Senior Reporter
anna-lisa.paul@guardian.co.tt
One month before it was confirmed that the T&T Prison Service (TTPrS) had paid over close to $1 billion in overtime over the past ten years—an internal communique detailing payment discrepancies pointing to an alleged overtime scandal surfaced and has led to a review of the current overtime policy.
In the document from within the Prison Service dated September 8 and addressed to the Senior Superintendent of Prisons; 13 Superintendents of Prisons; two Assistant Superintendents of Prisons; and the Prisons Supervisor—eight issues were highlighted as the reasons behind the delayed processing of overtime.
The document was obtained by Guardian Media. Chief among the issues raised were inaccurate record-keeping; calculation errors; questionable claims regarding compensatory time off; and signatures and regimental numbers submitted on overtime sheets and in the Hours of Work Book that could not be discerned.
Already the Prison Service, led by Acting Commissioner Elvin Scanterbury, has moved to implement measures and enforce systems already in place to ensure there is no repeat of discrepancies.
According to the internal memo titled Treatment of Excess Hours/Overtime by a senior prison official who cannot be named, several issues had contributed to the delayed processing of overtime.
Heading the list was inaccurate record-keeping—with a further explanation that, “Excess hours submitted for payment did not reflect actual hours worked.”
Time Off granted instead of Compensatory Time Off (CTO) was listed immediately after; followed by the granting of CTO, “when there is zero or insufficient accumulation of excess hours.”
No breakdown was provided relating to Calculation Errors; but queries were raised regarding the eight hours credited for a Salary Day.
Senior officials were admonished for not providing details as to why the Hours of Work Book and the Remarks Column had not been utilised “to explain extra duties worked.”
In addition, concerns were raised surrounding the ambiguity on whether an officer is “called out” for duty or given prior notice that he/she would be required to work on their day off.
Rounding out the list of issues was the most glaring and damning of all, which alleged, “Signatures and regimental numbers documented in the Hours of Work Book and overtime sheets could not be discerned.”
However, the senior prison official acknowledged that, “Considering the dynamics of the Prison Service, excess hours can legitimately be generated due to staff shortages, extra duties and peak periods, ie, national holidays, religious holidays, parades, etc.”
But the official went on, “The option to grant Compensatory Time Off is not being utilised to manage extra hours.”
They cited the example that overtime accumulated within nine weeks was being submitted to the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Prisons, Administration, before the expiration of the established six-week period—which was contrary to General Order 32 of 2012.
In reviewing the reasons, it was stated that, “CTO cannot be effectively administered given the current short timeline for overtime submission (nine weeks).”
The TTPrS ruled that adherence to General Order 32 of 2012—D (ii) will allow for a greater time period for Superintendents/Prisons Supervisors to manage staff, thus affording officers CTO—and will allow the utilisation of CTO during less demanding periods.
A further condemnation of senior prison officials came as the communique continued, “Oftentimes, neither Checking Officers nor Superintendents are verifying excess hours documented in the Hours of Work Book, as on numerous occasions inaccurate/misleading hours have been detected and returned for correction.”
The official again insisted that adherence to General Order 32 of 2012—D (ii) “will provide a sufficient time frame for Superintendents to verify, recheck and correct any issues found before appending their signature.”
Alluding to corrupt practices, the official wrote, “Hours accumulated beyond an officer’s normal working hours are being signed off by Superintendents without any written form of justification/explanation as to the extra duties performed. Additionally, the person who authorised the extra duty is also absent from the document, especially in cases when officers are accruing triple time.”
At this juncture, the official reinforced, “Senior officers are reminded that the payment of overtime allowances is regarded as a penalty imposed on the Employer, as a deterrent against the working of excess hours.”
Seeking to avoid any ambiguity moving forward, the senior official said that to ensure the accurate verification and seamless processing of overtime claims, “Immediate remedial action is required.”
Indicating attendance registers, pocket diaries and hours-of-work books are documents called upon when overtime is being audited, the official said, “Therefore, with immediate effect, the following guidelines must be strictly adhered to in the preparation and submission of actual hours worked beyond standard working hours.”
A main shift runs from 8 am to 4.30 pm from Monday to Friday; while a batch shift runs from 1 pm on any day to 2 pm the next day.
Directing all prison officials to ensure they adhere to General Order 32 of 2012—D (ii), the official outlined, “Where an Officer becomes eligible for CTO, such CTO shall be granted to the officer within six weeks after the month in which the excess hours have been worked.”
Indicating there should now be a Superintendent’s Cover Note verifying the period of excess hours submitted, the official went on, “When an officer is required to work on his/her off day or public holiday, state in the Superintendent’s Cover Note whether said officer/s were called out or rostered for duty.”
In addition, a written explanation documented in the Hours of Work Book of what are the extra duty/duties officers are detailed to perform, is now required—along with Attendance Registers for Main Shift Officers which are to be copied, certified correct and submitted with the relevant overtime sheets.
“For officers who have accumulated triple time or whose excess hours may be deemed exorbitant, copies of the Attendance Register—certified correct—are to be submitted verifying said hours.”
“Declaration to be made in the Hours of Work Book and Overtime Sheets, which is to be signed and dated by Supervisor and the Superintendent.”
The TTPrS is clear that “all supporting documentation must accompany overtime sheets upon submission to the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Prisons Administration.”
“Additional documentation may be requested if deemed necessary for further verification of overtime claims.”
Acting Prison Commissioner Elvin Scanterbury has welcomed the new directive. “Accountability in the preparation, verification and submission of overtime claims is essential.”
“Any discrepancies must be addressed promptly to protect public funds and ensure that officers receive the payments properly due to them.”
He said, “The review must ensure that claims are supported by accurate duty records, calculations are checked, and responsibility for verification and approval is clearly established.
“Remedial measures should also reduce errors and prevent unnecessary delays in processing legitimate claims.”
He added, “Any allegation of corruption is a serious concern. However, discrepancies alone do not establish corruption; we must distinguish administrative errors from deliberate misconduct through proper examination of the records.
“Where evidence of wrongdoing emerges, the matter must be referred to the appropriate authorities for investigation and action, with due process observed.”
International team
wants to audit
An international investigations firm has expressed interest in conducting an independent audit and investigation into overtime payments at both the TTPrS and the T&T Police Service (TTPS).
Attorney Keron Ramkhalwhan initially filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request on behalf of Vishal Persad, seeking detailed information on overtime payments to both state agencies.
Following the information contained in the TTPrS response, Ramkhalwhan renewed the call for an independent audit and investigation into how overtime is managed and paid across these institutions.
He said, “This is not about whether officers deserve to be paid for the work they do.
“They do, and they should be. The real question is whether public money is being paid out fairly, accountably and transparently. The public is entitled to that assurance, and only an independent audit can provide it.”
Ramkhalwhan confirmed that Nardello and Co, a global investigations firm, had reached out to him and expressed interest in conducting an audit and investigation into the overtime issue.
Ramkhalwhan continued, “We therefore call on the Government, the Police Service Commission, the Trinidad and Tobago Prison Service and the Public Service Commission to sanction an independent audit and investigation, and to retain an independent investigative firm to carry it out. Only a truly independent process can restore public confidence.”
