THE decision of the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) to take strike action for a second time this year will undoubtedly help it score cheap political points, but at what cost and to whom?
There are no winners in this impasse, only losers. Parents, many of whom are themselves teachers, and their children will end up holding the sharp end of the stick. A prolonged strike will eventually rob the next generation of their ability to reap the benefits from Guyana’s robust economic growth and development. Why steal that from them?

GTU and its political bedfellows in APNU-AFC say they have run out of patience with the Ministry of Education (MOE). And because patience, the one virtue that good teachers need the most of, has apparently evaporated, GTU’s only path forward is to launch a full-fledged strike?
Of the 50 US states, only 13 allow teachers to go on strike in the event of a bargaining impasse, a clear indication that for the majority of states, teachers are not allowed to take strike action because they are categorised as essential workers much like firefighters, doctors and police officers.

Instead of an out and out strike, GTU could have taken a page from the playbook of the very experienced Argentine unions? On the same day that GTU teachers stayed home leaving anxious parents scrambling, unions in Argentina launched a 24-hour shutdown of major sectors of the economy to protest austerity measures imposed by President Javier Milei.
The streets of Buenos Aires went quiet. Flights were suspended, ports were paralysed and schools and universities were shuttered. A day’s pay was deducted. That obvious detail is meant for Justice Sandil Kissoon of Guyana’ Supreme Court of Judicature who issued a bizarre decision that as an employer, the Government of Guyana was required to pay the salaries of striking teachers.

Unions, collective bargaining and strikes have been a pervasive feature of the Argentinian labour market. Between 1983 and 2014 Argentina experienced 1,500 public service teacher strikes, amounting to 35 per cent of all strike action in the country.

In a 2018 study, researchers anaylsed data collected from adults ages 30-40 who experienced an average of three months of strike measures when they were students. The study found that adults who were affected by industrial actions of 88 days or more – equivalent to half a year of schooling in Argentina – failed to complete a post-secondary education. Adults who were exposed to fewer strike days went on to complete a post-secondary degree or diploma.

The 30 to 40 years old who were exposed to three months of teacher strikes were more likely to be unemployed or stuck in low-paying jobs. Males and females saw reduced wages by 3.2 and 1.9 per cent respectively.

When researchers looked at 12-17 year olds who were exposed to strike action, they saw that negative education effects were visible immediately after students completed their primary education at the age of 12. The effects were concentrated among children who were from vulnerable households. This means that the poorer a student, the more adverse the impact of a teacher strike on their lives. According to the researchers they married less educated partners and ended up with a much lower per capita family income.

The prevalence of teacher strikes in Argentina had an effect on the economy as a whole. According to the authors of the study, a back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests an aggregate annual earnings loss of $2.34 billion.

The Government of Argentina would have had to increase the wages of all primary school teachers by 62.4 per cent to avert a loss of that magnitude.
It is not in the interest of Guyana’s government to have teachers go on strike. By the admission of the union itself, the PPP/C has given teachers more than they’ve demanded from September 2020 to the current period. That includes substantial salary increases and a menu of benefits and incentives that were never afforded to them by APNU-AFC.

A government cannot afford to acquiesce to every demand that unions make. It is bad fiscal policy and it makes no sense. Guyanese public school teachers happen to be the highest paid among all civil servants.

Please fact check it. I did. The PPP/C has done more to increase wages and benefits of teachers before oil and gas. Why would it now be contemptible with teachers and play Russian roulette with future generations of Guyanese when the state is evidently wealthier?

The PPP/C has raised teacher’s salaries by more than 20 per cent since taking office in 2020. And the MOE has stated that it is prepared to engage the Union on a Multi-Year Agreement from 2024 onwards, but says it will not negotiate retroactively. But for impatient GTU executives, any future negotiations must go backward in order to go forward. Nothing is ever normal in APNU-AFC’s warped political clinic.