 |
| IS THE CSA THE BEST PLACE FOR DAVE? |
Which
one is correct? Is the whole greater than the sum of the parts? Or is it equal
to the sum of its parts? The CSA will tell you neither is. On the contrary, they
will tell you that the reverse is true: that is, a part or the sum of the parts
is much greater than the whole.
The
CSA initially asked for 16% increase, then they sought and persisted with 9.5%;
but eventually voted to accept “zero”. Is the logic therefore that “zero is
greater than 16 and 9”? But that’s not all: their logic was clear throughout:
they also defied the logic that the TUF was bigger than them! Their clear
message was their 3500-strong membership was greater than the sum total of the
9000+ TUF membership and they eventually reduced and applied that logic to
their own membership: that a small group of 300 of them who embarked on
industrial action was also greater than the sum total of their 3500-strong
membership.
Lord
Kelvin once wrote: unless you can express what you are saying in terms of
numbers, then you don't make sense.
Perhaps,
Lord Kelvin's dictum explains the dilemma of the civil servants and it’s a pity
that they didn’t stumble on him despite all the research they claimed to have
done.
 |
| NWU PRESIDENT & SHREWD NEGOTIATOR |
What
could be the “industrial principle” for all that “mis-calculus”? Surely, I
don’t see any principle; I don’t even see a rationale; I see a motive. The CSA
probably had as its major goal the destruction of the TUF and its eventual
replacement with a super CSA akin to the NWU; but that was always going to be
untenable, if not impossible because while there was considerable “dissensus” between
the TUF and CSA, there was overwhelming consensus among the TUF membership who
all accepted the 4%. So the CSA should have known that their strategy - which
was probably conceived in deceit and born out of desperation – was also destined
to crucify them; and it did!
 | |
| SLTU FORMER BOSS: VIRGINIA ALBERT-POYOTTE |
So
the CSA – in its heightened state of irrationality as well as fear of the inevitable - was left with no choice but to turn to its “own self” for
retribution – a view also shared by Virginia Albert-Poyotte who is veteran
trade unionist. I argue: unless there's an urgent reconfiguration of the
leadership, the CSA is on an inevitable path to self-destruction, as it seemingly
pursues retribution against its own members, especially those who didn't
support it in the pursuit of 9.5%. And so it came to pass!
But
the outstanding issue is: will the CSA accept the 4% if gov’t extends it them
or will they return it to the treasury? If the CSA agitators believe in fair
play, equity and have a sense of morality, then they should do the later for a
number of reasons.
Firstly,
because the CSA have received their “pound of flesh”, (that is, all the
unwarranted free holidays they have enjoyed since February 21, all the pay for
no work they have received, all the disruption they have caused to the economy),
then they should do the honourable thing and return the 4% to the treasury as a
down payment on the cost for the unnecessary collateral damage they have caused
to the nation. They owe the nation a huge debt for their irrational behaviour.
In
hindsight, the chronology of the CSA actions can be reduced to a comedy of
errors, as apparently was the point-by-point case throughout their industrial
action. They embarked on a spate of destructive industrial action when
negotiations were proceeding smoothly. The negotiations had progressively moved on
from a steep 16% request by the TUF and an initial counter-offer of 0% (plus $1000) by government
to a 4% increase with conditions, taking into consideration the worsening
economic conditions.
Judging
from feedback from the CSA meeting yesterday, the organization is apparently in
a state of flux. The CSA individuals with the potential, proven expertise and
the credibility to put the CSA back on a path to discovery have either been marginalised
or overwhelmed by internal irrational elements who hijacked the organization.
 |
| FORMER CSA PRESIDENT: RAPHAEL ST. HILL |
The
CSA need an intervention – one which will elevate them from their own childhood
to a state of adulthood. My own view is, if this does not happen, then the
organisation may well be headed irreversibly to the precipice of self-destruction. I
believe we have not heard the worst yet. I am of the opinion that rational,
hard-working and conscientious civil servants who constitute the majority and
who were absent from the meeting yesterday will not allow themselves to be
overruled by the decision of a vociferous minority group of CSA members who
were present!
Raphael St. Hill - a former CSA president - confessed on RSL's 90-minutes with Shelton Daniel that the current scenario plaguing the organisation hurts him; I'm sure he is not the only one who feels that way! I personally feel that way too; and I'm sure the majority of the Civil Service and by extension the Public Service also feel that way as the domino effect begins to unfold.
No comments:
Post a Comment