IN ACCEPTING the recommendations contained in the 120th report of the Salaries Review Commission (SRC), the government has sent a clear message to the citizenry; spoken and unspoken. The argument of affordability to pay can no longer be used as an excuse to counter the demands of public officers for enhanced remuneration packages.
The substantial increases proposed by the SRC for the holders of high public office who fall under its purview is in stark contrast to the paltry increases offered by the government, which continues to display disdain and contempt for the collective bargaining process.
The colourful, even sensational, political commentaries and banter will now ensue in the hallowed halls of both parliamentary chambers as the report is debated, but this will be only of academic value. For even if some parliamentarians express vehement opposition to the recommendations contained in the report, at the end of the day the government will have its way by virtue of its simple majority.
The parliamentary stage is now set for the government to be formally accused of being insensitive and self-serving, even guilty of double standards, given the tone and content of the political commentaries that have been stimulated by the generation of the report.
Several questions remain pertinent regarding these recommendations, which have unsurprisingly generated healthy debate in the national community, from political voices as well as civil society. While one does not begrudge a salary increase for those people who hold some of the highest public offices, the basis for the recommendations remains unclear and even curious.
Many have rightly questioned the metric used by the SRC to generate its recommendations in light of the positions advanced by the Minister of Finance and, more recently, the Special Tribunal of the Industrial Court regarding salary negotiations with various public sector trade unions. The inconsistency is alarming.
While there may never be a "good" time for a salary increase for such people given the cut and thrust of local mauvaise langue politics, many commentators have expressed indignation with the quantum of increases proposed when juxtaposed against the measly take-it-or-leave-it positions adopted by the government. The double standard is glaring.
There is no doubt that officers holding high public office deserve salaries commensurate with the important roles they perform, especially when compared to positions in the private sector, including state companies. However, the argument of affordability must be applied equally across the board, with leaders leading by example.
It is noteworthy that the remuneration package currently enjoyed by these officers was pursuant to the SRC’s 98th report, which was laid in Parliament on February 14, 2014.
Just like many of the workers who are currently locked in battle for salary increases covering a roughly similar period after said government had, on the basis of affordability, imposed an unofficial moratorium on salary negotiations when it assu
