Latest update June 7th, 2026 12:45 AM
Latest News
- Govt. to control Development Bank with no oversight from Opposition, transparency bodies or civil society
- Farmer arrested for slitting 7-year-old boy’s throat
- Israel kills Lebanon brigadier general, 11 others; Pakistan urges end to war
- No deal yet on $3.4M daily powership demand
- APNU accuses govt. of undermining local democracy through parallel structures
Arbitrary Policy Changes, Selective Enforcement, and Labour Rights Concerns at GECOM
Dear Editor,
I write to express grave concern over what can only be described as the increasingly arbitrary, selective, and legally questionable administrative actions being undertaken within the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), particularly by the Chief Election Officer (CEO).
Foremost among these concerns is the recent directive reducing sick leave from 28 days to 14 days. This is not simply a policy adjustment—it is a unilateral alteration of a long-established condition of employment that has existed since 2005 and forms part of the legitimate expectations of staff. More critically, these terms were embedded in employment relationships and contracts already executed by the very office now seeking to amend them.
In employment law, it is a well-established principle that an employer cannot unilaterally vary fundamental terms of a contract to the detriment of employees without consultation, agreement, or lawful basis. Such actions may amount to a breach of contract and, in some jurisdictions, constructive dismissal. The abrupt reduction of sick leave—without negotiation or transitional arrangements—therefore raises serious legal and ethical concerns.
Equally troubling is the selective application of rules. While the CEO has chosen to rigidly enforce restrictive interpretations of sick leave provisions drawn from the Public Service framework, there has been a conspicuous failure to apply other provisions within the same framework—such as Personal Business Leave, Compassionate Leave, and leave relating to hospitalization. International labour standards emphasize that leave policies must be comprehensive, clearly regulated, and consistently applied across all categories of leave . Selective enforcement undermines both fairness and institutional credibility. GECOM is not a traditional public service agency. Its constitutional status demands a higher standard of governance—one grounded not only in rules, but in fairness, proportionality, and consistency. The selective importation of Public Service rules, applied only when convenient, reflects a troubling misuse of administrative discretion.
At a broader level, these developments point to a pattern of administrative overreach. The silence of the Commission in this context is equally concerning. As an institution chaired by a former judge, one would expect a vigilant adherence to principles of legality, fairness, and procedural propriety. The failure to intervene risks normalizing actions that erode both staff rights and institutional integrity. This is not merely an internal staffing matter. It is a question of governance. Institutions tasked with safeguarding democracy must themselves embody the principles of justice, transparency, and respect for rights.
GECOM must be reminded that authority is not absolute. It is constrained by law, guided by fairness, and accountable to the people it serves—both internally and nationally.
Yours faithfully,
Concerned Employees
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
