Finance Minister Colm Imbert is seeking to clear the air on the misconception in the public domain regarding the Government’s decision on the 117 Report of the Salaries Review Commission (SRC).
In a news release yesterday, Imbert said that it must be emphasised that the 117 SRC Report is the result of a job evaluation exercise that has taken over a decade to complete, and it is not a general or ordinary review of terms and conditions of employment in offices under the purview of the SRC.
In its 117th report, the SRC proposed a more than 30 per cent hike in the Prime Minister’s monthly salary to $80,000 which will make the head of government, the public official with the highest monthly salary.
It also proposed that the President’s salary move up to $73,920 and the Opposition Leader to 47,500.
But yesterday Imbert noted that the Government has made it clear that it is of the view that there are several serious anomalies in the report. He used as examples the recommendation that the salaries of Judges of the Supreme Court be maintained, at the same levels as in the last report of the SRC and that there be no increases for Judges of the High Court and the Court of Appeal since the 98 SRC Report was approved (with a reservation on transport facilities) in 2013, over 10 years ago.
Chief Justice Ivor Archie in a letter penned to the Prime Minister was of the view that the SRC report was flawed.
Another serious anomaly Imbert said was that the SRC has recommended that the salaries of Industrial Court Judges be reduced, while there are some surprising increases such as the recommended 60 per cent increase in the compensation package of the Leader of the Opposition.
In making his statement on the Government’s decision to send the report back to the SRC with a list of anomalies for its review, the release stated that the minister did not assert, or suggest, as declared in the headline of an article published on March 7, in the Newsday: “No pay rise for PM – Government rejects; irrational; salary proposals for MPs, officials”.
Specifically, Imbert noted he did not say or even imply that the Government has rejected the entire report, or all its recommendations, which are the result of a 10-year Job Evaluation Exercise.
Imbert said the only increase for an MP mentioned in his statement was that of the Leader of the Opposition, and this was highlighted because of the exceptionally large size of the recommended increase in salary for that position (60 per cent).
The minister provided context on what he said:
“The 117 Report of the SRC is unacceptable because of the serious and inexplicable anomalies that have emerged in the recommendations in the Report. The Cabinet believes it is necessary to alert the SRC to the existence of these anomalies. Therefore, the Cabinet intends to refer the 117 Report of the SRC back to the Commission with a list of anomalies so that it can revisit, review, and revise its recommendations and return a revised Report to the Cabinet via the President for its consideration”.
Further, Imbert noted that the Government was faced with three choices in dealing with the report, namely (a) reject the Report in its entirety and request the SRC to redo the Job Evaluation Exercise from scratch, or (b) make its adjustments to the recommendations in the Report without further reference to the SRC, or (c) ask the SRC to revisit and review what the Government considers to be the serious anomalies in the Report, before making a final decision.