Dear Editor,
Recent comments in the media on the silliness of the dress codes being enforced at government offices must not be seen as applicable only to the latter; they are also applicable to GuySuCo offices where their enforcement appears even more ridiculous.
I recall quite vividly two occasions not so long ago when I personally experienced the stupidity of the GuySuCo dress code. On both occasions I was operating voluntarily as the on-site project manager for the construction of the Blairmont Crematorium & Memorial Garden. I was refused entry into the Blairmont Estate Office compound because I had on short pants (I do not normally wear short pants in public except when I have to be in the sun for long periods). The first time when I was refused entry, I was trying to meet a staff member in the Blairmont Estate office who was then also serving voluntarily as the secretary of the Crematorium project, and I had to access some documents in her possession. I was refused entry into the compound, let alone the office, so the staff member had to be called to come out to the road to meet me with the document. On the other occasion I was similarly refused entry as I tried to meet with the Estate Manager on a matter that was, ironically, of more direct interest to the estate itself than to me.
What was also ridiculous about these incidents was the fact that I am well-known as an upright and respectful previous executive of GuySuCo and resident of Blairmont Estate. In my earlier career, I was actually a member of the senior management staff there for quite some time, and I do know from personal experience that in the pre-GuySuCo days, expatriate senior staff used to wear short pants as a matter of course to go to work in the very same offices.
As far as I know the rule against short pants for both males and females still applies to all GuySuCo offices. I believe the case for change is as strong here as it is for all government offices.
Yours faithfully,
Nowrang Persaud
