Tony Vieira’s use of the word, “junk” is unacceptable

Nov 28, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
I refer to Mr Tony Vieira’s letter in the Kaieteur News edition of November 6th, 2015 titled “Tony Viera replies to Donald Ramotar” in which he attempted to address some issues on the sugar industry raised by Former President Ramotar.
Mr Viera termed Skeldon Factory as a “junk” from the Chinese. One expected that Mr Viera would have provided some technical evidence for his dismissive remark but none was offered. If his remark was politically-inspired, the use of the word “junk” is excused. If not, it is an absolute disgrace from a Board member with technical know-how.
The “junk” Mr Viera condemns, I understand, is made up of an assortment of equipment much of whichhave come from reputable firms, outside of China, such as Honiron, Siemens, Wartsilia, Fletcher, Broadbent, Abb, etc. In view of this information, if Mr. Viera holds on to his description of Skeldon
Factory, it can be construed as foolhardy. Additionally, Mr Viera ought to be aware that while a Chinese company did the construction, another company was contracted to manage the project. That company, Mr Viera, was Booker-Tate Limited, which the last I know, was headquartered in London and has a long history in sugar. Booker-Tate Limited, I am advised was linked to the Skeldon project from conception to handing over (commissioning) and even after. I am advised that the present CEO of GuySuCo, who has been brought back to fill that position, maybe able to offer further pertinent details as he was a functional director of Booker-Tate who has responsibility for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Really, the technical flaws experienced by Skeldon does not make it “junk” nor can be wholly blamed on the Chinese company to be fair. With all the hype surrounding Skeldon, I was surprised to learn that it recorded its highest ever daily and weekly production figures during second crop 2015. This clearly is a reflection and the results of hard core engineering work executed to increase factory reliability and cane crush rate.
In his letter, Mr Viera threw in for whatever reason remarks on ethanol production. From his superficial statement it is obvious that he is not fully appraised on this matter. I also believe that ethanol production, in the Guyana context, has not been studied in depth. For instance, it is generally known that GuySuCo in its current state is not producing enough sugar cane and whatever it produces; it does so at very high cost. Cane and sugar yields are the Industry’s biggest problem at this instant. Mr Viera ought to know this. Bearing in mind it is surely advisable that the industry tread cautiously in spite of Mr Viera’s view.
Interestingly, Mr Viera makes mention that a cane cutter earnings could reach $2.9M yearly. Which makes me wonder why is GuySuCo complaining of shortage of cane cutters and pursuing a mechanization programme to augment the shortage. In pointing to a cane cutter’s wage, Mr Viera joins company with two (2) Ministers, I believe, who have called attention to this since the wages issue came to the fore. The stated amount needs to be verified as it is surely not reflective of the living standards and concerns of an average cane cutter. But even if so, the above figure, Mr Viera would know it is not anywhere near the amount one Minister tells us is the cost of preserving integrity in Guyana.
In any case, what about an exchange, any top GuySuCo or administration official occupying a soft-cushioned executive chair in an air conditioned office setting for a cane cutter’s job in the cane fields in a boiling sunny day. Ok, just for the experience of it all, some of those “top” officials may prefer to do a one crop stint in the fields of the industry they speak so unintelligibly about.
In his letter, the new GuySuCo Director, recognized that the industry has attained a high production level in the current crop. He attributes this to good management over the previous six (6) months. This is an incredible assertion of courage, and no one with basic knowledge of the industry will take it seriously. But then, Mr Viera, good industrial practice in modern times entail fair remuneration in good production performance. I do think sugar workers are deserving of wage increases in 2015.
To date, I get the impression, sugar workers, a productive sector of the public sector employees, are the only ones not getting wage increases for this year. This is distressing and I hesitate to call it discriminatory at this time. Equally bothering is GuySuCo’s ploy of not engaging the unions in discussions as enshrined in the Trade
Union Recognition Act (TURA) and the agreements with the unions and a practice going back to decades. The recent strike to call for the start of negotiations signals the restiveness of workers who feel they will be denied that increase so important to their living standards. This is not a good beginning for the re-employed management personnel, the ‘Board of Directors’ or the administration.
Frederick Yuraj

---

---