CSME Network News

From the Sunday Herald  Febriary 21,2010 - The arguments put forward to justify the continued failure to engage in negotiation the Air Jamaica worker spearheaded by JALPA are purported to be based on the principle of equality of opportunities to all interested parties.  It is posited that it would be unfair if JALPA were allowed entry at this late stage of the game because they would have been entering after the closing date that was set for acceptance of bids from interested parties.

That principle cannot be opposed or rationally be argued against. However, it must be recognized that that principle cannot be applied in a vacuum.  Where there are pre-stipulated conditions required of the successful bidder, then if any of those conditions are altered or removed after the closing date of the bid; the process ought to be aborted and new invitations sent out.  If this is not done the process is flawed and in fact discriminates against would-be bidders who might not have entered because of the pre-stipulated conditions.

To apply the principle of denial of late entry cannot be fairly applied in a situation where important preconditions are altered after bids have been closed.  Both transparency and the principle of equity/parity demand that the present Air Jamaica Divestment bid offer be reopened.  Certainly, anyone including JALPA should be afforded the privilege of having their proposal evaluated in a situation where there is a level playing field.

From the arguments put forward by JALPA and they have not been refuted, very important pre-stipulated conditions were removed after bid

Captain John Eyre (left), manager of training and standards at Air Jamaica; Captain Russell Capleton, spokesman for the Air Jamaica Staff Acquisition Team and  past president of the Jamaican Airline Pilots' Association (JALPA); Captain Maria Ziadie-Haddad, secretary of JALPA, field questions during yesterday's press conference at the Spanish Court Hotel in Kingston. (Photo: Karl McLarty).

entries were closed.  They have been seeking to enter a bid, which would be based on the same condition as those with whom the government is negotiating.  It would be interesting if the following questions were given public answers:

Is it not a fact that the certain important stipulated conditions required of the successful bidder were never met by anyone who entered a bid?

Is it not fact that the important condition of the sharing of the existing accumulated debt, which was a part of the original invitation to bid, was altered or removed after the bids were closed?

Is it reasonable to accept that the viability of acquisition would be seriously affected if one party is factoring a portion or the whole of a debt of US$1.0 billion?

How would the principle of parity/equity permit a closing of the gates to a Jamaican entry while changing conditions for those already entered?

Change of conditions

Using an analogy from horseracing, one with which many people could easily identify, let us say nominations are invited for participation in a race.  One of the conditions stipulate for the race was that all runners would carry a weight of 133 pounds during the race.  After nominations were closed the authorities and those who entered the race decided that weight of 133 pounds was too much for the racers so they negotiated among themselves and changed the weight to be carried in the race will be 112 pounds rather than the 133 pounds stipulated in the invitation for nomination.  With the word out, that the condition of the race had changed and that entrants would be carrying 112 pounds, someone who did not accept the invitation for nomination when the stipulated condition was 133 pounds decides to enter his animal now because, while he would race with 112 pounds he would not race with 133 pounds.

In racing, the matter would have been resolved by voiding the original nominations and invite nominations with the new 112 pounds condition made known to all prospective entries.  If that principle holds good for horseracing, why should it not hold good for the divestment of Air Jamaica?  The point is that it is manifestly unfair to permit change of conditions after the close of entries and proceed to deny late entries.  The bidding process must be reopened with the conditions available to all. ALL SHOULD MEAN JAMAICANS INCLUDING.

It is improper, discriminatory and. disrespectful to advertise overseas, while not doing so locally.  To deny late entry of bid can only be fair if there is no change to the preconditions of entry that would influence the decisions to enter.

Quenching  entrepreneurial spirit

There are those who feel very strongly that it must be a breach of procedure to have offered Government of Jamaica property for divestment without advertising that intent in any of our many local newspapers.  Was this a miserly attempt to cut advertising expenditure or was it a way of making it clear that Jamaicans are unwelcome to this divestment?  Since they could not advertise in Jamaica and say Jamaicans are excluded, the next best was done — advertise outside of Jamaica.  When it is considered that what the haggling with Caribbean Airlines is not about what they will pay, it is about how to put Air Jamaica out on the scrap heap.

The question must be asked: why not hear what the workers have to put on the table?  Why is there no effort to mobilize the capital of Jamaican at home and abroad in an effort to provide equity capital for the venture?  Isn’t it ironic that while Jamaica capital is stocked in government paper, foreigners have bought the Carib Cement Company, the century old Jamaica Mutual, and others.

The truth is that reliance on government paper has quenched the entrepreneurial spirit in Jamaica.  Could it be that there is a secret fear that should local capital start investing in production there will be a shortage of capital to satisfy the demand of the insatiable appetite of government for short-term money?  This myopic strategy can only result in our increased indebtedness and continued deterioration of the Jamaican economy.

How come we have reached the stage where closure and even give-away are among the options and likely action contemplated without even for a moment trying to involve the workers and the wider Jamaican community participating in a national effort to own/save the national airline?  The answer could shock us but one thing is very sure, national pride and the effort to mobilize Jamaican capital for productive industry were visibly absent.  Will we ever hear who has received how much in order to bungle us to this point of national embarrassment?  Is this a level paying field?

For  the full article plese go to - http://www.sunheraldja.com/2010/02/air-jamaica-is-the-playing-field-level/