Dear Editor,
Reference is made to a letter published in the 25th March, 2026 edition of the Kaieteur News under the caption, “Arbitrary Policy Changes, Selective Enforcement, and Labour Rights Concern at GECOM”, purportedly written by a ‘concerned employee.’
This letter is not only startling but it is a direct attack on the Chief Election Officer (CEO) who heads the GECOM Secretariat; especially since no employee has ever formally raised any such concerns with the management of the agency. In this regard, GECOM wish to categorically dismiss the falsehoods in the letter which can only be deemed as an effort to sow discord among employees in a well-run constitutional agency, create mischief, cause confusion, and undermine public trust and confidence in GECOM.
The opening paragraph of the letter alleged that the CEO has been increasingly undertaking arbitrary, selective and legally questionable administrative actions. However, after careful perusal of the entire letter, there is no evidence to prove any of those allegations. In fact, the move to reduce the 28 days concessionary sick leave to 14 days only sought to bring GECOM’s employment policies and practices in alignment with what is legally permissible.
Whereas Public Service Rule (2004 Edition) No. H41 clearly states that, “a pensionable employee may be granted by his/her Permanent Secretary/Head of Department/Regional Executive Officer Sick leave not exceeding 28 days in any one year”, No. H42, states that “a non-pensionable employee maybe granted by his/her Permanent Secretary/Head of Department/Regional Executive Officer Sick leave not exceeding 14 days in any one year.”
Whereas, all categories of employees were benefitting from the annual 28 days sick leave by default, the move to regularize the sick leave concession was simply to ensure compliance in line with Public Service Rule No. H42. There is absolutely nothing arbitrary or selective in this action.
Further, the unknown letter writer’s statement regarding selective enforcement is reckless and evidently mischievous since our records will prove otherwise. The fact of the matter is that staff has benefitted and continues to benefit from various forms of leave in accordance with the extant Public Service Rules.
In view of the foregoing, it is of importance to note that the GECOM management has an open-door policy and regularly engages with staff to resolve issues as they may arise. In fact, it was only quite recently that the CEO and the Chairman held a general staff meeting where the opportunity was given openly to all members of staff to raise whatever concerns they may have. At that meeting the issue of sick leave concession was discussed with no question being left unaddressed. Also at that meeting, staff members were encouraged to bring to the attention of Management, any issue which might be affecting them through the Human Resources Manager, and with the undertaking that any such issue will be addressed transparently. Further, the CEO has been traversing Registration Offices to have similar engagements with field staff. None of those engagements resulted in the airing of any of the issues mentioned in the above referenced letter.
While we found it necessary to offer clarification regarding the disinformation spewed in the letter, we also use this opportunity to assure all concerned that GECOM remains grounded in ensuring that its operations are effectively managed and that staff welfare is prioritized.