The set­tle­ment reached by Pub­lic Ser­vices’ As­so­ci­a­tion (PSA) and the Chief Per­son­nel Of­fi­cer (CPO) for a 10 per cent wage in­crease for pub­lic sec­tor work­ers is a re­mark­able achieve­ment for both the trade union and the lead pub­lic sec­tor com­pen­sa­tion ne­go­tia­tor.

The six-year term of the set­tle­ment, which is di­vid­ed in­to two three-year terms—from 2014 to 2016 and from 2017 to 2019—pro­vides the ap­prox­i­mate­ly 25,000 em­ploy­ees in the civ­il ser­vice, the statu­to­ry au­thor­i­ties and the To­ba­go House of As­sem­bly with a one per cent wage in­crease for each of the years from 2014 to 2018 and a five per cent wage in­crease for 2019.

The CPO has in­di­cat­ed that when the Cost-of-Liv­ing Al­lowances (CO­LA) are con­sol­i­dat­ed, the over­all im­pact on em­ploy­ees’ salaries will be clos­er to a 15 per cent in­crease.

In dol­lar terms, it is ex­pect­ed that the set­tle­ment be­tween the par­ties would cost the State an ad­di­tion­al $420 mil­lion in an­nu­al re­cur­rent ex­pen­di­ture and an es­ti­mat­ed $3.8 bil­lion in back­pay.

The set­tle­ment is re­mark­able be­cause of the length of time those cov­ered by it have been with­out agree­ments based on col­lec­tive bar­gain­ing. The last time pub­lic ser­vants re­ceived a salary in­crease was 14 per cent for the pe­ri­od Jan­u­ary 2011 to Jan­u­ary 2013, at four per cent, four per cent and six per cent, re­spec­tive­ly. That 14 per cent hike in salaries was cal­cu­lat­ed af­ter the con­sol­i­da­tion of CO­LA of $145.

The ben­e­fi­cia­ries of the wage set­tle­ment must be con­grat­u­lat­ed for their per­se­ver­ance. Elect­ed in March 2023, PSA pres­i­dent Fe­l­isha Thomas in­sist­ed the agree­ment she was seek­ing would be no less than 10 per cent, while oth­er trade unions rep­re­sent­ing work­ers in the pub­lic sec­tor ac­cept­ed ei­ther four or five per cent from the pre­vi­ous ad­min­is­tra­tion.

But it must be said that the fact that oth­er trade unions set­tled for less than 10 per cent made it eas­i­er for the cur­rent ad­min­is­tra­tion to agree to pay a sub­set of the pub­lic sec­tor em­ploy­ees a 10 per cent wage hike. T&T sim­ply could not af­ford to pay all those em­ployed in the pub­lic sec­tor the in­crease the PSA re­ceived.

It is al­so quite ap­pro­pri­ate that the Gov­ern­ment chose to pay on­ly about 20 per cent of the back­pay owed be­fore Christ­mas. Some $3.8 bil­lion go­ing in­to the pock­ets of pub­lic ser­vants two days be­fore Christ­mas would have been in­fla­tion­ary; $760 mil­lion go­ing in­to those pock­ets is ex­pect­ed to be much less so. In fact, if the PSA is agree­able, it may be bet­ter for work­ers and the Gov­ern­ment to make these back­pay pay­ments in sev­er­al tranch­es, rather than one.

All this is not to say that there are no is­sues with the agree­ment. As of yes­ter­day, the Min­is­ter of Fi­nance had not giv­en de­tails on how the Gov­ern­ment is go­ing to fund the back­pay and the ad­di­tion­al re­cur­rent ex­pen­di­ture. And the Gov­ern­ment has not in­di­cat­ed how it is go­ing to treat with the trade unions that set­tled for four or five per cent, not for the pe­ri­ods that were set­tled by the pre­vi­ous ad­min­is­tra­tion, but bring­ing their col­lec­tive agree­ments up to 2024 or 2025.

If the Gov­ern­ment leaves oth­er trade unions with­out col­lec­tive agree­ments for too long, it risks dis­af­fec­tion, which T&T can­not af­ford at this time.

The coun­try would ben­e­fit from the Gov­ern­ment and the trade unions mak­ing all the pub­lic sec­tor col­lec­tive agree­ments cur­rent. That will avoid the Gov­ern­ment hav­ing to make large back pay­ments, which hard­ly ever com­pen­sate for the loss of spend­ing pow­er, as a re­sult of de­layed set­tle­ments.