Dear Editor,
It is perplexing, and at the same time instructive, that a simple resignation from an organisation should make news to the extent that it invites letters to the editor. This basically innocuous development may, however, be indicative of the interest Guysuco generates, not necessarily of a positive nature.
There also had to be a retraction with apology for the misrepresentation of the CEO surrounding the context in which Guysuco as a “youth friendly” environment was used.
Whether these incidents are intended to be linked makes one wonder whether there is a pattern emerging. For example, the news concerning the curtailment of the sale of alcohol in estate staff clubs must cause at least sniggers amongst their older and aging customers, when they reflect on the more civilized days of socialising in those well-attended facilities, with a decorum into which wives were integrated and families congenialised with invited guests. There will also be nostalgia about children frolicking in games, in and out of swimming pools, as dads roamed the billiard tables and moms paid no heed to either, as they intensely exchanged versions of their domestic affairs, then free from abuses. Each club was well managed by a committee which kept in touch with its membership and was sensitive to the latter’s needs and even frustrations.
But times have changed. Complaints are made of abuse – alcohol abuse – presumably on the grounds that the indulgence is seen to affect productivity.
However, the peremptory closing of one bar could not reasonably be expected to contain what addiction may exist. All that will happen is that the locus of consumption will be shifted. So what? Indeed what may be important to diagnose is why the drinking habit has appeared to reach such proportions as to attract non-management levels of decision-making, in the absence of appropriate executive action.
An indicator may well be the lack of decisiveness, not only at the senior executive level, but at other relevant decision-making levels in the organisation, because of a lack of self-confidence resulting from the very pattern of peremptory decision-making being experienced over recent times. Perhaps it has to do with the perception of those affected (and consequently disaffected) that the human resources management function in the organisation has been downgraded in latter years to a point of abject impotence and attendant imbecility.
‘People’ are no longer more important than ‘sugar estates.’ They are mere captives aboard a sinking economic vessel the bow of which, overswept by a tide of miscalculations, obscures the vision so much needed in this particular regard.
The closure by Guysuco years ago of the residential Training Centre at Ogle, operational since the seventies, was a dark signal of the diminishing appreciation for the maintenance of an effective human resource development plan in the sugar industry. When in the most target-oriented industry in the country managers’ performances ceased to be rewarded on merit, but in its place ‘across-the-board’ increases are imposed, where is the place for motivation and innovation? How is pride in achievement sustained? Why should the contribution expected be more than that of the office assistant? How then are the criteria for promotion formulated if all are assessed and valued as performing equally? How are weaknesses in performance identified? Is there any meaning to having a succession plan? What are the methodologies of preparation for the next higher rung, with the residential Training Centre having been closed?
It is not difficult to apprehend how over time frustration can harden into endemic stress. But the capacity for treating the effects of stress has also been substantially reduced, with the closure of the Ogle Diagnostic Centre, where salaried medical practitioners conducted annual medical examinations that tended to serve warning on alcoholics and non-alcoholics, smokers and non-smokers, alike, and at least showed objective reason why the negative reaction to stress needed to be minimised. The closure of the Ogle Diagnostic Centre also meant that regular sugar workers and their eligible families could no longer access the long established attention, treatment and health monitoring provided by this medical facility. Treatment has been outsourced – taking with it commitment, loyalty, and in prevalently extreme cases, discouraging needed attendance at work. This exercise in cost-effectiveness (?) is described by old people as ‘penny wise and pound foolish.’
Where now are counsellors of any kind who could help not only identify the stressors in the work environment, but also provide support for the stressors emanating from the wider society?
The answer is unlikely to be found in the persistent indifference to peoples’ feelings, and the patent lack of energizing communication amongst the relevant players.
Yours faithfully,
E B John
