Dear Editor,
From all appearances, misbehaviours and misrepresentations, the sugar industry would seem to be going in a direction that is other than ‘sweet’ – back into a place once described so eloquently by Clem Seecharran as ‘bitter sugar’.
But this is not happening by accident, rather it is a result of a deliberate coordination of insinuations about deficits in the individual character; and the subversion of organisational roles of authority.
The indulgence encouraged in the bypassing of accountability relationships is frightening, cumulating in the surrender of honour of highly qualified managers, as well as technical personnel.
The deterioration of the observance of organisational norms is at least pointing critical players towards what exits there may be at different opportunity times.
Those who might opt to stay (at the sacrifice of their self-respect,) might not realise that in the process they are laying others on that very altar of disrespect.
The scale of toxicity in a once productive and congenial work environment has to be experienced, albeit on a daily basis, in order to be appreciated.
When suddenly the security guard becomes incensed enough to stop those whom formerly they respectfully allowed safe passage; but now, for example, proceeding to a day’s work recognisable managers are being challenged for their authenticity, by subordinates.
What could be driving this level of mistrustful behaviour amongst even those who attend church every Sunday? If reports are to be believed, GuySuCo is too historic an organisation for its international image to be emaciated to this extent; and its managers exposed to such undeserved humiliation.
Meanwhile the TV reports on ‘contracted employees’ (cane harvesters) complaining of not being able to access NIS benefits, nor the provision of (traditional) safety gears, from the ‘Contractor’ (a recent GuySuCo Agriculture Manager) who should know better. These are issues which should demand the immediate attention of the Ministry responsible for the compliance of the relevant laws.
All the above, and more, cry out for the early establishment of a Board, specifically to oversee the management of the operational estates.
Meanwhile some other authority should be concerned about setting a realistic time line for the completion of the crucial divestment process. The debilitation simply cannot persist in extenso. Nor can the intervening agony be indefinitely endured – by the mass of demotivated participants in this scenario.
The prospects are for their departure from increasingly unsavoury working environment conditions; while the likelihood of adequate replacements looks slim. Who would want their professional career and personal to be so toxified?
Yours faithfully,
E.B. John
