Fix this and 80% of the solution has been found

Jun 19, 2011 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
I find it strange that from a Human Resource perspective the makers and shakers at Guysuco are as blind to the absence of policies on human resources and more specifically strategic human resources intervention as part of the solution to the problems faced by Guysuco.
A company the size of Guysuco should demand a meaningful role from its HR Department, moreso a removal of the fixations that political gambits beset the functioning of such a department.
If the HR leaders are cognizant of their role, and there are enough rumblings that are preventing them from executing their role effectively, then they need to let the newspapers that are carrying their spread know of their tribulations and if they can get nowhere then they need to return to abodes of the cold north, plain and simple and not bank on a pension here.
The problems of sugar are far from over but with no clear plan there will be no decisive response to the ailing company and it will continue to ail.
Firstly, the government is clueless on the industry and its requirement. This fact was clearly emphasized by two episodes, one that categorizes the modus operandi of the Ministry of Agriculture and more specifically the Minister of Agriculture in May 2009 when 9 million euros was lost because of the late submission of the Sugar Action Plan and the other when the President was clearly made to eat his foot by telling sugar workers firstly at Wales that there will be no closure of estates in 2009 and then in March 2011 justifying the closure of LBI estate.
Editor, these two episodes summarizes the government’s position on the industry without any required explanation. Despite all that has occurred there seems to be no requirement of an HR solution demanded by the stakeholders.
For the first half of 2011 there have been numerous references to turn out but no solution to address this malady as they want us to believe.
This clearly exemplifies that the government is not keen on any solution. If those that run our affairs are conscious to our dilemmas then they would have sought answers.
I get this impression that there are a number of persons in the industry who are merely there presently to secure a pension rather than contribute to the discourse on and work towards the improvement. GuySuCo definitely has an HR crisis on its hand and unattended to, continuous destruction will be inevitable.
I think the Minister should question the role of the Board and the conflict of interest that they have generated apart from credibility issues since this is outside the mandate of management.
The public needs to know that a member of the Board is also an employee of the Corporation.
This kind of twiddling requires no explanation and justification as it is simply wrong.
It may be appropriate to ask the audit committee to look into the working of this Board Member’s office and his contribution to the industry.
Editor, the famous “blue print” has not addressed specifically this issue of the labour problem. Just a word on this blue print, it is the worst document that I have ever seen from a Board that has two Phds, an Economist, two Accountants and one average Agriculturist.
Look at the Mauritius sugar industry; it is practical to find detailed and highly academic publications on research that was done preparing it for the success it is.
This government needs to send a high level team to Mauritius, Africa, India and Brazil (I don’t mean a few underlings of the Ministry of Agriculture) to see what these people have done as lessons for us to articulate in practice.
This government should start demanding from the hierarchy of GuySuCo, action-based plans that are result oriented.
Unlike some I am of the belief that institutional memory is not a strategic need at this point, the present challenges of the sugar industry have outgrown past practices and therefore require new approaches and methodologies.
It requires a major shift. GuySuCo’s success has been in its number of employees and with that diminishing on the technical side the replacement has to be qualitative if the solution is to be meaningful.
I would however support the notion of an office of sugar in the Ministry of Agriculture and not seek a response for assistance in the sugar as was done recently (March 2011) by having a Tate and Lye personnel by the name of Colin Turner resident at LBI who reports to the Chief Executive, tasked with advising on the sugar industry. GuySuCo removed one of local managers from a house to facilitate this gentleman…so much for strategic HR.
This inclusion to the FIR dilemma is not surprising. What is surprising is the press doesn’t know. It is called re colonization!
HR needs to outline a plan and if the top is deemed useless then it needs to say so. By comparison to the major sugar industry, it can be deduced that the hierarchy of GuySuCo is the worst constituted academically.
This must be seen as a contentious issue that requires remedy.
When the rank and file of an industry is skeptical of those that lead and office gossips and jokes are centered on very senior members of the organization, it needs to take stock of itself and the expectation is HR needs to point this out.
But what if the jokes are also on HR then I would say we have a crisis situation and that is what exists.
HR therefore has to make its role known and it must revolve around continuous development of its people and policies that guide HR.
The union’s traditional role of being confrontational has to change but can be dealt with. There are no doubts about that and they know it. If the HR leadership wants to reduce itself to “moo moo” then expect no solutions.
I would support the government bailing the industry out but this cannot and must not be an infinite arrangement.
The solution is to a larger extent rooted in HR. The Minister and the government need to embrace a professional solution that can only be given by professionals and not political nominees.
To emphasize this point, GuySuCo to date has not employed nor have someone act in the position of Financial Director, a job that the acting CE had. He is doing both jobs strange enough. It may be concluded that the office of the CE is useless since the acting CE focuses on more financial issues. But what is the office of the DCE doing? Confusion galore I would conclude.
Plain and simple, the problem is with the hierarchy not knowing its anatomy and function. Fix this and 80% of the solution has been found.
Rohit Parmanand

---

---