Dear Editor,
The abysmal and unacceptable performance of GuySuCo’s IMC continues unabatedly, although the taxpayers of this country are required to pay these men millions per month. After 10 weeks of operation in the 1st crop 2017, at week ending April 22, 2017, the industry produced about 41,000 tons of sugar, or 55% achievement of its target, which is just over 74,000 tons.
At this time, according to the industry’s production plan, it should have produced about 66,000 tons of sugar. This means that sugar production is lagging by some 25,000 tons. It will take at least six weeks from here on, producing at 5,000 tons per week, to achieve the target.
In the first place, did GuySuCo have sufficient canes to produce the 74,000 tons it set itself to make? It is impossible to realise the target, since cane harvesting would not be possible in the upcoming rainy season.
From the present grinding pattern, it is clear that the crop is coming to an end; and from all indications, the crop’s performance will be the worst in recent memory.
As I said before, the GuySuCo IMC is very consistent in delivering record poor performances. The highly-paid team delivered the lowest production in 25 years in year 2016 (last year), and is well on its way to deliver yet another record-lowest first crop production in 25 years.
Sugar recovery is extremely poor, and the IMC team members appear to be quite pleased with blaming everything under the sun, except themselves. Not so long ago, they took credit for the 2015 performance, citing good management and rewarding themselves with fabulous salaries and perks.
In the meantime, the IMC has a platoon of executive pensioners on excursion from estate to estate, swallowing scarce resources and not bring any value to the business. The overall performance confirms this. It is instructive to note that Albion, Blairmont and Uitvlugt estates have respectively achieved 67%, 77% and 79% of their targets as at week ending April 22, 2017. Will the Govt ask why such poor performance was recorded at all estates, especially those which His Excellency announced will be retained?
Editor, I am certain that GuySuCo and the IMC ‘boys’ are at this time considering what would be their scapegoat for the crop’s dismal performance. Undoubtedly, the upcoming rainy weather and the demotivated workers would be blamed.
Having taken such an inordinately long time to announce its crop target at the beginning of the year, it is logical to assume that the IMC must have considered the impacts of the last El Nino and La Nina phenomena, workers morale, poor cane growth in the fields, etc, in arriving at the target of just over 74,000 tons. If these variables were not factored into the schedule, it is proof that incompetence in GuySuCo’s management has reached new heights.
The volatile and poor relationship between workers and the GuySuCo bureaucrats is a direct result of GuySuCo’s irresponsible IMC causing workers to react in defence of their livelihoods. The IMC has effectively placed the Government in an embarrassing position politically, economically and socially; a position which justifies the closure of estates.
Yours sincerely,
Sookram Persaud
