Orville Taylor | Rules matter

Sometimes, it is unimportant who one is; but more significant is the ‘where’, because external statuses can clash and one must be sensible enough to know where the respective lines end or begin. To enter every situation in the same frock makes a mockery of the process and unfortunately, ourselves.

In my family, my PhD means nothing. Yes, I might be more formally educated, but I am my sisters’ little ‘bredda’. In my home, the only titles that matter are for the houses and vehicles. And, the only positions that are of significance, are certainly none dictated by external social structures and institutions.

On the plantation, my place of primary employment, there are myriad situations for individuals to cross lines regarding statuses. Thus, relatives, including side-chicks and Joes, have to be declared, if registered in a lecturer’s course. In such cases, someone else sets the exam papers and grades the scripts.

Yet, for all those checks and balances, people, because of their external or internal positions or status, still forget their places. In my mentee’s psychotherapy class, I am his student; not his mentor. It takes a special effort, to understand that one cannot carry one’s external status into every situation, and still be in charge.

Not being an attorney, it took me a while to understand the phrase ultra vires. First read in a 1985 judgment as a senior conciliation officer at the Ministry of Labour, and given the personae in the matter, it smacked of a microbiological reference about some kind of illness. Pulling in external statuses can, not only be inappropriate and ultra vires, but in some circumstances, border on corruption. During a number of mediation, conciliation, arbitration and other procedures, attorneys have had to be quietly nudged that it was not a court of law and who absolutely was in charge.

However, on another occasion, while a hapless magistrate struggled to find the other half of his wit, to assuage his deep insecurities, I assured him that it was totally his court and his intellect was not the source of my primary research.

You see, status is not translatable in every single milieux.

Doctors, teachers and attorneys, who move into other jurisdictions, irrespective of their competence are simply without locus standi to practice their professions, without submitting to the local authority.

In labour matters, respect for jurisdictional limits is very important. For example, where a medical doctor issues a certificate regarding the health of a worker, his employer cannot negate it. Notwithstanding that, even if a second doctor engaged by the employer is infinitely more qualified than the first, he has no power to subvert the initial opinion. Such matters have to be settled by the Chief Medical Officer in the Ministry of Health, who is certainly junior in qualification, expertise and knowledge to many of her colleagues.

Even with a doctorate, you cannot serve two masters, even if one is yourself.

Last week another set of health workers, as they did with the brutally attacked nurse, were told to denigrate and desecrate the noble colour black, and turn it into a hue of protest. Behind the protest was the interdiction of a medical doctor, a full-time employee of the Government of Jamaica, whose terms and conditions of employment are circumscribed by the Public Service Regulations (PSR) and the Staff Orders for the Public Service (SOPS). True, the opinion of some attorneys is that these might be themselves unconstitutional. However, until a court says that they are, these are as binding as the rope that ties a randy ram goat.

The ‘victim’ presented himself for nomination and unsuccessfully ran as a candidate in the last general election. He lost twice. First, his candidacy was shot down in a hail of ballots and second, his employers the Government of Jamaica used the relevant sections of the SOPS and PSR to interdict him.

Honestly, inasmuch as it is my belief that a worker’s job is nothing to be trifled with; the ram goat must be aware of the proportions of its sphincter muscles, before it swallows a mango seed.

On July 27, 2025 on this very page, I wrote a treatise addressing the subject of public officers and their ban from political activities. It ended with the phrase, “A word to the wise is sufficient.” Apparently, some are ‘otherwise’. Whoever misadvised the good doctor, must have had his eyes wide shut. After all, if one plays a careless stroke, the fielder cannot be blamed for taking the catch.

Even more ridiculous is that just seven years earlier, his handlers won a game after the opposing batsman played a similar stroke.

Then to cap off a bad week, right in the middle of my evening repast, a question; not statement by senior journalist Dionne Jackson Miller, was directed at legendary (former) Director of Public Prosecutions, Paula Llewellyn. In the academy, even with assumptions or undertones, there is distinction between an interrogative and declarative expression. One ends with a ‘hook’, the other a period.

What followed was rank indignation, excoriation and a fulsome reminder about external status and seniority. Apart being totally unnecessary (which is what fulsome connotes by the way), it was simply a loss in the court of public opinion.

A guest on a talk show, is simply that, and the host is the host. Multiple words exist for excessive deference beyond basic courtesy, due to one’s status. After all, this is not a court where King’s Counsels are (unfairly) given privileges, even if they arrive an hour after the early bird junior.

Rules are rules, even if they are not mores, sociologists recognise folkways when we see them.

Orville Taylor is senior lecturer at Department of Sociology at The University of the West Indies, a radio talk-show host, and author of ‘Broken Promises, Hearts and Pockets’. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and tayloronblackline@hotmail.com