Local News

POA alleges irregularities

25 October 2026
This content originally appeared on Trinidad Guardian.
Promote your business with NAN

Se­nior Re­porter

an­[email protected]

The Prison Of­fi­cers As­so­ci­a­tion (POA) is aware of a com­mu­nique cir­cu­lat­ed to se­nior prison of­fi­cials out­lin­ing how over­time pay­ments will be han­dled in the fu­ture and has no ob­jec­tion to it, ac­cord­ing to Gen­er­al Sec­re­tary Lester Lo­gie.

Lo­gie told Guardian Me­dia the as­so­ci­a­tion had met with the Chief Per­son­nel Of­fi­cer (CPO) and prison of­fi­cials to clar­i­fy parts of the agree­ment.

“Some of the things would have been a breach of the agree­ment where of­fi­cers’ of­fi­cial leave en­ti­tle­ments were con­cerned, and how many hours they were en­ti­tled to,” he said.

He said sev­er­al is­sues had been clar­i­fied dur­ing three meet­ings with the CPO and the prison ex­ec­u­tive. The most re­cent meet­ing was held last Fri­day with act­ing Prison Com­mis­sion­er Elvin Scant­er­bury and the prison ad­min­is­tra­tion.

Lo­gie said the is­sues that had arisen from the doc­u­ment and were in dis­pute had been dis­cussed and clar­i­fied.

“The ac­count­abil­i­ty is­sues were not in dis­pute,” he said, adding, “We are all for ac­count­abil­i­ty in terms of how the hours are record­ed.

“How­ev­er, we were con­cerned with the spe­cif­ic peo­ple that they want­ed to de­ter­mine must own over­time.”

Lo­gie said that if 20 of­fi­cers were as­signed to a batch shift from 1 pm one day to 1 pm the fol­low­ing day, they should not be treat­ed dif­fer­ent­ly when over­time was cal­cu­lat­ed.

“You can’t tell me you’re on­ly pay­ing the su­per­vi­sor, the in­fir­mary of­fi­cer and the ra­tion room of­fi­cer over­time,” he said.

“No, that’s wrong. That is dis­crim­i­nat­ing. They are all on the same shift and are work­ing the same hours.”

Lo­gie said the Su­per­in­ten­dent of Pris­ons had a ma­jor re­spon­si­bil­i­ty in de­ter­min­ing over­time, since of­fi­cers could earn ex­tra hours on­ly if the su­per­in­ten­dent re­quired them to stay on for a spe­cif­ic task or be­cause their re­place­ments had not ar­rived.

“On­ly the su­per­in­ten­dent can de­ter­mine that. So the su­per­in­ten­dent has a re­spon­si­bil­i­ty based on our agree­ment in who earns ex­tra hours,” he said.

Al­though a se­nior of­fi­cer had is­sued the com­mu­nique, Lo­gie said, “The ma­jor­i­ty of the time, it is the Com­mis­sion­er who de­ter­mines who gets the over­time.”

“The Com­mis­sion­er will de­ter­mine who he pays ar­rears of over­time.”

Lo­gie said the POA had re­ceived re­ports of re­tirees be­ing paid ar­rears, as well as re­ports that ac­count­ing per­son­nel had been in­struct­ed to se­lect at least one name from a list of ten or 15 of­fi­cers for pay­ment while oth­ers re­mained un­paid.

He said main-shift of­fi­cers were some­times called in on week­ends and pub­lic hol­i­days to sup­port oth­er de­part­ments. They re­ceived com­pen­sato­ry time off, while of­fi­cers in those de­part­ments were paid over­time by the Com­mis­sion­er.

“I worked on the main shift for sev­er­al years in the Op­er­a­tions De­part­ment be­fore the Pro­grammes De­part­ment was es­tab­lished, and I worked sev­er­al of these ex­tra du­ties whilst sta­tioned at YTC, Car­rera and Port-of-Spain. I nev­er re­ceived over­time for my ex­cess hours worked on evenings and week­ends,” Lo­gie said.

“I was giv­en com­pen­sato­ry time off dur­ing the week for my ex­cess hours worked.”

Main-shift of­fi­cers are al­so en­ti­tled to an ad­di­tion­al va­ca­tion day for each pub­lic hol­i­day they are re­quired to work. Lo­gie claimed, how­ev­er, that “the ma­jor­i­ty do not get back the day va­ca­tion”.

He al­so raised con­cerns about an of­fi­cer at­tached to a for­mer spe­cial­ist se­cu­ri­ty unit who, he said, had re­ceived $250,000 in over­time.

“When I want­ed to know how he was paid, they couldn’t ac­count for the ex­tra hours he was work­ing,” Lo­gie said.

“He was not re­quired to re­port at any prison, so the chal­lenge is, how do you ask for ac­count­abil­i­ty for a cer­tain group of of­fi­cers whose ex­tra hours you can ver­i­fy, but oth­ers whose ex­tra hours you can­not ver­i­fy be­cause they are not un­der your con­trol?”

Lo­gie called for fur­ther in­ves­ti­ga­tion and clar­i­ty, say­ing of­fi­cers were up­set about pay­ments to spe­cial­ist units whose over­time hours could not be ver­i­fied.

He said the is­sue point­ed to a man­age­ment prob­lem and a lack of ac­count­abil­i­ty.

“Be­cause the man­agers who have to as­sign the ex­tra hours of­fi­cers have to work, why is it an is­sue to ac­count for these hours?” he asked.

“The man­ag­er, the su­per­in­ten­dent, is sup­posed to check all these things or his clerk will check the ex­tra hours book.”

Lo­gie said each prison had an of­fi­cial gate book in which of­fi­cers’ ar­rival and de­par­ture times were record­ed.

“When the Com­mis­sion­er has to give an of­fi­cer a case, if the of­fi­cer is miss­ing from du­ty or what have you, that’s the book they go to and check,” he said.

“So there are checks and bal­ances in place.”

Lo­gie said it was un­fair to blame of­fi­cers for de­lays in over­time pay­ments.

“Per­sons are not car­ry­ing out the func­tion that they were pro­mot­ed to do, but you can­not blame the of­fi­cer and you have his pay­ment in lim­bo. Most of these pay­ments are ex­tra hours earned years ago, and you’re ask­ing the of­fi­cer now to go and find his pock­et di­ary that he is re­quired to give up af­ter two years,” he said.

“That’s to avoid pay­ing the of­fi­cer,” he al­leged.

Lo­gie said mon­ey set aside by the Gov­ern­ment to pay pre­vi­ous years’ over­time was in­stead be­ing used by the Com­mis­sion­er to pay cur­rent-year over­time to units whose hours, he claimed, had not yet been earned.

He said cur­rent-year over­time was not au­dit­ed.

“They don’t go for an au­dit. It is paid in the cur­rent year, so au­di­tors don’t come to au­dit the books to pay that. We have of­fi­cers who are paid over­time to process the very over­time sheets,” he said.

“When we cre­ate these bu­reau­crat­ic hur­dles, we open an av­enue for cor­rupt prac­tices where of­fi­cers are claim­ing that they are pay­ing per­sons to get their cur­rent year and pre­vi­ous year over­time mon­ey owed.”

Lo­gie said he did not want the is­sue to be­come as dif­fi­cult as ob­tain­ing a Firearm User’s Li­cence.

“Ba­sic record keep­ing seems to be the is­sue from where I sit. We should not throw it back on the of­fi­cer to de­ny pay­ing him his pre­vi­ous years’ over­time,” he said.