IS IT true that the police had to be called to a certain Government organisation following a meeting to inform workers about the separation exercise now in progress?
From what Cou Cou was reliably told, things got out of hand when several concerned employees demanded to know the criteria for determining who would be sent home. Apparently, they wanted an undertaking that no one was being penalised for their perceived political affiliation.
That’s when the situation reportedly got out of hand.
People started calling each other Bees and Dees, and telling one another which politician gave them their job.
Our fly on the wall said some of the senior people in the room could not say much because accusing fingers were being pointed at them too.
As the temperature during the session began to rise uncomfortably, the meeting was quickly brought to a halt while the police were summoned just in case tempers flared again.
Someone in the know said the pitiful thing about this situation is the fact that grown men and women, some of whom are well qualified and good workers, were reduced to telling off each other because they got their jobs through a politician.
The person reasoned that this demonstrated the power of politicians in Barbados, a level of influence that they should never have. He reasoned that no matter which party is in power, hirings should be based only on credentials and character. Cou Cou concurs. Â
?
Wondering how
?A PUBLIC SERVANT wants to know how Government will decide which of the two workers from one household it would be better to lay off, given the situations in some relationships.
He wants to know if Government will call in the individuals and interview them. Will they look at who holds the more senior position and keep that person, or send home the more senior and keep the other with fewer years in the service? Or will lots be drawn to decide?
This issue is important to this man because he and his wife may live under the same roof, share the mortgage, utility, food and other bills, as well as the cost of educating their children, but otherwise there is nothing between the two of them.
He told Cou Cou their living situation is what it is because he cannot afford to pay her out, and she can’t pay him out either. So he has his personal life and she has hers.
He said if he loses his job, he is sure his wife will try to kick him out, as she has tried to do so before, but his lawyer challenged the move and won.
But if he loses his job, he will have to find money to hire a lawyer to fight on his behalf and he could therefore end up on the street.
This man, who has more than 20 years in the Public Service, thinks the only way Government’s idea will work is if both people are interviewed and, in cases like his, some legal agreement made that the one being retained in the job can’t evict the other.
?
Nothing new
A PROMINENT ATTORNEY has publicly accused Government of misleading the country.
He has charged they should be aware that some things purported to be new were in fact two years old.
According to the attorney, the items in question were pulled out of use and refurbished. Then there was a photo op with a certain politico claiming they were new.
The attorney has challenged the Government to call him out if he was lying.
Furthermore, he has argued that if the politico did not know the items were not new, then the individual clearly is not on top of their responsibility, and should be released from it.
Either way, everyone is waiting to hear from the politico.
