Time is the best interpreter of every doubtful and controversial decision

Mar 30, 2009 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

It seems to me that we are in the season of anniversaries and observances of tragic events.

Hence recently, we observed the anniversary of the Lusignan massacre, as well as the Bartica killings and in a matter of months we will be observing the Lindo Creek and Kaieteur News pressmen killings.

Now! These are all tragic events which have left an indelible print on our minds, but what about the dismissal of the six bankers from the Republic Bank two years ago?

The trade unions and the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) as well as a small section of civil society who showed solidarity with them seem to have lost all interest in the matter.

Hence, its anniversary was allowed to pass quietly.

After all, I said before, that misgivings such as frauds and those, which fall within the realm of employment relations, do not engender emotions on a scale similar to violent crimes.

Be that as it may, recent developments have fortified my view that those six employees who were dismissed from the Republic Bank had been unfairly treated.

It is on record that more that 2000 years ago a Greek Historian in the person of Dionysus Halicarnassus said: “Time is the best interpreter of every doubtful law”. And so, 15 years ago, Chief Justice Bishop, now Professor Bishop enjoined Dionysus and said that his remark could be applied to any situation. Therefore, I would wish to say that time is the best interpreter of every doubtful and controversial decision.

From the beginning, I submitted that the bank’s decision was manifestly wrong in that it was a perfect example of what should be deemed as naked injustice. Until today, it is unclear to me why the bank was allowed to escape with such a grievous mischief

Just for emphasis, I wish to refer to a statement made by the then managing director published in the SN of 22-04-2007. He said:

“The bank has a situation in which money was taken away; the investigation at that point could not prove who was guilty and who was not.”

In spite of such a bold statement, the bank proceeded to terminate the services of the innocent employees on the basis of ‘Loss of Confidence’ and in an effort to justify their sins they called forth the Termination Of Employment and Severance Pay Act (TESPA) to their defence.

Unfortunately, the Act offered them no protection for what was done.

Regardless of what the bank said, it is clear that it acted in conformity with its common law privileges, which had been overtaken, by the TESPA and that is very, very sad indeed.

I find that a particular

statement made by Justice Roy is a recent case (2008) to be very refreshing as well as damning to the bank’s decision. Speaking about the restrictive powers of the employer to dismiss an employee he said at paragraph 20 of his judgment:

It is not quite accurate therefore to say that, in relation to the power of summary dismissal under section 10, any misconduct will do.

Parties are not entitled to restrict the ambit of Section 10 by including in their contract of employment terms and conditions that confer upon the employer the right of summary dismissal for just any kind of misbehaviour or misconduct.”

The bank may wish to contend that it severed instead of summarily dismissed the workers but I do not wish to rekindle the debate about the rightness or wrongness of the dismissals since I feel that that is a settled matter.

However, I wish to state that in the light of Justice Roy ‘s judgment, time has indeed interpreted the decision of the bank to dismiss the six employees two years ago was a bad one.

Worst still, a mere $8 million were stolen in 2007 resulting in six employees being subjected to cruel and embarrassing treatment by the police before they were wrongfully dismissed.

Two years later when a quarter billion is stolen from the same bank, it is described as insignificant. I think that must have been a painful thing for the six ex-employees to hear.

I wish to close by quoting the substance of a book titled ‘Saving The Corporate Soul-and (Who Knows) Maybe your own’. It says:

“Everyday the media reports on the latest corporation guilty of financial misconduct and public deception. Insider trading, fraudulent accounting, outlandish executive pay, and perks – a steady stream of scandals, scar the business landscape.

But the corporate crisis is as much spiritual as it is financial. More than ever, the time is ripe for Saving the Corporate Soul. In his hard hitting thought provoking book, David Batstone shows that a corporation has the potential to act with soul when it aligns its missions with the values of its workers and puts its resources at the service of the people it employs and the public it serves”.

This is quite an extensive quote but it is much too important to be condensed. I think that the six workers have all moved on with their lives and the bank may not wish to keep company with them any longer. But I think that the first step it should take in an effort to save its soul is to apologise to them.

Francis Carryl

---

---