Finance Minister Winston Jordan

Public servants salaries

…says any increase must be tied to productivity

Government seems more cautious about delivering the promised 13 per cent pay increase for public servants, saying now that any increase would have to be tied to productivity to stave off inflation.

However, it assured that the $2000 increase in Old Age Pension is almost certain and can be achieved in the 100-day plan the coalition had unveiled during the election campaign. The plan promised “significant pay increases for Government workers including: nurses, teachers in primary, secondary and tertiary education, security personnel and civil servants on the traditional payroll”.

According to a report by the Government Information Agency, Finance Minister Winston Jordan said as it relates to salary increases for public servants, Government would be “the first to admit that salaries are not where” they should be, but noted, “you have to have a plan about taking them where you want to be, it cannot be a one-shot thing”.

The Minister said that salaries should be a part of the compensation package, and that increases must also be premised on productivity increases otherwise “you are just going to a circle which is the easiest part, but then you thus encourage inflation, which will have an impact on competiveness and an overall impact on the country”.

Former Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh

He said that a salary increase is one of the issues on the Government’s front burner, but one that will be done in a sustainable manner. “I could give you 10 per cent today and by year-end, you probably give me back 11 per cent in taxes or more, so it has to be in a menu of measures that we have to look at to lift public servants who have stagnated over the years,” he said.

The Minister said that he knew for a fact the allowances for some public servants have not moved much in 20 years. “I understand people are getting $200 for meal allowance…” he noted.

In the lead-up to the May 11, 2015 elections, then Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh had warned that some of the A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) promises were unrealistic, and had described them as “empty”. “This is nothing short of a blatant attempt to bribe voters and is a gross insult to the Guyanese people,” Dr Singh had said. What is worse, Dr Singh highlighted, is that the members of the APNU+AFC bloc have become notorious for inconsistency, offering a different set of “goodies” every time they speak.

In the lead-up to the 2011 General and Regional Elections, the AFC had promised a 20 per cent pay increase for public servants. Salaries and Old Age Pensions had seen steady and sustainable increases over the past 20 years under the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Administration. In 1992, when the PPP/C took office, public servants were in receipt of $3137 as minimum wage. This increased to $23,204 by 2005. In 2009, there was a six per cent increase; 2010, five; 2011, eight, and in 2012 and 2013 respectively, five per cent. In 2014, workers earning below $50,000 were granted an eight per cent increase while those earning over that sum were granted five per cent.

Pension boost

However, Minister Jordan has assured that the pension boost that the APNU+AFC Government pledged during the election campaign as part of its 100-day plan will be delivered. The Government’s pledge was that pensioners will get $1968.25 or a 15 per cent hike in their pension, which currently stands at $13,125 per month. “We are going to make certain the pensioner gets at least what was in the 100-day agreement and I think it was $15,000. We are going to ensure that pensioners can get at least that,” the Finance Minister said.

He said too that his Ministry was also examining the other benefits that pensioners receive. “We won’t want to take away any benefit that pensioners have enjoyed over the past, but we want to look at the mechanisms; how it has been given out, because some people prefer to have the money in their hand and they make the choice.”

He added , “For example, if a subsidy for a pensioner on electricity works out to be about $1000 per month, and water, let us say is $500, some people would prefer you give the $1500 plus the regular pension and they’ll make the determination.”

He further explained “when you are putting a subsidy of let’s say $1000, you are assuming that for example the pensioner may burn one blub or two bulbs, have maybe a television of no more than so many wattages”.

He then raised the issue of the pensioner who did not have these. “Some people I know are happy to just have a radio, listen to a little death announcement and so on and then have their sleep. They prefer a different kind of leisure so they much prefer you give them the $1500,” he noted.