Update on Barama Company Limited

Update on Barama Company Limited

Dear Editor,

Barama is claiming that it is not a profitable company and therefore does not have to pay the measly tax.

A press report of November 25th, 2002 taken from the Land of Six Peoples' website (http://landofsixpeoplpes.com/news022/ns211258.htm) states: “GMA Annual Dinner - Barama lifts President's Export Award.”

“The foreign-owned Barama Company Limited (BCL) has, for the second time in three years, won the President's Award for the Export Achievement at the Guyana Manufacturers' Association (GMA) 2002 Annual Dinner.”

“BCL was awarded the trophy in recognition of the company's consistent increases in export sales, earning US$23 million from January to October; a reflection of the company's maintenance of economic competitiveness in overseas markets.”

“The award, presented by Prime Minister Sam Hinds on behalf of President Bharrat Jagdeo, was made to BCL Sales Manager Rodney Raghubansee at Le Meridien Pegasus Hotel on Friday evening.” The same news (November 10th, 2002) was also reported in the Guyana Chronicle.

What I fail to understand are: 1. How come a company can win the Presidential National Award for Export Achievement , citing its international competitiveness in overseas markets, and still claim that its business operation is unprofitable? Companies that are internationally competitive in overseas markets must show profits. I have never heard of an internationally competitive Company winning an award for not showing a profit.

2. If the company is not profitable, how come the President's Award was given to and accepted by Barama? It seems that something is not right here. It is inconsistent.

3. Is Guyana's ‘best' company a money loser? What kind of example is selected for an award? For example, failed students do not take the podium at UG. Only those who excelled are given special awards (Agriculture is what keeps this country from starvation and collapse, and in effect subsidise this company, yet there is no recognition of this sector and its workers).

Probably some of our astute financial and business oriented Guyanese can raise some questions. We need someone like Prof. Clive Thomas to emerge and to help guide us.

In reference to the much vaunted sense of corporate responsibility publicised by Barama's defenders, I have just seen the May 10th 2004 report taken from (http:www.op.gov.gy/stories/0241-glumeeting.htm) where President Jagdeo met Guyana Labour Union (GLU) members.

The report states: “…However, workers of Barama Company limited implored the Head of State to intervene on their behalf to address many complaints, including low wages and a housing programme.”

“According to the workers, their wages are below the minimum wage paid to public servants by Government, which is about G$22,000 (monthly).”

“The GLU's President (Mr Stanley Troyer) said that the Union has requested conciliation to resolve the matter, since the company has not responded favourably to workers' pleas for increases.”

“President Jagdeo was appalled at the low wages being paid to the shift workers, who earn below $100.00 per hour in overtime, and promised to raise the issue with Barama when he meets the company's representatives later this month to discuss the expansion plan.” (This approx US$0.50 per hour is about equivalent to what is paid to factory workers in China. Incidentally, I do not know why the President is appalled; he is doing the same thing to his government employees. Who is taking lessons from whom?)

“On the issue of housing, the workers said that Barama promised them to build low and high income houses costing G$2.4M and G$2.8M respectively, with a monthly instalment of G$20,000. Workers say they cannot afford this. The President urged them to apply, through the Ministry of Housing, for their land, and through the bank for loans to build with a G$12,000 repayment per month. Alternatively, he suggested that the Ministry of Housing work out a programme with Barama. Minister Shaik Baksh said that Government has already offered the company 100 house lots in Parfait Harmonie, but Barama is yet to get back to the ministry with a proposal….” (Imagine receiving about $20,000 per month and paying $12,000 per month for housing).

I do not know how this particular story ended. Maybe the GLU can give us an update. However, it does not paint a very favourable picture of a company which just won the Presidential Award. If this is the record of the ‘best' company, one shudders to think of what the others are doing.

The company did not seem to be honouring its promises to the workers – in this case represented by a union. How could we expect fair deals in the company's initial dealings with the Amerindians without even any union representation?

We know from reports in the press that government workers are not well paid and are struggling to survive. Yet the Barama workers are paid even less than the workers of the Government. Seems that even the President was surprised, being unaware of what was going on in the forestry industry, in this case, with Barama, holder of the largest concession in the forestry sector.

Mr. James C. Keylon, Managing Director, Barama Company Ltd. (Guyana) and President, Sterling Wood Products (USA), June 2000. “We have been here for a number of years and our experience has been that the people of Guyana always do the right thing. We are expanding, bringing more investment and widening our export base. We work with local suppliers and manufacturers, and it's a great experience.” Taken from:

http://www.international

specialreports.com/theamericas/00/guyana/3.html.The CEO is right. Guyana has always acceded to their requests, but has Barama always done the right thing for Guyana?

The Commissioner of Forestry (SN 17th Nov., 2006) said: “Whenever BCL has been in breach of any procedure, the GFC has meted out the appropriate penalty.” Maybe the Commissioner can enlighten us on what were these breaches, and what were the penalties? In this way, Guyanese can have some idea whether the penalties were commensurate with the infractions. Hopefully, we do not have to wait until after the Freedom of Information Act is passed.

We have to take steps to ensure that we are treated fairly. We cannot live in a fantasy world, hoping that companies will take care of us and fulfill their corporate responsibilities. We have to learn from our own experiences and those of others, and take preventative actions/measures to eliminate any potentially unfavourable treatment.

Seelochan Beharry