An insult to the working class

Oct 16, 2024 Peeping Tom

---

Peeping tom…

Kaieteur News – It is a common ploy for leaders to make grand announcements—declarations that sound transformative but fall flat under scrutiny. Such is the case with President Ali’s recent proclamation that by the end of 2025, the lowest-paid public servant will earn no less than $100,000 per month.

On the surface, this might appear as a significant concession to public sector workers, a gesture that the government is serious about addressing economic hardship among its employees. However, a deeper look reveals a façade that belies a critical reality: the glaring gap between the national minimum wage and the public service wage, a divide that lays bare the government’s unwillingness to extend this increase to all workers in the country.

As it stands, the national minimum wage, which applies primarily to the private sector, remains stagnant at just over $60,000 per month. This figure, far removed from the realities of inflation and the ever-rising cost of living, consigns thousands of low-level private sector workers to a life of struggle. The people who stock shelves in retail stores, serve food in small eateries, and labor in market stalls are trapped in a cycle of survival—each month a juggling act of rent, groceries, and other basic necessities. For these workers, the prospect of earning $100,000 per month is a distant dream, even though they, too, contribute daily to the functioning of the economy.

The President’s announcement, for all its fanfare, offers nothing to these workers, who are left behind as the public sector moves incrementally upward.  But even for public sector workers, the $100,000 is but an illusion. If the wage increases offered to teachers in 2024 and 2025 were extended uniformly to all public servants, then the minimum wage would naturally rise to beyond the promised $100,000 by the end of 2025. This renders the President’s pledge less a boon and more a matter of simple arithmetic. The reality is that the public service wage increase is not so much a gift as it is an inevitability.

Yet the real question is not whether public servants deserve better pay—they undoubtedly do—but why their counterparts in the private sector continue to be left in the lurch. Why is it that, despite years of economic growth and increasing revenues from sectors like oil, so many workers are still scraping by on a wage that barely allows them to cover their basic needs? The answer lies not in the inherent complexities of the economy but in the political calculus of the government—a calculation that privileges the comfort of the bourgeois class over the well-being of the working poor.

It is no secret that the government has been reluctant to align the national minimum wage with the public service minimum wage. To do so would be to upset the delicate balance of interests that sustains the power structure—a balance heavily weighted in favour of employers who benefit from cheap labor. The President’s reluctance to disturb this balance speaks to a longstanding truth in our political life: that despite all the rhetoric of inclusivity and upliftment, the true beneficiaries of government policy remain those who hold economic power.

For decades, successive administrations have walked this tightrope, attempting to appease the working class with promises of incremental wage increases while avoiding any significant changes that might provoke the ire of business owners.  It is an abdication of moral responsibility, a refusal to acknowledge the basic dignity of all workers, irrespective of whether they are employed by the state or by private interests.

The government’s failure to bridge the gap between the public service wage and the national minimum wage effectively institutionalizes a two-tiered system, where those who serve the state are afforded a modicum of comfort while their counterparts in the private sector remain trapped in precariousness. Such a system may be convenient for the political elite, but it is fundamentally unjust, perpetuating a cycle in which the most vulnerable are left to bear the brunt of economic inequality.

The consequences of this disparity are not just economic but social. A society in which a large segment of the workforce is left struggling to make ends meet is one where discontent festers and where social cohesion is constantly under threat. It is a society where hope dwindles and where the promise of a better life—so often invoked by politicians—rings increasingly hollow. For how can there be hope when the fruits of national progress are distributed so unevenly?

To align the national minimum wage with the public service minimum wage would be a bold step toward fairness and equity, a recognition that every worker deserves to earn enough to live with dignity. It would mean raising the floor for all workers, not just those who answer directly to the state, and ensuring that no one in this country is forced to subsist on a wage that cannot meet the cost of living. It would signal a commitment to the principle that economic growth should benefit all, not just a select few.

But such a move would require a willingness to confront the powerful interests that have long shaped economic policy—a willingness that has been sorely lacking in recent years. It would mean facing down the protests of employers who claim that raising wages would harm their bottom lines, even as those same employers enjoy the benefits of a growing economy. And it would mean challenging the narrative that progress for one segment of the workforce must come at the expense of another—a narrative that has long served to pit public sector workers against their counterparts in the private sector, diverting attention from the broader structural issues that keep wages low.

The truth is that the real burden of a unified minimum wage would not fall on small business owners alone. A more equitable wage structure would also benefit the broader economy by increasing consumer spending power, allowing workers to afford more than just the basics and thereby stimulating demand.

Yet, instead of embracing this vision, the government remains wedded to a narrow approach that prioritizes the interests of a privileged few. It is a betrayal of the promise of democracy, a reminder that even in an era of supposed progress, the old power dynamics remain intact. And so, the announcement of a $100,000 wage for public servants becomes not a sign of change but a symbol of what remains stubbornly unchanged: a system that rewards the powerful while leaving the working poor to fend for themselves.

The time has come to reject this false dichotomy between public sector workers and private sector workers, to recognize that the struggle for a decent wage is a common struggle, one that should unite all workers rather than divide them. The President’s promise of a higher wage for public servants may make for a tidy headline, but until that same standard is applied to every worker, it remains little more than an empty gesture—a reminder that in the politics of wage-setting, appearances are often more important than reality.

---

• critical, Economic, governments, politicians, reality, unwillingness, upliftment

---