The general public of Anguilla was surprised on Monday afternoon, February 12th, when the employees of Social Security suspended their tasks, taking to industrial action to silently protest their dissatisfaction over certain conditions under which they were functioning on the job.
On Monday, for the most part, the employees were tight-lipped, and it was not altogether clear what was the reason for the silent protest. The media, however, had gotten wind that the cause of the sit-in was that the staff was dissatisfied because they did not receive the Government ex-gratia payment which public servants had received close to the end of last year.
On Tuesday, February 13th, the afternoon sit-in continued for the second day, and Director of Benefits, Ms. Paulita Bryson, read a letter on behalf of the staff, captioned “Staff Concerns”. This letter was addressed to the Board’s Chairlady, Mrs. Jacqueline Bryan-Niles. In that letter it was disclosed that there were other factors that influenced the industrial action, besides the non-receipt of ex-gratia payments.
Such factors included: 1. the absence of a Social Security Board Director for two years; 2. The absence of a Human Resource Officer; 3. the absence of a Compliance Manager for one year; 4. the absence of a senior Compliance Officer for five years; and 5. the impending departure of the Chief Financial Officer, the Internal Auditor, and the Supervisor of Contributions and Registration. The letter states: “to date there has been no communication regarding successors for such crucial posts.”
After highlighting the diligence and care with which the staff served the public in the good times and the bad, the letter continued by addressing the ex-gratia payment: “We were also excluded from the ex-gratia payment awarded to all other public government entities in December 2023,” the letter stated. “We have yet to receive any meaningful correspondence from the Board of Directors on these and other matters that have been raised previously, indicating that our past and current efforts are not valued.”
The letter called for an in-person meeting with the Board of Directors to address these concerns by Wednesday, February 14th, 2024.
In the meantime, retired Social Security staff member, Ms. Lena Saso, was on hand Tuesday afternoon to get information on the ex-gratia award matter, to share her views on it, as well as to support her former colleagues.
She said: “Yesterday, I heard of the sit-out. I am not here for a war of words, but to be enlightened as a pensioner. Yesterday, I got some information regarding what was approved by Executive Council,” she said. She read the December communiqué concerning the approval of the one month’s ex-gratia: ‘Approved is one month’s salary as an ex-gratia award to all public officers, non-established workers, pensioners, legislators, specified statutory bodies and other groups set out in the paper submitted to the Executive Council’.
She said that apparently what went to Executive Council spoke to specific statutory bodies, and she was not certain whether Social Security would have been included.
But then, she read a second paragraph which said: ‘Agreed and approved that the ex-gratia payment should be made only to persons who are employed in the public service and statutory bodies as at December 23rd 2023’.
She said that it was her understanding that the staff of Social Security would qualify as a statutory body, and she termed the exemption of Social Security from the ex-gratia award as a “pepper-pot”. “Something has gone wrong. There is a mix-up somewhere,” she said, “and it really needs to be addressed.”
Also standing in solidarity with the Social Security staff was community activist and radio talk show host, Mr. Evan Rugby Lake. He is a former Board member of Social Security, and said that historically the staff had been always taken advantage of.
“I support the hardworking staff one hundred percent,” Mr. Lake said. “They have worked hard over the years to keep this institution together, and what is happening to them now, is a disgrace. When I was on the Board in 2010, the staff was bullied because the Chairman of the day thought that they were being paid too high. The Board had been undermining the staff for years now.”
The industrial action continued into Wednesday, February 14th, and up to press time on Thursday 15th February, 2024, since up to that time the staff had not received any satisfactory response from the Chairlady of the Board. They were told, however, that the matter was being looked into.
