Edna Manley teachers will be required to retire earlier

Jamaica is currently the beneficiary of a four-year, $958 million US Extended Fund Facility loan from the International Monetary Fund. In layman’s terms, Jamaica is receiving conditional international financial assistance aimed at improving the anemic state of the economy. Here is a good article on the subject, and while the fact that Jamaica must continue to submit itself to the conditions of the international system that originally (many argue) caused its demise, the country is meeting the targets set out by said system. (It must undergo 15 reviews and meet conditions to unlock the funding).

Here is analyst Aubyn Hill explaining the exact improvements better than I can:

The Net International Reserve (NIR), which had slipped progressively from about US$2 billion at the end of 2011, stood at US$912.3 million at the end of September and was US$151.1 million above the US$761.2 million target.

Reserves and grants in April to September 2013 were J$27.2 billion higher, recurrent expenditure was J$4.8 billion lower, capital expenditure was J$8 billion higher and loan receipts (borrowings) were J$58.5 billion lower compared to the same period in 2012.

These and other statistics served to reduce our planned Budget expenditure by J$10.9 billion and recorded a J$6.6-billion fiscal deficit, which was significantly better than the J$10.4-billion deficit figure that was in the Budget for the quarter under review.

And for further reference, if you are so inclined, check out these documents and links with more information on the IMF agreement.

Request for an Extended Fund Facility with the International Monetary Fund.

Jamaica’s Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies

Here is a good explanation of Jamaica’s current state of financial affairs, from the government:

Jamaica faces severe economic challenges. Since the mid-1990s, real GDP growth averaged less than 1 percent a year, which has contributed to sustained high unemployment rates and large-scale emigration of labor. Anemic growth and recurring bouts of financial market instability have been rooted in increasingly high levels of public debt, which reached 137 percent of GDP at the end of 2011, and is currently approaching 150 percent of GDP. Sustained high debt service obligations and large refinancing needs have resulted in costly risk premiums and helped crowd out private sector investment. The high debt levels have also exposed the country to adverse shifts in market sentiment. With interest payments alone accounting for approximately 37 percent of government revenues, the fiscal accounts are stretched too thin to pursue productivity-enhancing social and infrastructure investment.

This is the high level view. On the ground, however, it is a different story in terms of how the agreement is impacting people’s daily lives. I have been trying to wrap my head around the IMF agreement for some time now, both at the micro and macro level, and this situation I heard about the other day is helping me to do so. My friend Ann McNamee teaches at Edna Manley College of the Visual and Performing Arts and because of the IMF agreement, will be out of a job soon.

Because of a regulation buried deep in the agreement, teachers will now not be able to work past the age of 60, whereas before they were granted extensions until age 65. Because Edna Manley falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education, its employees are public sector workers, with wages governed by federal legislation. The closest thing to an explanation I can find is here, from the Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies:

Spending on education will also be made more efficient and effective. There will be a balancing of student-teacher ratio within and between schools. This will be achieved through, among other things:
 Structured attrition e.g. a freeze on the hiring of new teachers in schools that are overstaffed, to allow the number of existing teachers to decline by attrition.
 Mandatory retirement at the normal retirement age (schools with teachers beyond retirement age will be notified to regularize by September 2013).
 Standardization of the student/teacher ratios at the secondary level (to begin 2013).
 Establishing a clear accountability mechanism enabling the Central Government to set policies that grant schools more autonomy particularly with respect to greater flexibility in the deployment and redeployment of teachers.
 The process of voluntary reallocation of staff will continue over the medium term pending the enabling legislation for mandatory redeployment (enactment by FY 2015/16).
Other measures include reforming the current study leave policies to take account of the new hiring policy; restructuring the current scholarship programmes into separate need-based and merit-based components (review and design of the scholarship mechanism in the 2013/14 academic year with full implementation in 2014); instituting greater cost recovery at the tertiary level and improving the funding structure of the student loan scheme to facilitate increased access to tertiary level training.

But here is the explanation from my friend:

The issue with the IMF is that the government is to be careful how they spend our tax dollars. :-). The real problem is the Ministry of Education that thinks Edna Manley is a teacher’s college and the staff can be easily replaced! The rest of the world understands that expertise and experience is important in teaching the arts. The retirement age is 60 but in the past they’ve allowed faculty to stay until 65 when the Director of the different schools has requested it. I got my letter last week so I’m to retire in August.

Teachers and staff at Edna Manley are concerned for several reason, mainly that they will be losing experienced professionals who are not easily replaced. This is a shame. Despite budgetary challenges, Edna Manley has consistently educated and produced thousands of talented artists over the years. It would be a shame to lose the core group of professionals who are instrumental in this process.