It seems as if the leadership of the Jamaica Teachers’ Association is returning to the days of the 1960s when it was strongly pro-PNP and became uncooperative in the JLP’s education reform led by Edwin Allen, then minister of education. That is the only reason I can deduce from information gathered on the impasse between the JTA and education minister Andrew Holness. The information suggests that the JTA is not acting in the best interest of its members by boycotting meetings of the Teachers’ Service Commission (TSC).

On March 28, 2011, Davis was appointed by the minister as chairman under the Education Act and senior adviser to the minister in 2007 with responsibility for safety and security in schools, a position he continues to hold. In his capacity as senior adviser, Davis is the chairman of a special advisory committee — the School Security and Safety Steering Committee — established under the Act. His existing responsibility bears no relationship and does not run counter to or conflict with his new responsibilities on the TSC. It should be stated that Davis has no known or expressed political relation to the minister of education. I gather that the minister knew Davis only in his capacity as president of the Principals and Vice-Principal Association in 2007. The JTA has not produced one shred of evidence of any conflict of interest between Davis and itself. I am fundamentally opposed to anyone or organisation being prejudged.

Davis’s special qualities

What special qualities and attributes has Davis brought to the positions? He has a wide and deep connection with education leaders. His was a familiar and respected face to whom stakeholders could immediately identify, relate and communicate. At the time he was appointed senior technical adviser-safety and security in schools, there was a major issue that required mobilisation of school leaders. To place matters in perspective, it is worthwhile to note that the TSC comprises 19 members appointed at the minister of education, including the chairman, of whom nine are appointed in the minister’s discretion and are known as ordinary members, six are nominated by teachers’ associations recognised by the minister and four are nominated by a body recognised by the minister as representing owners of educational institutions.

The functions of the commission include registration, discipline and assessment of teachers employed in public educational institutions (PEIs). The advisory functions include guiding the minister on the appointment of principals and other teachers to senior posts in the PEIs. The TSC does not make appointments. The minister has the exclusive authority in law to make appointments, having regard to the recommendations of the TSC. The chairman of the TSC has no special authority in appointment, discipline and/or assessment of teacher qualifications. The chairman merely convenes and presides over meetings. Apparently, the JTA objects to the appointment of Davis as chairman of the TSC on the basis of a perception that there is a conflict of interest in his role as a senior adviser to the minister and his role as chairman of the TSC. The essential point in its argument is that convention and practice dictate that the chairman of the TSC should be an impartial person unconnected with the political directorate. I gather that the JTA does not believe that Davis is a political appointee.

The JTA objection to the minister’s choice of chairman means that its members will not

attend meetings of the TSC until its objections are acceded to, thus precluding the formation of quorum. It should be noted that Ruel Reid, another senior adviser to the minister chairs another advisory body, the National Council of Education which trains and recommends the appointment of school board chairmen. The JTA expressed no objection then, or since the appointment of Reid whose situation is similar to that of Davis.

As a result of the impasse, contrary to the provision of the Act, the TSC has not met to conduct business on the required basis. This has led to the delay in the appointment of principals and assessment of qualification, among other matters.

Sources say the minister is of the view that there is no conflict of interest in the appointment, perceived or real. He reasons that a conflict of interest occurs when an appointee or agent has an agency of trust that amounts to fiduciary or public interest duty and that fiduciary/agent or public official has other obligations or duties (either private or public ) that run counter or could conflict with his duty of trust to his principal/appointing body or public interest. I have been told that in this case the minister has a public duty of trust for the public interest which by law allows him to delegate to an agent (Davis) in whom he has confidence, will exercise his duties in the public interest.

It appears to me that the JTA is batting on shaky grounds while its members are placed at a considerable disadvantage. Holness is sticking to his position while JTA president, Paul Adams, is showing his usual determination. The matter might well end up in court.