Dear Editor,
I write in relation to the article captioned ‘New GuySuCo unveiled’, in Stabroek News, July 1, 2016. The article notes that New GuySuCo which was launched “includes diversification but there were few details”.
From my reading of the article, I got the impression that the New GuySuCo launch was more a public relations exercise than an attempt to explain the future direction of this entity that employs thousands of Guyanese and which plays an important role in the economy of the country. The information disseminated by this corporation seemed to be crammed with catchy buzzwords and jargon from textbooks in the fields of Organization Behaviour and Communications Study, but has little of substance to assure sugar workers of their future.
While diversification is being touted, and may well be an appropriate approach to be pursued, it should be remembered that this was tried and failed during the earlier PNC years in government. Consequently it is only prudent that proper analyses be conducted before moving in this direction. In the short term then, sugar is still likely to be the focus of the corporation.
Recently, President Granger opined that Guyanese must be consulted before going forward with possible constitutional reform for the country. If we apply the same yardstick to GuySuCo, the question becomes why are Guyanese and certainly sugar workers not being consulted. It is known that the CoI into the sugar industry did not recommend the closure of Wales estate, yet closure was announced and the services of some workers terminated while future plans for Wales have still not been disclosed.
Since the sugar industry was nationalized in 1976, politics, instead of the relevant qualifications and experience in management principles and practice, has been the underlying factor in selecting people to direct, lead and manage operations from the level of the board, to the executives, down to field and factory operations. This means that, whether intended or not by governments of the day, the people who run the corporation make decisions which they feel will meet with the approval of the political masters to the detriment of the corporation. The declining price of sugar exports within recent years has finally exposed the shortcomings of GuySuCo. More recently, two eminently qualified and experienced individuals who should have been, at least, appointed to the board of the corporation if not given executive positions are Messrs Vibert Parvatan and Nowrang Persaud. Vibert Parvatan is a former Bookers Sugar Estates agricultural superintendent and field manager with extensive experience in sugar cane cultivation, an area of major weakness in the corporation. He was also a technocrat minister with the earlier PNC government and subsequently, a senior executive in the private sector. In my view, he has the breadth and depth of experience and qualification to be the CEO or Chairman of GuySuCo.
Nowrang Persaud is an internationally recognized human resources professional with extensive experience in the sugar industry in Guyana. In the Bookers days, just prior to nationalization, it was general knowledge that he was on the fast track to becoming the first personnel manager in the company to be appointed an administrative manager to run an estate. More importantly, he grew up on a sugar estate as a son of the labouring class, and understands the motivation of sugar workers. As well, he is one of the private cane farmers in Guyana, a group that the future of GuySuCo depends on, and who understands their needs/concerns. Both these men played key roles on the CoI into the sugar industry, so why have they been sidelined when others were offered positions?
Yours faithfully,
Harry Hergash
