What’s next for The Alexandra School and the major parties involved after the official handing over of the Waterman Commission’s report to the Governor General yesterday?
We have heard loudly and clearly the myriad grievances of teachers from the Speightstown, St Peter institution, as well as those of the school’s board of management.
Several teachers, mostly young ones, have shocked the country with recollections of the hostile reception they got upon entering the school, while many senior teachers – some of them dedicated old scholars whose lifeblood, sweat and tears are now a part of the school’s foundation – have bemoaned their sad moments under the leadership of Jeffrey D. Broomes, whom they described as a “workplace bully”.
But the saga has not stopped in anticipation of the report of the commission, presided over by retired judge Frederick Waterman at the Gymnasium of the Garfield Sobers Sports Complex throughout July and August. Recent incidents might be interpreted as making the two-month-long, half-million-dollar-plus commission seem like a passing joke before its findings are finally made public.
For instance, the Barbados Secondary Teachers’ Union (BSTU) sent a letter just over two weeks ago to the Ministry of Education basically laying out instructions as to how principal Broomes should be dealt with.
In the past week, it has also unfolded that Alexandra clerk typist Stasia Boyce, whose name was mentioned at the inquiry, was sent on leave by the board’s chairman Keith Simmons on September 3. Based on correspondence regarding the issue, the typist, who was also acting as the board’s executive officer, was sent on “special/administrative leave” with half pay for no stated reason.
As a result, the National Union of Public Workers has threatened to take the matter to court, having likened the action to “an abuse of power”.
We understand that neither the deliberation of the commission of inquiry nor the supposed imminence of the public disclosure of its findings and recommendations ties the hands of relevant entities to act in legitimate ways to deal with exigencies related to the school. But we believe that the fact of the commission of inquiry should have suspended anything that hints at or might seem to hint at previous objectives.
And we would suggest that any action that would seem to fly in the face of the commission of inquiry should not be occurring now for two over-arching reasons: deference to the leader of this country, and respect for the due process of the law.
While the commission of inquiry does not have the “teeth” to instruct or be punitive but can only give recommendations, all parties, particularly the board and the BSTU, should be especially circumspect in their actions at this time.
The public is watching, and we hope that after precious taxpayers’ dollars and people’s time and energy have been spent on this commission of inquiry, concrete and progressive recommendations will emerge which the Prime Minister, as the final arbiter in the matter, can act upon before disrespect is given time to rear its ugly head.
