11 facts on how teachers unions scammed teachers (Laptop Wahala)

The 11 FALSE facts show how teachers unions scammed teachers in the One Laptop One Teacher programme makes Ghanaian teachers look unprotected and vulnerable as the very unions that should seek their interest are seeking other interests.

HOW TEACHER UNIONS SCAMMED TEACHERS 😏
_________________
1. It was not the government’s intention to provide laptops for teachers.

2. Teacher unions GNAT, NAGRAT, and CCT brought that request to the government to procure laptops for teachers. According to NAPO, former education minister, the unions alleged they had discussed with teachers already and teachers agreed.

3. These teacher unions mentioned in(2), requested the government to take 70% of the cost and for teachers to take 30% which was eventually agreed.

4. Government through the Ministry of Education, requested the above-mentioned teacher unions to contract a company that will procure and customize the laptops for teachers. Take note, Government didn’t contract any company to provide laptops. However, teacher unions made it look as though the government was the main brain behind the laptops.

5. The teacher unions mentioned in (2) brought a company with no track record for procurement. Did they have any interest in the deal which they pushed for the GES to buy into? Some teachers have rumoured that K.A Technologies is owned by CCT-GH leader King Ali thus K.A technology. Is this a conspiracy theory or a reality?

6. Government through the Ministry of Education had no hand in determining the cost of the laptop per unit. All were negotiated by our teacher unions. According to NAPO, on a radio interview, the specs of the initially presented to him amounted to Ghc 4000.

7. The contract was then signed by all parties. The official cost per laptop was Ghc1,550.

8. It was not initially compulsory for all teachers but was made so because the teacher unions sensed many teachers may opt-out of the project.

9. Mode of payment was to be in installment after receiving your laptop but it was later decided to be deducted from the teacher’s professional allowance.

10. Government’s 70% quota of the laptop was to be used as upfront payment for the procurement but it was not ready then, and still not ready now.

11. These teacher unions mentioned in (2) decided to go for a loan without consulting teachers to fund the laptops. There was an interest on the loan.

12. These teacher unions urged the government to take off the interest on the loan but the government was reluctant.

13. So instead of deducting Ghc465 as 30% component of Ghc1,550, they spread the interest for teachers to bear the cost, making a total deduction of Ghc509.

In Short, Teacher Unions SCAMMED Teachers