What’s good for the goose must be good for the gander

Now that the Opposition has publicly objected to the salary increases proposed by the Salaries Review Commission (SRC), we anxiously await the Government’s decision on the matter.

The Opposition’s position was, in any case, always going to be academic, since it is the Cabinet that is responsible for deciding on the proposed wage hike, even though the report is debated in the Parliament.

At this point, however, it is difficult to see how the Keith Rowley administration could justify the proposed increases, given the prevailing labour and economic climate that has pushed public opinion vastly out of its favour.

There is as yet no clear indication of what the Cabinet will do when it meets to discuss the proposals. In the meantime, Planning and Development Minister Camille Robinson-Regis said yesterday that the report should not be seen from a political standpoint only, as the salaries of several other public servants are also to be considered. Nonetheless, as a longstanding politician, the minister ought to know that the public will not buy that argument.

At the same time, Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar has openly declared that she will not accept an increase, telling a public meeting on Monday night that while she has no issue with the public servants and judicial officials mentioned in the report getting the recommended hikes, she does not believe that the President, the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader should be paid more at this time.

This amounts to nothing more than political manoeuvring, as Mrs Persad-Bissessar, being the former prime minister whose Cabinet accepted the last SRC report that recommended salary increases in 2013, knows only too well that an SRC report must either be accepted or rejected as a whole.

The Cabinet must either decide, as was done earlier this year, to reject the entire thing and have the SRC present another report at a later date or accept it as presented. As justified as the increases may seem to those who stand to benefit, particularly since the last increase was 13 years ago, the Cabinet must consider if the current political, economic and labour climate is right.

From our perspective, it is certainly not, and approving this report is akin to lighting the fuse to a gunpowder keg.

With general elections just months away; with the Chief Personnel Officer entering fresh discussions with trade unions; and with port workers, T&TEC staff and university teachers all demonstrating for better wages, there is simply no justification for salary hikes as high as 47 per cent in the case of the Prime Minister and 76 per cent in the case of the Opposition Leader, while at the same time telling ordinary workers that they cannot get anything more than four per cent.

Added to that, the whopping $150 million back pay tab on top of the recently passed deficit budget is not acceptable at this juncture. Therefore, sympathetic considerations for the non-political candidates under the SRC report cannot be the determining factor.

The Government has continuously told us that we are moving into a better economic position as key energy projects come on board in 2026 and onward. We are simply not there yet. While we agree that many of the officeholders listed in the report deserve increases, the time is simply not right—not to mention that the perks and allowances our top officials already receive are more than what is afforded to the average person.

Everyone’s time will come, but as it relates to holding economic strain and tightening our belts today, what is good for the goose must also be good for the gander.

The post What’s good for the goose must be good for the gander first appeared on CNC3.