The right to work, the military and social cohesion

THE right to work is guaranteed in the Guyana Constitution (Article 149 A) and this right has its genesis in the covenants of the United Nations (UN). The acts that are committed by national governments and questioned by groups and citizens cannot be allowed to go unnoticed. For where there exists a right it carries corresponding responsibility to make sure that in upholding the rights of an individual or group, the rights of others are not being trampled.

The questions that are being raised that a number of former military officers are being appointed to jobs in the public service and where possible there exists an opportunity for one to earn a dollar through the process of a short- term inquiry, preference is given to this class of citizens cannot be ignored. This concern has now taken on national political ramifications and a response even sought from the President at one of his recent Public Interest programmes.

The right to work does not mean denying others the right to equal opportunity. When Bharrat Jagdeo during the 2015 elections campaign said to the nation that a David Granger administration will see an emergence of militarising of the government, my position was that each has a right to work and if one has the skill, he or she should not be denied the opportunity, and his or her constitutional right must be respected.

This government has publicly proclaimed the greatest resource in the country is the people. There is the recent incident of appointing a hospital administrator for the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC). The health services is a highly specialised arena, deals with life-and-death decisions, and requires requisite skill competencies to make it effective. The decision to place a former military chief of staff to head the hospital absent the requisite training and education is one such instance that gives rise to justifiable concern that military officers are being given preferential treatment, not based on skills, but just by being a member of the fraternity.

The issue of military officers transitioning to civilian work was practised under the PNC and PPP governments. One such outstanding officer during the PNC administration was Fabian Liverpool, who had transitioned to the Ministry of Home Affairs as permanent secretary. This transition has seen him climbing the civilian ladder to perform duties in the Caribbean Community Secretariat.

So it is not a case where military officers do not have the skills set to function in civilian life, nor have not distinguished themselves when placed in such positions, but what it must not be is that when opportunity presents itself preference is given to them. In the current circumstance, the number of former military officers who are appointed as head of civilian institutions reflect a high distortion in filling jobs to a certain class in society.

There was a time in this society when concern was expressed that the requirements to fill any vacancy, race and political persuasion were the qualifying factors. Now the concern is that this preference is being given to military officers. As an aside, I note Sasenarine Singh’s letter that this government has filled the permanent secretaries’ position with Africans. Most of the present PSs have been inherited from the PPP/C. At the same time, government should not ignore this concern, likewise in other areas where it is felt that only one race or class was or is being given preferential treatment.

Profiling was the policy position of the PPP/C government in every sphere. Roger Luncheon was bold enough to say in the court, under oath, that there was no African-Guyanese that was qualified to become a head of any foreign mission. In fact, when the PPP/C came to power in 1992, Clement Rohee as Minister of Foreign Affairs proceeded with cruel racist precision to remove every African head, and where possible, junior level African foreign service officers. Those who were not removed or dismissed were frustrated out of the system.

If we condemned preferential treatment in the past based on identity and association and not merit, we must condemn it now. Note must be taken that the Constitution protects every citizen from being discriminated against and every public official that has taken the oath to do so has a responsibility to make sure that any and every act that underlines discrimination be resisted and removed in the daily execution of their duties.

One of the government’s signature programmes is that of Social Cohesion and there is need for the government to be reminded that this is much more than establishing harmony villages. It is about putting legislation in place for equal opportunity in all sphere of life, ensuring equal responsibility, and developing programmes that meet the needs of every community. Social cohesion also requires moving to create legislation for equal employment opportunities, where every worker can be guaranteed protection from discrimination, having met the criteria for the job.

Social Cohesion as seen by the UN “is the glue that holds society together.” Its analysis, seen through three values speaks to: i) social inclusion; ii) social capital; and iii) social mobility. Instead of seeing a national programme being developed along these lines to achieve the stated values, government has put forward a document based on analyses of the thinking of persons who are authorities on the subject.

Programmes have be developed to minimise inequities in the system by bringing about greater opportunities in employment, easier access to financing for the creation of business opportunities for those left behind. Reforming the state’s land system is critical to social cohesion, since it reduces waiting time for acquisition to engage in developmental projects. There must be some form of affirmative action programme that targets those who were left out of the process in the past, with a view of reducing the disparities in the society. The right to work is not only for a special class or group, it is for every citizen regardless of origin, political persuasion, creed and class.  Social cohesion can move to make this possible.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.