One can expect in times of emergencies that allocations can be made under the respective ministries with the Contingencies Fund – which has been the subject of abuse over the years – being utilised for this purpose. Alternatively, supplementary funding secured by financial papers approved by Parliament would be the preferred means of disbursal. It is not appropriate for President Ali to be assigning monies left, right and centre without any known reference to Parliament or the financial accountability architecture.

What was frankly astonishing is that in his address to the nation, the President delivered in

granular detail changes in salaries to 27 categories in the Guyana Police Force, the Rural Constables and Neighbourhood Police, the Guyana Fire Service and the Guyana Defence Force. Was that really necessary? Should it not have been left to the Minister of Finance, or the Minister of Home Affairs or the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs? There is also the matter of the appearance of politicking and how that accrues to the benefit of the ruling party as opposed to the President being cognisant that he is also Head of State and must therefore be mindful of his larger responsibilities. The second point to be made is the diminution of the significance of annual budgeting if the President continues with this ad hoc dispensing of monies. The whole intent of the annual estimates of expenditure is to provide a clear picture of projected revenues married with projected expenditure. This is then subjected to the annual circus of each parliamentarian wasting the public’s time in futile debate(?) before the budget speech and the appropriations bill are approved. While the 8% across-the-board increase was said to have been catered for in the 2022 budget it isn’t at all clear that the salary adjustments announced on Thursday were. The same goes for the various allocations unveiled during the year. The budgeting process is therefore undermined and this cannot be a good thing.

Budgeting should now be an even stricter process considering that the under its Natural Resource Fund legislation the government would be fully aware by the end of December this year how much oil revenue is available for expenditure in 2023. Oil money is now the major lubricant for expenditure. Aside from emergencies all outlays such as emoluments, planned housing aid and tax reductions should be factored into the 2023 budget for approval by the Committee of Supply, thereby eliminating these discretionary announcements by the President.

Among the other issues which will arise in the President’s announcement is the matter of who exactly is deciding on the scales that have been approved. Public service salary scales have a long-established history with their various intricacies and persistent problems of bunching and anomalies across sectors. Any ill-considered variations could deepen contradictions and create an even bigger muddle. The public was not told who decided for which categories the various minimums would be raised. Was it the Ministry of Finance? The Ministry of Public Service? The Office of the President? The public should be provided with this information along with the rationale. What will happen in the instance of the parts of the public sector where there is union representation? For instance in the heath sector, will increases of nurses’ minimums be discussed with their union? Who is also analysing the impact of these salary increases and other interventions in the public sector on inflation and the follow through from this on poverty-stricken households which will not benefit from any assistance?

After announcing the increases on Thursday, the President admonished the fortunate sections of the Joint Services that the public expected improved performance.

“These salary adjustments come with great costs to the Treasury. We expect you to honour these adjustments with dignity, with hard work, with accountability, with transparency. And we expect you to perform at all times at the highest level. We expect you to deliver a better service to the people of our country”, the President asserted.

It is unlikely that without fundamental reforms in the Guyana Police Force, in particular, that the hopedfor results will be obtained.

As much as higher wages are to be welcomed, the President’s announcement raises a number of problematics that challenge good governance, best practices and the role of Parliament.