Another example of bad handling of sensitive issues by a Minister

Feb 27, 2009 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
I have remained patient and watchful as the conflict between the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) and the Minister of Education unfolded, hoping that there will be a change in posture, for the sake of the students.
This avoidable dispute stemmed as a result of a teacher, attached to the Berbice High School, flogging some students for homework. This matter seemed to have attracted views from various commentators and citizens as it relates to the teacher’s action.
While I may have my own views regarding the action of the teacher, I do not wish to make any additional comment on this aspect of the issue, since I also believe that what also requires critical analysis in this dispute is an examination of whether the matter was handled in a professional and proper manner, from the inception.
Thus, in an attempt to determine whether appropriate problem solving techniques and sensible leadership were employed in this situation, it might be important to examine some of the facts reported in the local press regarding this most sensitive matter.
On February 18, 2009, the Kaieteur News (KN) reported, in its article captioned “Teachers Union plans industrial action”, that an investigating team was set up to investigate the allegations against the teacher. This team, according to the report, included persons from the GTU, Regional Education Officers, and Welfare Officers. These professionals, according to the report, concluded after the investigation that though the teacher was in the wrong she acted with good intent. The report further stated that as a result of the findings the Chief Education Officer (CEO) recommended that the teacher be reinstated, after her two weeks of forced leave.
Apparently, this recommendation did not find favour with the Minister of Education, Mr. Shaik Baksh, who reported that he told the CEO that the matter should be taken to the Teaching Service Commission (TSC) to be investigated.
Now, where was the Minister when the initial investigation was taking place? And why didn’t he disband this body and advise them that the matter should be decided on by TSC, the body he claims has sole authority to pronounce on this matter? In essence, why were people allowed to waste their time to investigate and pronounce on a matter they claim to have no authority to investigate? Or was this body sanctioned by TSC?
If the Minister claims that he was unaware of the investigation then he had abrogated his responsibility. Further, when he discovered that the matter was being handled by a body without any legitimate investigating authority in the particular case, what action did he take? Did he contact GTU and advise them accordingly? Did he also inform GTU immediately that the CEO had no authority to pronounce on this matter?
Sometimes we allow our office, emotions, and desire to demonstrate a “boss like” attitude to foreshadow our ability to deal with these sensitive matters in reasonable, logical and professional manner.
In another KN report on February 19, 2009 under the heading “Teachers commence industrial action”, Minister Baksh told the press that he called the regional administration in New Amsterdam and advised them that TSC did not give approval for the teacher to resume duties. Since the Minister claimed that it is only the TSC that has the legitimate authority to order reinstatement, why didn’t TSC contact the parties involved in the dispute and state its position?
From all indications it appears that the Minister is usurping the authority and function of the Teaching Service Commission. In none of the reports, in the press so far, is there any statement by TSC on this matter, a development I find quite puzzling.
It is also not clear who has the authority to block the teacher from working, since Mr. Baksh stated that it is only TSC and not the CEO that can rule in this matter. If it is Minister Baksh who is holding up the reinstatement, isn’t his action illegal, since according to him it is only the Teaching Service Commission that has the power to proffer any recommendation in this matter. So has the Minister become the new TSC?
I believe that if the Minister was in good communication with the parties involved that this matter would not have escalated to the level where strike action seem to be the way forward.
With so much suspicions and allegations of government interference, and political victimization in various sectors, the Minister should have been mindful that his action does not provide an opportunity to give credence to these suppositions. He, therefore, was careless in handling this situation.
What was also disappointing is a statement the Minister made that is reported in the KN dated, February 22, titled “Parents being misled by GTU” where Minister Baksh opined that “the Education Ministry will now have to deal with all PTAs differently in the future since associations that involve themselves in actions like these will not be recognised by the Ministry”. Clearly, the Minister has become frustrated to the extent that he is blinded as to the importance of Parent Teachers Associations (PTAs), especially in today’s society.
To issue such a threat is most uncalled for and a highly provocative comment. Rather than trying to appease the situation or to engage in meaningful dialogue with all parties Mr. Baksh seem to be on an all out campaign to exhibit his political muscle. Does Mr. Baksh think that such comments will aid a process to realise normalcy or will it further deplete the relationship between the Ministry, GTU and PTA bodies?
Further, is he claiming that PTA bodies that engage in strike actions against any wrong doing in the school system is not worthy of recognition by the Ministry of Education? The Minister cannot be serious.
Mr. Baksh laments that the ministry is concerned about the children. I am not sure that his action in this case is demonstrative of this claim.
And getting back to TSC, I wonder what stand this body will take now that the Minister has clearly shifted the issue in a particular direction. Will they follow the Minister’s implicit direction or will they demonstrate professionalism and independence in dealing with the issue? So the challenge now is for TSC to demonstrate its independence.
No doubt critics from all sides will be scrutinizing any decision taken by this body should they decide to initiate their own investigation, and advance recommendations. There is no question that Minister Baksh’s bad handling of this matter has now called into question the impartiality of any further investigation in same.
Further, I believe that too often we fail to acknowledge the far reaching implications of some actions and situations. In the current case the most critical concern should be the best interest of the students. Thus, every action and decision taken should reflect this overwhelming concern by all involved.
Too often government officials neglect or gave up on the opportunity to settle disputes, before they escalate into unwarranted industrial conflicts.
This situation, I believe, is largely aided by a belief by those in authority that they are the masters and not the servants of the people; a posture that can only invite and encourage conflict. I know we all can do better, so let’s raise the barrier.
Lurlene Nestor

---

---