Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
As minister of education in 2004, I did not properly understand the ethnic-political dynamic that is at play in Guyana. Instead, our utopian vision treated Guyana as a normal society and the ministry crafted a briefing paper, ‘Cross Border Career Stretch in the Teaching Profession’ (extract below) directed at teachers’ pay and retention. This document came to mind when recently the president and the leader of the opposition locked horns on the issue of teachers’ and nurses’ pay and retention.
‘The loss of teaching staff, particularly trained teachers, is common to most open societies. This is largely because in these societies, teaching does not command comparatively sufficient material rewards and status and poor countries such as Guyana are at the bottom of the rewards table. The result has been and is an ongoing problem of teacher emigration.
Of course, the emigration problem does not only apply to teachers, and the national effort in terms of teacher remuneration (Guyana: 3.4 times the per capita income for the average trained teacher) is quite reasonable. Although all efforts should be made to improve the remunerative and working conditions of the teaching profession, it needs to be recognised that the size of our national income (US$860 per capita) is insufficient to seriously mitigate the problem. What is more likely is that the problem will be used to leverage comparatively larger increases that will have very little impact on emigration.
In the case of Guyana, a 2002 World Bank public expenditure review had this to say on the issue of teachers’ incentives: “Regarding the retention and performance of teachers, more training is at best a very partial solution. In fact, training at the university may have led to an increase in emigration. Similarly, the solution cannot be a further general increase in salary levels. As part of the solution to the teacher retention and performance problem, Government will need to recognize the importance of teachers’ role by giving them more voice in school management by designing sensitization campaigns that boost teachers’ social status, and by financially rewarding them for achieving predetermined, measurable goals … ”.
Recognising the intractable and regional nature of the emigration problem, in 2002, Caribbean education ministers at a meeting in Bridgetown, Barbados, formulated “the Savannah Accord”, which requested, inter alia, the development of a draft protocol/code of practice for the recruitment of teachers in the Commonwealth. The matter was further discussed at the 15th Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers held in Scotland in October 2003, and elsewhere. If the proposed Caribbean intentions are achieved they should make the recruitment process more open and transparent, provide those who wish to emigrate with a better deal, allow national governments to become a major stakeholder in the process of recruitment, and possibly provide some additional compensation for the country of origin.
In these globalised times, however, when sizeable numbers opt to be trained as teachers precisely because of the opportunities for emigration, we must adopt new strategies if we are to maintain and improve the standard of teaching and thus the quality of education delivery. We must do so always bearing in mind both the global pressures and our specific socio/economic condition.
Career Stretch views a teaching career as continuous regardless of the national jurisdiction in which the teaching is actually done. It differs from the attempt to manage emigration because it does not view, and as a result, does not treat a career move to another jurisdiction as necessarily emigration. It seeks to develop and keep in place professional links that might provide incentives for re-engagement at some future date. As such, a managed departure (managed emigration) is only one aspect of this process.’
Given the present level of communications technology, the opportunities facilitated by Career Stretch are endless, but first, there must be a genuine interest in retention. As noted above, in 2004 when the per capita GDP was US$860, the average annual teachers’ pay was 3.4 times the GDP. With the exchange rate in 2004 at G$200 to US$1, the annual average teacher’s salary was US$2,924 – G$584,800 a year and G$48,733 per month. This was largely the result of the relatively good pay awards made by the Cheddi Jagan regime and was in keeping with international norms.
Today, using GDP may be considered inappropriate as Exxon and associates are going with substantial amounts of it. So here I use the same exchange rate and the per capita Gross National Income (GNI) which is at present about US$10,000. 3.4 times the GNI is US$34,000 – G$6,800,000 per annum or G$566,666 per month. Average monthly teachers’ pay today is about G$115,000 per month or 20% of what it should be if the ratio was maintained.
True, as a country gets richer, it appears that teachers’ salaries decline as a percent of GDP, but a government that prioritises education cannot afford to drive teachers and public servants in general below a living wage and this is particularly so now that the regime is flushed with cash. However, the PPP is fixated on ethnic/political dominance: not on the retention of teachers, nurses, or public servants. More precisely, it is not interested in retaining African teachers, etc.: it would prefer that they vote with their feet while it makes other arrangements to retain the votes of those Indians who also migrate.
Indeed, even the Indian vote would be more certain if they leave! As I pointed out last week, the PPP shocked the authors of the Final Report of the European Union Elections Follow-up Mission on Guyana 2020 elections when it unilaterally substituted in the law only the requirement of a ‘registered address’ in place ‘residence’ to register to vote! This ‘cannot be characterized as a measure of reform. ….. [I]t is highly unusual, globally, to accord voting rights within the country to the diaspora. … Voters are usually required to reside and be domiciled in the place where they are registered to vote. This change in the law, adopted in response to a court decision, is extremely controversial, and not perceived to be politically neutral!’
Amoral? Of course. But I suspect that the president now understands this and will be traversing the country imbuing teachers with his current realisation for such is the nature of political competition in a bifurcated ethnically divided society.
