Editorial: what is it, fair wages & salaries commission?

Is it possible that a public institution whose core mandate is to ensure industrial peace could take delight in instigating strikes?

That is the unflattering picture of the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission that emerges from the reading of the grievances of workers’ unions threatening to down tools – first & second cycle teachers, doctors, pharmacists, university teachers, name it.

Take the case of the university teachers, who accuse the FWSC of unilaterally breaching the explicit terms of the communiqué they signed on December 15, 2011 on the basis of which the university teacher were successfully migrated onto the Single Spine Salary Structure .

According to Dr Anthony Simons, President of UTAG, following the 18 percent across-board increase in salaries for public sector employees in 2012, the FWSC wrote to Minister of Finance authorising payment of the increment to UTAG members. However, the Commission allegedly calculated what was due to the teachers using a criterion different from what was mutually agreed in the 2011 communiqué. This reportedly occasioned pecuniary losses to UTAG members.

Dr Simons said in a statement: “The National Executive Committee of UTAG drew the attention of FWSC to the anomaly and sought to have it corrected as early as April 2012 to reflect the contents of the communiqué. However, UTAG received no response. After some time, UTAG followed its first letter with several others, including even telephone calls. All those efforts came to naught.

“Eventually, in the face of mounting frustrations, UTAG sent the case before the Labour Commission for redress. Following that action and the recommendation by the Labour Commission for both parties to attempt to settle the matter out of court, the National Security Coordinator intervened and facilitated discussions on the issue between UTAG and Fair Wages and Salaries Commission. UTAG cooperated in the matter and exercised restraint.

“Unfortunately, in spite of UTAG’s show of magnanimity and display of utmost restraint and co-operation, government’s response and attitude towards dealing decisively with the problem has been nothing other than lackadaisical and feet-dragging”.

The stories of other worker groups are similar. Why should a state institution like FWSC seem to be deliberately goading workers to go on strike? Is it that the Commission is composed only of economics and accountants who have no knowledge of labour relations and workers psychology? Or are they square pegs in round holes, lacking in negotiating skills?

Gye Nyame Concord is baffled. Or is it a case of the government, especially the Ministry of Finance, which holds the purse strings of what the Commission dispenses, that is the problem?

If so why is the Commission not saying so? Or is it after they had agreed a position with workers that the government overrules them? In the UTAG case above, how come the letter it sent the Minister of Finance violated their signed communiqué?

Gye Nyame Concord expects the FWSC to sit down with government and get a holistic picture of the financial projections for labour each year. That way the Commission would go into negotiations knowing what is possible and what is not.

If labour demands what the Commission knows is not possible, the Commission should clearly state its offer and throw it into the court of public opinion.

But to voluntarily reach agreement with workers, unilaterally violate it and then go into hiding behind a wall of silence is pre-historic management of wages and salaries. Such should stop today.