Home Letters GuySuCo never fails to issue clumsy responses
I refer to GuySuCo’s letter of June 3, 2017, captioned “GuySuCo’s detractor is being outright irresponsible and reckless”. This letter is a response to my letter published on May 31.
Editor, the corporation’s communication unit never fails to present clumsy responses or rebuttals, either knowingly or unknowingly. I shall address the core points raised in this last response to demonstrate how ignorance and incompetence pervades this organization from its apex down.
1. It is an undisputed fact that the Corporation deliberately packed bulk raw sugar from Albion for 2-3 weeks at Enmore. In a most uneducated and unintellectual defence, the Corporation attempts to justify its actions by stating that “all six factories have the capacity at any time to produce the varying qualities required”. This creates an impression to the reader that Albion can produce direct consumption sugars. If this is the truth, can Ms Thomas show proof whether GuySuCo’s own monitoring mechanisms, or national regulatory bodies — such as Guyana National Bureau of Standards & Food & Drug Analyst Department — approved Albion Estate to produce food grade sugars for direct consumption?
The Corporation then continues with its unadulterated nonsense by stating that “the difference between bagged and packaged sugar is further drying of the sugar to render it more conducive for packaging”.
Editor, the truth is that bagged and packaged sugar is a product intended for retail sale, thus it must be fit for direct human consumption, and must therefore meet all quality stipulations, not just degree of dryness (by “further drying”).
Interestingly, after my letter was published on May 31st, the movement of Albion’s sugar to Enmore was halted on June 1st. What a coincidence!
2. I have zero cause or reason to attack GuySuCo, because its management is in accelerated self-destruction mode, as can be seen from its very own utterances, actions & inactions. I am just highlighting some facts on the Corporation, for which management should be thankful, instead of labelling me a detractor.
3.It is not my responsibility to advise the GAWU on its relationship with GuySuCo. From the Corporation’s lamentation, it seems like workers have greater commitment, faith and trust in the GAWU, than in their employer, GuySuCo. It may be good to do some self-introspection to find out why workers are less committed, or have lost faith and trust in GuySuCo.
4.Taking on “Project GuySuCo”. The IMC and management should not even attempt for a fleeting moment to suggest that they are doing this nation a favour, because they are a very well paid bunch with my tax dollars. For example, the IMC alone cost the treasury G+ million/yr. Anyone with such pay packet must be passionate and enthusiastic. Wouldn’t you, Ms Thomas?
5. SWOT Analysis. From this admission, it appears that GuySuCo’s IMC & executives discovered, for the first time, the simple framework for analysing an organization via SWOT analysis. Packing of bulk sugar for direct consumption is probably a highly strategic decision in GuySuCo’s psyche. We should light a candle for sugar workers and consumers!