Bahamas Gaming Board Criticized for Firings

The government of the Bahamas has come under severe criticism for allowing the Gaming Board of the Bahamas for firing about 30 employees. The board said the employees didn’t have enough tech skills.

The Gaming Board of the Bahamas last week fired about 30 employees, sparking criticism from MP Glenys Hanna Martin.

Martin declared that the firings were “crude and heartless,” and amounted to “rolling out of the “red carpet for foreigners.”

The statement followed an ultimatum from the Bahamas Public Service Union to rectify the situation in seven days or face “some action” from the union.

A spokesman for the government answered: “The Gaming Board of the Bahamas recently conducted a manpower review which made it patently clear that the gaming industry in the Bahamas had in recent years transformed into a more technologically based business than had previously existed.”

The spokesman added, “The regulatory needs of the industry have become more techno-centric than labor intensive. In short, the board required the services of more technology analysts and personnel with specific technological qualifications.”

The Gaming Board said it will need employees who are qualified in information technology and accounting, to properly regulate the industry.

The Gaming Board said that “immediate past human resources director, Mrs. Georgette Johnson, was mandated to carry out the manpower needs analysis and upon her specific recommendation, the board has immediately disengaged the services of some 30 employees.”

The statement concluded, “During the past four years, the staff complement of the board has increased by approximately 40 per cent. Unfortunately, some of those persons who have been engaged over that period and previously, are now ill-suited for the modern-day requirements of our current regulatory regime. Accordingly, best professional advice indicated that the board was severely overstaffed and that the future viability of the board as an effective regulator, with all of its regulatory obligations and responsibilities, required that changes, though stark and hard, had to be made.”