The Tribune

• Public service culture ‘plays games with people’s lives’

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

An ex-PLP MP has won just two percent of his $84,420 legal claim against the government for what he described as “the most humiliating episode of my professional career”.

Ron Pinder, Marathon’s MP from 2002-2007, also slammed a civil service appointments culture that is used “to play games with people’s lives” when giving evidence before the Industrial Tribunal to support his wrongful and/or unfair dismissal claim against the Ministry of Public Service and National Insurance.

The former parliamentary secretary in the Ministry of Health, who was appointed as deputy registrar general in 2013 under the second Christie administration before being transferred to the Law Reform Commission, had claimed he was “entitled to reinstatement and/or compensation and damages” after it was determined his services were no longer required following the FNM’s May 2017 general election win.

However, Simone Fitzcharles, the Industrial Tribunal’s vice-president, found all Mr Pinder was entitled to beyond the $25,034 he received when terminated was $1,900 as a mixture of general salary increases and increments stemming from the Bahamas Public Services Union’s (BPSU) new industrial agreement that took effect in 2014.

Tribune Business records show Mr Pinder was transferred from his post as deputy registrar general just days after he held a late October 2016 press conference to refute widely-circulated claims he had married a same-sex couple.

Producing both the husband and wife to put and end to the claims, Mr Pinder also denied that he himself was a homosexual. He said at the time: “Nothing can be further from the truth. I am not a homosexual. I have never been a homosexual. I’m not gay. I am not a sissy. I am not a punk.

“I am a man, and I performed this wedding as a marriage officer of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas, and it is a legitimate marriage between a man and a woman.” The Industrial Tribunal’s ruling detailed the transfer, although it did not include any of this background information.

Mr Pinder, in his claim, cited various breaches of the Employment Act, civil service General Orders, the Public Service Commission regulations and BPSU industrial agreement as grounds to support his unfair and/or wrongful dismissal claim against the Government.

He claimed $39,471 for wrongful dismissal and just under $65,000 for unfair dismissal, taking the total to $104,420 - a figure that included $10,000 for aggravated damages. However, Mr Pinder and his attorney, Trades Union Congress (TUC) president, Obie Ferguson, deducted $20,000 from this due to the earlier pay-off from the Government to leave the total claim at $84,420.

The Government, though, denied Mr Pinder’s claims and asserted that it had “fulfilled its obligations” to the former PLP MP via the $25,033 paid out in compliance with the Employment Act’s section 29.

Tracing the background to the dispute, Ms Fitzcharles said Mr Pinder met with then-permanent secretary Archie Nairn prior to his May 8, 2013, hiring. Mr Nairn said he would be employed on either a year-to-year contract, for three years or by being made a “permanent and pensionable” member of the public service.

Mr Pinder had expected to be appointed as the latter, and he received a June 6, 2013, letter from then-deputy permanent secretary, Celia Strachan, advising that the Christie Cabinet had approved his hiring on a $45,150 annual salary and 12-month probationary period.

The former MP provided all the documents requested by the Government to facilitate his hiring, but Ms Fitzcharles said he never inquired as to his appointment status. Mr Pinder was transferred to the Law Reform Commission on October 27, 2016, “to assist with urgent preparations of a committee tasked with conducting a conclave with a team from the Organisation of American States”.

He remained with the Commission until the Government dispenses with his services on August 2, 2017, less than three months after the Minnis administration was elected to office. Mr Pinder had been employed for four years and three months by that stage.

The ex-parliamentary secretary argued the Government was guilty of a “dereliction of duty” in failing to make him a “permanent and pensionable civil servant”, but the latter argued he was never “regularised” as such and was operating without a formal contract and never appointed as a public officer.

Ms Fitzcharles found that Mr Pinder was never appointed as a public officer in accordance with the constitution and Public Service Commission regulations, and nor was he a contract officer because he was not appointed for a fixed period of time. And his appointment was not in compliance with the Registrar General’s Act.

“The Public Service Commission and the Governor-General did not perform those acts necessary to appoint Mr Pinder as a public officer to the post of deputy registrar general, albeit he was employed to do so,” Ms Fitzcharles found.

After finding that Mr Pinder was entitled to neither pension nor gratuity benefits, she added that he had to be classified as a ‘government servant’ or temporary worker with his working relationship governed by the Employment Act.

The ex-MP, under cross-examination from the Government’s attorneys, during the trial hit out at the public service appointments process for lengthy delays in making persons “permanent and pensionable”.

“I am telling you the culture that is in the public service,” Mr Pinder blasted. “Persons should not suffer because the system has failed to keep up. It is by no means uncommon. I wish something could be done about it. Any suggestion that because I did not have a letter in hand nullifies my position is disingenuous.”

And later, when pushed that he had not been regularised and given a formal contract, Mr Pinder hit back on the absence of a letter confirming his appointment by the Governor-General. “That is not the culture of the public service,” he argued.

“It is a pervasive culture and, because it happened for so long, people use it to play games with people’s lives. It was the most humiliating episode of my professional career.” Mr Pinder then recalled how he had to pack his belongings, and clear his desk, with other staff watching on.

Ms Fitzcharles found this could have been done “in a more tactful manner”, with Mr Pinder allowed to leave after other employees had already left. However, she argued that his “dereliction of duty” claim was based on his “lack of appointment” rather than dismissal, and the Industrial Tribunal would “overreach its powers” if it made a determination on this aspect.

Accordingly, Ms Fitzcharles dismissed Mr Pinder’s unfair dismissal claim, adding: “In the circumstances, the Tribunal cannot find that because the Public Service Commission and the Governor-General did not appoint Mr Pinder a permanent and pensionable officer in the position of deputy registrar general, his dismissal was unfair.

“This is because such a finding would first require the Tribunal to venture outside of its remit to review the question of the lawfulness of refraining from appointing him.”