PERHAPS IN a modern democracy, discriminatory benefits should be considered to be as verboten as discriminatory taxation. The constitutions of many countries prohibit the latter and, on moral grounds, the former can be seen as a violation of distributive justice.
Government, forced by the economics of the Jamaica Urban Transit Company (JUTC) to grant increases in bus fares (in some cases as high as 100 per cent), has apparently agreed with the trade unions to exclude public sector workers from having to pay the higher fares. We think this is wrong in principle and unlikely in practice to help in solving the JUTC's financial woes.
The argument of the trade unions is that public sector workers have signed the MoU and therefore need special protection against the cost of living increase, which the hike in bus fares will occasion. But the ravages of inflation affect private sector workers as much as their public sector counterparts. From time to time, as in the case of teachers and air traffic controllers, it suits the Government to try and burden them with the wage restrictions of the MoU even though these groups never signed off on it. It would be too fickle now for the Government to exclude one class of workers from a rise in the cost of living at the expense of another class.
We are concerned also that the proposed exclusion could backfire on the JUTC. Given the ingenuity of Jamaicans in getting around roadblocks and regulations, it might not be very long before the majority of bus passengers present IDs showing that they are public sector workers. Existing IDs are not difficult to counterfeit and in the rush of loading passengers into a bus, it would be hard for conductors to do careful checks on the status of commuters. There will be, in any case, excuses about IDs being left at home or lent to friends, all of which will cause more conflict and social division.
In the end, the JUTC might lose so much revenue across the board that the purpose of the fare increase comes to naught. The proposed discriminatory benefits for public sector workers is neither equitable nor practical.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
