While the government hailed the Daily Paid and Minor Salaried Officers Compassionate Gratuity Bill as “revolutionary,” Opposition Leader Ralph Gonsalves described it as a “retrogression” of established practices that could leave workers vulnerable to political victimization.
Gonsalves argued that while the bill codifies an existing administrative practice—providing a “golden handshake” to non-pensionable workers like watchmen, drivers, and nursing auxiliaries—it introduces two troubling changes:
- Increased Service Requirements: The bill raises the minimum service period from two years to seven years to qualify for benefits.
- Ministerial Discretion: Clause 92 allows a minister to withhold or reduce a worker’s gratuity if they are found guilty of “negligence, irregularity, or misconduct”.
Gonsalves criticized the lack of an independent appeals process, noting that under this law, “the minister gets to decide” a worker’s financial fate.
He characterized the government’s defense—that the provision would encourage “good behavior”—as “illogical and obtuse.”
