Jane Ragoo: "It is essential to fairly and adequately compensate workers"

Jane Ragoo, the General Secretary of the Confederation of Public and Private Sector Workers (CTSP), stated, "If the government acts reasonably, it could provide compensation of Rs 700 to Rs 800, but it should not eliminate the CSG Allowance."

How did the discussions go during the tripartite meeting? Was there a real space for dialogue?
The atmosphere was relaxed, discussions were cordial, and the meeting proceeded smoothly. The Prime Minister presented the situation, and everyone shared their perspective. Employers requested that salary compensation not be applied in sectors covered by collective agreements to avoid upsetting the already negotiated wage scales.

I pointed out an important aspect to the Prime Minister: the CTSP signed 18 collective agreements with both large and small companies for the year 2025 alone. These agreements include a security clause that states any favorable change after signing must be reflected in salaries. Therefore, employers are obligated to adjust wages accordingly. I advised the Prime Minister not to play into their hands. We firmly oppose this.

The Prime Minister mentioned Moody’s dissatisfaction regarding the reduction of public debt. What are your thoughts?
Moody’s does not control our country. Every year, we carry out this exercise to restore the purchasing power of workers. Why bring up this agency? Does Moody’s dictate our purchasing power? What matters to us are the figures from Statistics Mauritius. The Prime Minister himself said that under the previous regime, the statistics were distorted. However, this year, with the new figures, we can clearly see the reality.

The household basket amounts to Rs 45,000 according to the Statistics Bureau. If we apply an inflation rate of 3.8% on a base of Rs 22,515, it results in a compensation of Rs 855, not even accounting for the Rs 600 loss due to the elimination of the CSG Allowance. Therefore, we also requested that the CSG Allowance not be cut.

Moreover, we have never seen a tripartite committee that merely listens and then lets the Council of Ministers decide. That is not social dialogue. We need to come with figures, debate them, or establish a minimum wage indexed to the inflation rate to determine salary compensation.

Do you believe the proposed amount will fall short of expectations, especially considering the real loss in purchasing power?
Everyone has experienced a loss in purchasing power, even those earning over Rs 50,000. In my opinion, if the government acts reasonably, it could offer compensation of Rs 700 to Rs 800, but it should not cut or eliminate the CSG Allowance.

What message do you have for the Council of Ministers, who will arbitrate on salary compensation?
Two union members in the Council of Ministers, Paul Bérenger and Ashok Subron, know perfectly well that what occurred today was incorrect. Why should the Council of Ministers have the final say instead of the technical committee as has always been the case? Who advised the government that ministers should make the final decision? I advise them, if they truly want change, to send a strong signal that things are changing. They need to restore hope to the people. I also pointed out that the retirement age should be reinstated to 60. Regarding compensation, we recommend Rs 855. During today’s meeting (this Thursday), unionists agreed on an inflation rate of 4%. Taking Rs 22,515 as the reference point, the compensation should therefore be around Rs 900. It is essential to fairly and adequately compensate workers, and we need to move in that direction.