Dear Editor,
A handful of letter writers, who can be aptly described as malcontents, have written about the self-perceived ‘incompetence’ of the GuySuCo CEO, but NOT one of those writers provided an iota of evidence to support their frivolous claims; which, to say the least, are quite subjective and self-serving.
These letters are supposedly written by ‘professionals’ who are ‘experts’ at turning around an ailing entity, but all they can contribute is a plethora of ad hominem attacks on the person of the CEO, oblivious of all the new challenges which have emerged over the past year.
GuySuCo’s downward slide has been in progression for decades, and yet no one wrote about the previous CEOs – both expatriates and locals -who have presided over this progressive retrogression.
The CoI sponsored by the Coalition Government listed 41 factors which have caused the fall of sugar, and it would be edifying for these ‘sugar professionals’ to have a read. Were these ‘professionals’ blinded by the gravy they enjoyed? Why were these ‘professionals’ unable to stem the decline of the entity?
Mr Sasenarine Singh has been at the helm for only the past year, and during that period, the challenges became more severe and debilitating due to the global pandemic and a devastating flood. At this time, the globe is reeling from the effects of the pandemic, so why should GuySuCo be an exception?
Should the CEOs of all these corporations be replaced?
Let us examine what the CEO inherited at GuySuCo. The Coalition did everything possible, during its tenure in office, to destroy sugar. The factories and fields were allowed to rot and decay, especially the closed estates, and these present another great challenge to the CEO. The great flood has destroyed 32% of the cane cultivation and severely affected the TC/TS of the industry. There is a poor turnout of labour, and rainfall has depleted the opportunity days available to plant and harvest. These are just a few of the problems.
Can the CEO be blamed for any of these uncontrollable factors?
Which of the past CEOs was involved in rehabilitation and resuscitation of a closed estate? Which one was faced with all these challenges? This current CEO’s performance should be analysed and assessed in the light of these paralysing circumstances. All the previous CEOs had everything in their favour, and they failed miserably.
Mr Sasenarine Singh never flinched for a moment in confronting these challenges head-on. He knew the state of GuySuCo, and could have refused; but he did not. Being a professional analyst, he did forensic analysis, which provided an X-ray into the many ‘ailments’ from which GuySuCo suffered. Some of these were the corrupt procurement tactics and the poor allocation and usage of scarce resources. He immediately introduced innovative strategies which have not only cut costs, removed procurement malpractices and bottle-necks, and relocated staff to where they could perform optimally, but he introduced marketing strategies which have increased sales and revenue. It must also be mentioned that wages and salaries have been paid on a timely basis, and workers’ contentment is at an all-time high. He also specifically restructured the entire management, to ensure optimum labour efficiency. The CEO is aware that if the old status quo is allowed to thrive, the downward spiral of the Corporation would continue.
You cannot do the same thing repeatedly and hope that the results would be different. Yet there are those who feel threatened, and are opposed to the new vision for a new GuySuCo. The CEO must be given credit for sitting with these people and explaining the need for a new attitude of mind, but he was seen as the new kid on the block who knows nothing about sugar.
Unfortunately, some of these ‘professionals’ have opted to continue to do things their own way, and when confronted, they have decided to resign. This is good for both the Corporation and themselves. The new team would be given opportunity to work without egoistic and self-contrived interruptions. The fact that these people have left instead of working with the CEO has laid bare their corrupt intentions and their lack of loyalty and commitment to the Corporation.
Had the current CEO allowed those ‘sugar professionals’ to continue in their old, corrupt ways, they would have sung his praise, but he instead worked feverishly to mend the broken systems and create a new attitude of mind, and for that he is being crucified by them. But crucifixion sometimes exposes the wrongs and evil intentions of those involved in the act, and not necessarily the victim.
The CEO is an ACCA graduate with years of experience in finance and management, and is suitably qualified to be the CEO of any corporation. Singh’s qualifications and experience are not about accounting and financial analysis, as some would like to believe. A man of his calibre can sit and get to the bottom of the working of any entity, ascertain the reasons for its poor performance, and implement solutions. And that he did.
The old management has failed miserably, and the first thing they must do is to come to terms with this fact, see the need for change, and then work with the CEO to resolve these issues. Many feel that GuySuCo is their favourite stomping ground, and any newcomer who is not in line with their thinking must be forced out of the territory.
Those who are opposing the CEO must write in the press what they think the CEO is wrong about, and alternatively, how it must be done. They must also provide concrete evidence that the CEO is a corrupt individual. I am yet to see one of the persons who resigned venting their opinion in this regard. If they cannot, then they should sit and await their imagined outcomes of prognostication of doomsday for GuySuCo to materialise.
GuySuCo is on the right course, and with the backing of this Government, the entity would progress rapidly under CEO Mr Sasenarine Singh. Let us give the CEO the chance he deserves.
Yours sincerely,
Name given, but with
held by request
