We now have both the Government and the OWTU making their positions clearer about the future of Petrotrin, following the strike that never was. This is both welcome and worrying�as it is also clear both have a very different understanding of Petrotrin's problems, the impact they have on our economy and, ultimately, all of us taxpayers.
We have already welcomed the Prime Minister's speech spelling out his expectation that the additional $81 million per year required to cover the pay agreed will need to come from Petrotrin's operational budget, not from the Treasury. He also indicated that his government is prepared to take the right path to turn Petrotrin into an efficient, modern and competitive company, with the potential of private capital injection to help it along the way. He ought to be commended for his approach.
To succeed in his commitment, he will need to have the political stamina to take on one of T&T's most powerful interest groups, the OWTU. And the gulf between the union's take on Petrotrin and the rest of the population seems to be widening, not narrowing.
The OWTU leadership seems to see Petrotrin as the cash cow that should keep on giving to its members at the company even when it is not performing well. It talks about the billions of dollars the company has contributed to the economy over the years and argues that Petrotrin's workers deserve a share of those revenues. It seems less enthusiastic, however, about their share of the losses currently being posted by the company�suddenly, this is a problem only for its management and the Government.
It is right that workers should benefit from productivity gains and profit posted by businesses. That's why successful businesses tend to have good incentive schemes which reward professional growth in job, the meeting of targets and overall improved productivity. After all, this helps make all staff true stakeholders in the economy, irrespective of seniority. If this is what the OWTU is proposing for Petrotrin, in line with modern industrial relations practices, they will be moving in the right direction.
The most worrying aspect of the OWTU's position is perhaps the most fundamental of all. From its recent statements and justifications, the union appears not to take into account that the idea behind a state-owned enterprise is that it operates for the benefit of all, not the few. And a higher payroll of an already bloated company can only mean a reduced return to the main shareholder: the Government. In turn, this means reduced funding available for public services or more borrowing by the Government and both options are a poor deal for the taxpayer.
The maths is relatively simple. The additional $81 million Petrotrin needs to find for its employees equate to an average increase of just over $16,000 a year for each worker. Most workers in this country can only dream of such an increase and perhaps may be less in awe of their colleagues at Petrotrin if they knew that the rise will cost every man, woman and child in Trinidad and Tobago around $62 each in reduced profits or higher losses at Petrotrin.
The maths just don't make sense any more.