Talent is short

Jul 16, 2017 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Earlier this year, the Head of the Guyana Gold Board and another senior officer were sent on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation into the purchasing of gold from a particular individual who is now before the courts. There has been no word as to the outcome of that investigation. The individuals remain off the job.
Sending a person on administrative leave must not become a form of constructive dismissal. The sending of persons on administrative leave must not become the norm where investigations need to be conducted. Not all cases require that senior officers be sent on administrative leave.
Administrative leave must be deployed sparingly. It must only be used when it becomes absolutely necessary to ensure an individual’s presence on the job would not prejudice an investigation. So long as the presence of a person on the job would not interfere with an investigation, there is no reason to send that person off on administrative leave.
The investigation should be promptly conducted so that the persons on administrative leave are not off the job for an unwarranted period of time. It should be conducted promptly to act as a safeguard against administrative leave becoming a form of constructive dismissal.
The present situation at the Gold Board should be handled with delicacy because of another reason. The head of the Gold Board happens to be the daughter of a former President of Guyana. She is suitably qualified for that job. The opposition, including her father, has been pointing fingers at the government claiming witch-hunting. The government should therefore act promptly, so as to neutralize any accusation which is likely to arise that its actions are politically motivated or that it is victimizing anyone with connections to the main opposition.
This case will have a bearing on how professionals are likely to relate to the government. Professionals are not likely to want to stick around if they believe that they can become victims of arbitrary dismissals, or if their reputations can be placed into disrepute because of politically motivated or malicious actions. Qualified persons are not going to wait around while any government takes its jolly own time in undertaking investigations.
Overseas-based professionals are not likely to be encouraged to come back and work in Guyana if they see a situation in which persons sent on administrative leave are kept off the job for an inordinate period of time. The case of the Gold Board must therefore be one in which the investigation should be prompt, and the decision about the future of those sent on administrative leave expedited and be fair. It must be transparent and stand up to public scrutiny.
The government has clearly made a mess of its handling of top officials at other institutions. It had preordained plans for some of these individuals and only kept them on while it identified its own lackeys for the jobs. Some of these lackeys have proven worthless, and in some instances have had to be removed. A number of persons appointed to replace others within the public sector have simply been at sea. They are not getting things done, because either they are too new to their positions or are woefully incompetent.
Anyone seriously interested in doing an analysis of the newbies within the government should just look at what many of them have achieved since they took up their new appointments. Very few success stories exist within the government. The local bureaucracy tends to stifle initiative, but when you look at the performance of many of those hurled into high positions you will find that most of them have underperformed.
In such a context, Guyana has to ensure that there is no further hemorrhaging of professionals from the system, because there are shortages of skilled persons within it. There is no abundance of talent out there as many people tend to believe. It is hard to find good people. Most employers can attest to how difficult it is to find quality staff. Unless the few professionals that are around are treated fairly, they too will bolt.
The Gold Board investigation should be conducted by an impartial panel. It is sometimes difficult to find such persons, but one criterion which is often used to ensure the absence of political or other bias, is to ensure that the persons undertaking the investigation are at a higher level than those they are investigating or would have served at that level.
Another method is to appoint retired persons from the judiciary to undertake any investigation, since a judicial mind is likely to be able to make a recommendation based on verifiable evidence and not sentiment. Due process should also be observed. Those being investigated should be provided with an opportunity to be heard both during and after the findings would have been made. It is an element of due process that an accused person is provided with the opportunity to respond to the findings of an investigation before a decision is taken against that person.
The investigation into the gold purchases made by the Guyana Gold Board from one trader should have been completed by now. Administrative leave should not become the basis for any constructive dismissal. Why should the outcome of the present investigation have to await the outcome of any criminal trial? The Gold Board should act promptly and judiciously in addressing the allegations which promoted it to send home some of its top officials on administrative leave.

---

---