> He {Dames} stressed successive governments have allowed accrued vacation - which should be capped at 15 weeks - to “run amok”.

Absolute hog wash! A 'take-it-or-lose-it' policy was put in place years ago when it was realized senior police officers were abusing accrued vacation. Back then all accrued vacation was paid up to date to allow for the implementation of the new take-it-or-lose-it policy. Thereafter, unless approved in advance at the time by the minister responsible, and only under the most extenuating of circumstances, no senior police official was entitled to pay for vacation not taken within the year it was earned.

Therefore, what's really happening here is that Dames is squandering our tax dollars to make unnecessary huge lump-sum 'giveaway' payments to senior police officers that he and Papa Doc Minnis have decided to give the proverbial boot. This gets the undesirable senior officers to leave voluntarily and quietly so that they can then be replaced by promoting other officers considered to be much more loyal to the FNM. This is outrageous to say the least!

You are simply ignorant of what you speak. . . you have no inkling of information as far as it comes to public services policies for vacation, retirement leaves, age of retirements and and accumulation of leave time or contingencies that allow excessive accumulation of leave time!!

Anyone on this site who has worked in public service and or retired from the same will just tell you: "shut the heck up cos yoon know what ya talkin bout". . .heck the people right here at the tribune can tell you you talking a load of dumb stuff!!

Now if you want to accuse the MONS of giving away money. . .just come out and say so. . .we would expect nonsense out of you like that. . .that's nothing new!! But the bunch of poppycock you brought out here is just no true. . .or even remotely correct!!

When BEC, BaTelCo, WSC and even some private companies took this kind of action, they found themselves having to go back to the same pool and rehire the people they let go. Apparently Meltdown Marvin feels he has enough talent and experience within the ranks to boot almost his entire top brass and either leave some positions vacant or promote junior officers. A bet the country cannot afford to lose, considering the crime situation. And the claim that this will not affect morale on the force is rubbish, especially since some dismissed officers claim they only learned of their fate in the media. With BTC, the problem is many who didn’t take the package are now leaving because they feel jobs are insecure. At least three CEO’s in five years. To unceremoniously kick long serving officers out to graze must have some impact on other officers. Some are wondering whose running the ship, while others may have hands itching to get on the wheel. And the public is also wondering what type police force their country will end up with.

When will spineless Brensil Rolle do the same in the public sector????? ......... 35 years service OR 60 years of age should be the MAXIMUM amount of time anyone is allowed to work in the public service.

Most public service workers who serve beyond 30 years are generally marking time and collecting salary and perks........ OR have not planned for their retirement.

Brensil Rolle and the Cabinet has to abolish those old British colonial General Orders and other antiquated Pindling-dated PSC laws and regulations and clean out the deadbeat employees of the Government. Most Ministries spend between 70-85% of their Budget on salaries and emoluments (perks). This is a financial and productivity drain on the country.

I have a feeling that you worked in public services and do know that information that those two "ignorant pundits" above are muddling through and have no idea what they are running on about!! The FNM government placed that time frame back to 30 of services or aged 65. . .by policy. . .but it was at 35 years services or 60 years old. I cannot remember the year it was returned to that time policy. . .but I can remember HAI was the PM who did so!!

What difference does it make if you take a paid vacation now or bank it.

Who cares, it's the same math.

It's "paid" vacation

The government lives by kicking the can down the road, ie borrowing.

Arguably better for government if the bank vacation.

It makes a big difference because these senior officers were in many instances, and for many years, simply lounging around doing nothing when they should have been on vacation. And then there are some of them who did take their vacation each year but it was not recorded as time off on vacation. Believe me, with way too many senior officers over many years, the amounts involved here are not chicken feed for Bahamian taxpayers!

Look out people. . .IGNORANT MAN WALKING THROUGH. . .as usual he don't know of what he speaks!! Hehehehehehehehehehehe. . .you simple don't have no idea how the public services works. . .PERIOD. . .or you would not be saying such silly things. Again. . .any public servant will tell: "homes yoon know what ya sayin". . . that kind of leave you talking about can never happen in public services like that!! Each leave time is recorded on a leave form where the category of leave is clearly marked. . .all government departments do that. . .

Makes no difference if they bank vacation.

If the person due "x " weeks of vacation pay, whether it paid out this year or in 20 years it's still the same. In fact money is always depreciating, ie 1000.00 buys more today than it will in 20 years, so really it's cheaper to pay them later.

What foolishness you speak of is time theif, or corruption etc, and that is a completely different subject. By you logic if they take their holidays every year do you expect the time thiefin will stop? Fool if you do.

Actually not true. In year one I may be making $100/week. By year 20 I may be making $500/week. If I allow it to accrue and take it all in year 20, then I'm getting 40 weeks at $500 per week versus the lesser sum I would have received in year 1. The officers are smarter than the government. Their take-home pay is greater for having waited. I can see Mr. Dames' point. It has to stop.

***@ CHUCKY***. Yes it's paid vacation but spread out over 1 to 2 years as opposed to the 1 to 2 years vacation paid in a lump sum in addition to their gratuity etc. It's easier on our finances to spread it over a longer time. Could you imagine having to pay each of them $60,000 or whatever their annual salaries are, that would be $300,000.00, plus their gratuity of whatever amount on their retirement. If they remain and work up until their official retirement date, then they would have been paid for those years that they should have been on vacation and still carry their vacation over to be paid on retirement. This makes a lot of sense to me from a financial background. Just to break it down -- ***(Scenario 1) Leave now and take vacation for one year -- $60,000.00 X 5 = $300,000.00, then retire with no owed vacation pay. (Scenario 2) Continue to work and don't take vacation --- $60,000.00 X 5 = $300,000.00 (salary for 1 year) + $60,000.00 X 5 (Vacation pay for 1 year) = $300,000.00 for a total of $600,000.00.***

Scenario 1 -- $300,000.00
Scenario 2--- $600,000.00
If you are a business owner, which package would you go with?

Seems to me that there is an amount that's paid out for vacation annually.

If the worker doesnt take the vacation, the government doesn't pay out the money.

So in the end the government still supposed to have that money.

So no difference. In your business scenario, which would I choose, well any business person with savy would gladly hang onto that money and use it over the years,

In addition, paying out a 1000 today is a lot more money than paying out 1000 in 20 years.

So your argument based not on fact, but your misguided feelings.

Government cannot continue to keep the public services like it is now. . .so before they do a mass send home. . .they are weeding out the dead weight. . .there are just too many of them on the public dole when they should have been gone years ago. . .they prevent new ideas from entering the system as well!

Papa Doc Minnis doesn't want to change the public services system.....he just wants his own senior police officers loyal to him and the FNM to pocket whatever gravy they can from the very same corrupt system, all at the taxpayers expense.

So who will become commissioner? Anthony Ferguson is also over sixty and has served his fourty years?

He is also on the list to get pre-retirement leave

When I left the public service voluntarily I left with about a years vacation. The plan usually is to work until you are sixty five and then leave with a couple of years vacation. The result is that you would have extended your retirement by a couple of years beyond the mandatory retirement age. For the last several years the government has been cracking down on that.

And as life expectancy increases, countries are seeking to raise the retirement age for both males and females, or, at least, relax the enforcement of it. In some countries the life expectancy is 90, so some persons will be collecting pensions for almost thirty years. And in some cases the number of retirees will, at some point , equal the number in the work force, causing a serious drain on retirement funds.

Life expectancy has been declining the last 8 years in all western nations.

Not so, the life expectancy is still around 80 years in this part of the world...81.9 being the highest in any country

Agreed, John. Amazing the specious garbage people post on this comment section.

This nonsense is just not true. My source is www.nhs.uk, which annually produces statistics on this. What is your source? Please stop posting untruths, particularly without a source. Geez.

Your personal attack does not make you credible or believable. My source tells me the life expectancy is still around 80 and vary slightly depending onwhere you live. You say it has been declining for the past eight years. So what if it has. It is still around 80. So the decline, if there was one, must have been infantisimal. Maybe if you stop posting under different names then you would be less confused and have less need to be hostile and coming across like an idiot.

I have much respect for the FNM government and Mr. Dames is indeed a genius

The vacation pile up is something that goes with the amount of money you make. I think Those A.C.P.s got 6 weeks a year plus 10 casual leave. They never touch their vacation and just use the casual leave. The police Act govern's much of the decision making, not the Public Service Act. So you would find that the police in most cases operate under Police Act. But As I stated previously, in the police force after 30 years you are serving at the pleasure of the Government. They don't owe you 40 years or age 60... pay all ya bill between day one and 30 years, after that you are on borrowed time.

"10 casual leave". Days or weeks? Hopefully not weeks!

10 Days.

Those senior officers sell their souls (and bodies) to the politicians ..... SMH

You go No Games Dames send them all home and you be the last man standing.,

They say you can do as much as you like , but not as long as you like. Time is moving
quickly so hurry up. Because this is your first and last time in the house of assembly.