August 9, 2007

RECENTLY I watched the press conference organised by the Bermuda Public Services Union on the television news. Union president, Mr. Armell Thomas and general secretary, Mr. Edward Ball, took the opportunity to defend the appointment of Ms. Ellen Kate Horton as Acting Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Education, Sports & Recreation, following criticism by the Bermuda Union of Teachers.

The Royal Gazette front page article on the press conference headlined "She's Bermudian and qualified, what more do we want?" captured my attention as well. It definitely appears that BPSU members have to be a certain rank in order to "qualify" for union representation, or should I say, a press conference.

In a December 3, 2003 article, after protesting the hiring of a non-Bermudian Chief Justice, Mr. Ed Ball shot down claims that he has double standards when it comes to Bermudianisation. However, I beg to differ.

Mr. Ball was not supportive of Bermudian Mr. Troy Caines, a BPSU member of 25 years, when he was overlooked for the Assistant Collector of Customs position.

I clearly remember his verbal attack on then BIU President, Mr. Derek Burgess when he supported the hiring of Mr. Troy Caines as Assistant Collector of Customs.

As General Secretary Mr. Ball was, in fact, instrumental in aiding the introduction of a Principal Customs Officer exam after a grievance had been filed with the BPSU by Mr. Caines.

Mr. Caines was denied a promotion after refusing to sit the exam which wasn't part of the criteria when he initially applied for the post. They disregarded the fact that Mr. Caines surpassed the educational requirement and that he had previously acted in the position.

Mr. Thomas, on the other hand, states that Ms. Horton "has never acted as Permanent Secretary for Education before..." He also stated that: "As Permanent Secretary we're getting a good package. She's Bermudian and qualified, she's a woman and a leader, what more do we want?"

What criteria is necessary to be considered "qualified" by the BPSU? Is it being female, is it being an ex-union leader or is it being one of their past teachers?

Are there really checks and balances in the civil service, as Mr. Thomas states?

If so, why was the Chief Immigration Officer allowed on an interview panel of Bermudian applicants who were considered unsuitable, when his role is to ensure that "qualified" Bermudians are hired over non-Bermudian applicants?

Also, why was the Collector of Customs then allowed to hire the non-Bermudian applicant who was not qualified?

The Collector's reason for doing so was because the Bermudian applicant with the Master's degree and over 20 years experience wasn't qualified, as "he did not have the management experience required and because it was a senior level executive post¿"

She also said that the Public Service Commission, who supposedly ensures transparency and fairness, would not have sanctioned foreign head hunting if there had been a suitable candidate.

The BPSU accepted her reasoning on that occasion, yet have no problem supporting Ms. Horton who they admit never acted in the position she has been appointed to fill.

So how can Mr. Armell Thomas make the statement: "She has never acted as Permanent Secretary for education before, so you're going to shoot someone down before they get the job."

What hypocrisy¿didn't the BPSU assist in shooting their member, Mr. Troy Caines down? After all, he's been a BPSU member for over 25 years - how long has Ms Horton been a member of the BPSU and how did she qualify so quickly for a press conference organised by the BPSU?

President and general secretary of the BPSU, I think you've shared your gift of gab enough and the union members should now see clearly who the BPSU honestly represents.

J. CAINES

Devonshire

August 10, 2007

I READ about the plight of a "Concerned Southampton Resident" in The Royal Gazette recently and can sympathise with the problem of getting anyone to respond to abandoned bikes. This has happened to me on several occasions.

Apparently, some of our underage younger persons manage to get hold of old bikes and put old, dubiously acquired license plates on them to make the bikes appear legal. They ride them around, for example, the old Railway Right of Way. When the bikes break down, or the youngsters are chased by the police, they simply abandon the bikes wherever they happen to be. Tracing the legitimate owners of these bikes is well nigh impossible based on my own experience.

After my initial frustration, I quickly found a simple and inexpensive way to deal with the matter. Take the offending bikes to the main road, away from your residence or a tourist attraction like the Railroad Trail and simply leave them there. After several days the bikes disappear, presumably picked up by one of the organisations which declined to deal with the problem in the first place when asked.

Some will tell you this solution is illegal. If that is in fact the case, so what? It was illegal to dump the bikes on public or private property in the first place. And why should I assume the responsibility to hire a truck to dispose of someone else's discarded bike if it ends up being dumped on my land? If the bureaucracy was pro-active and became a part of the solution (rather than being part of the problem), I wouldn't need to seek this no-cost disposal method.

Hopefully this will help the Southampton complainant and others to deal with similar bike problems.

ANOTHER SOUTHAMPTON RESIDENT