Caymanians still dominate in civil service.
(CNS): On the 30 June this year there were 3,756 core government civil servants — four percent down on last year, and over 70% of them are Caymanian. From a low of 56.7% in 2001 the percentage of Caymanian employees working directly for government grew steadily until it reached a high of over 75% in 2005, since then the percentage of locals working for government has hovered around the 70%. According to an employment report from the portfolio of the civil service there are thirteen government departments with over 90% Caymanian employees and three can claim a 100% local staff.
However, the service is still something of a melting pot as the report reveals that scattered across various departments are 1105 people from 38 different countries. While Jamaicans and Brits make up half of the foreign nationals there are people employed by government from as far afield as Romania and Nigeria. Not surprisingly the governor’s office has the highest percentage of non-Caymanian workers followed by the Audit office and 911 where three-quarters of the staff are from overseas. However, the immigration department; customs; recreation, parks & cemeteries, fire department and most of the ministries have a full complement of Caymanians. Half of the foreign workers in the civil service were recruited on island.
Although Caymanians are over represented in the lower wage brackets they still also dominate in the higher grades as well. Foreign nationals tend to be numerous in technical and specialist rolls where there are less Caymanians available. The report suggests that the higher than average percentage of local staff in the lower grades and wage brackets is as a result of the number of junior posts that are filled by Caymanians.
Although there are more women than men in the service, when it comes to salaries the report reveals that the higher grades are dominated by men. There are more men than women in all grades from A-H. At the lower end of the pay scale, among wage earners again men dominated the highest wage brackets and women the lowest.
Whenit comes to age-friendly departments, the post office has the highest number of workers over 70 with 5 people well past retirement age still employed. District Admin also employs four septuagenarians and conversely employs the most workers under the age of 20. Both the MRCU and the National Archive however, have the highest percentage of workers over retirement age with 18%. Over at the general registry and department of youth and sports however the staff is dominated by the under 30s.
Staff turn over in the service is just above 12% for 2008/09, for the last five years turnover has been around 11%. Although the Department of Tourism had a turnover of 40% authors of the report indicated this owed much to the policy of employing scholarship students on short term job placements. 911, the cadet core and the empowerment and community development agency have all had high turnover rates during 2008/09. Aside from the governor’s office the OCC, vehicle & equipment services, youth & sports, the health regulatory board and the Legislative Assembly all had 0% turnover during 2008/09. Other departments with low turnovers included lands & survey, customs and the economics & statistics office.
Only three percent of both Caymanians and non-Caymanians who left were sacked and 42% of foreign workers, versus only 27% of Caymanians resigned.
Category: Local News
To the guy who stated my children can’t run for office.
I took your statements to task and I have to correct you as you are obviously uninformed , as usual for someone of your posting ability. First, there is not such thing as Status in Cayman anymore, and I quote from the immigration website.
"However, only those people who have acquired the right to be Caymanian (or Caymanian Status as it was formerly known), whether by birth, descent or grant, are actually Caymanians in the context of the Immigration.
And YES they can definitely run for office, please read the elections law below. Please be more informed before making such ignorant statements.
Source: http://www.electionsoffice.ky/cms/index.php/election-process/54-qualification-and-disqualification-of-a-candidate
(1) A person shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the Assembly if, and shall not be qualified to be so elected unless –
A) he possesses Caymanian Status and
B) he has attained the age of twenty one years; and
C) he is, at the date of his nomination for election, domiciled and resident in the islands; and
D) he is a qualified citizen; and either
E) he was born in the islands in the circumstances mentioned in subsection (2)(b) of this section, has resided in the Islands for a period of not less then seven years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election and, subject to subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the number of days on which he was absent from the islands in that period does not exceed four hundred; or
F) he was born outside the Islands, has resided in the Islands for a period of periods amounting to not less than fifteen years out of the twenty years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election, and in the seven years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election the number of days on which he was absent from the islands does not exceed four hundred.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) (D) of this section, a qualified citizen is a British Dependent Territories citizen by virtue of a connection with the Islands, who either –
A) at the date of his nomination for election possesses no other citizenship for which he may be elegible; or
B) was born outside the Islands, has or had at least one parent or grandparent who was born in the Islands and possesses Caymanian status (of if deceased would if alive have possessed Caymanian status at the date of nomination for election), and who at the date of his nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his birth outside the Islands.
I repeat – there is no such thing as a Naturalised Caymanian. You can possess/be granted the Right to be Caymanian (formerly known as Status) AND/OR you can be Naturalised as a British Overseas territories Citizen by virtue of a connection to the Cayman Islands. When you used the word Naturalised I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that the mother was not Caymanian at the time of their birth. I still do not know from your response whether she was or was not.
You will note that A and D above require both the right to be Caymanian AND Naturalisation as a British Overseas Territories Citizen.
There are other issues that could be of concern. Were you married to the mother? Do issues of domicile of dependency arise? Do the children possess any other nationality?
You can also see provision 61 of the new Constituton for guidance.
I provided an abbreviated version for you based on limited information. Your insults were not called for.
If you want to take me to task – give some facts that can be relied on – not some made up bestowal of "the right to be Caymanian" under the 1981 British Nationality Act (as amended). That was all I was commenting on.
How about a moratorium being put on ‘Cayman Status grants’ for a while? Can the infrastructure of our small, very small island cope with all this? Put a moratorium on cars, hotels, seven storey buildings, work permits and give the island a chance to be the way GOD wants us to be:- ‘an island’!! HE put us here and HE can wipe us out any time HE wants. Cayman belongs to HIM no one else – HE just gave us an opportunity to live here. Be thankful!!
How about a moratorium on bible thumping for a while?
I have a Rental Receipt, CUC bill and a Water Authority bill. Does that mean I am a Paper Caymanian?
Only if you are paying the minimum monthly amout to keep your utilities connected.
Does this explain why there was no cut in the civil service during the current budget?
You don’t say. Too many of the job for life brigade have the vote.
Bad service, rude jobsworth attitude, terrible value for money. Mmm. now these figures start to make sense.
Facts sir/madam, facts. Not "every teacher/nurse I know" etc. That’s called "anecdote".
Thank you to the 13:59 poster!
Finally someone who put sense into words and onto paper.
The prejudism on this little haven is becoming painful…. and it’s not from the outside in.
Just look at Computer services and Audit internal/external departments and u will see how many expats there are.
And your point is? As soon as they get a little experience they go to the bigger salaries of the private sector-it’s been going on for years and years. Those who don’t make it in the private sector become politicians (Elio-ex Computer Services).
Only in Cayman do you hear "paper Caymanians" and the like. Didn’t any of you know, you government does now NOT distinguish between naturalized Caymanians and born Caymanians. They have specifically said there is no difference, so get it out of your minds.
You don’t hear Americans or Canadians say, "Oh, he just a paper American" or "He just a paper Canadian". Those that are naturalized are as Caymanian as you can get. You forget that if you are of several generations of "born" Caymanians you have other blood in you so maybe you are a paper Caymanian!
The Civil Service and YOU should be proud there are so many Caymanians that work there as that is what runs the countries affairs!
No, America has Italian Americans, African Americans, Latinos, Irish Americans (and huddled in a few reservations) – Native Americans.
Canada has done a little better – but they still refer to Hong-Couver.
In England, there are Englishmen and Bloody Foreigners.
Each has a strict immigration regime. Cayman is not in reality, any different.
You make a good point. However, in the States you count Italian American’s Latino American’s as AMERICAN’s. You don’t and can’t by law discriminate. And you certainly (other than maybe from the far right) have people fighting if they are "American’s", regardless of their origin.
In fact, I would say if ALL Caymanians have some other blood in them. If they don’t and have only married Caymanian’s you better check the blood line for marrying cousins, at the very least very distant cousins.
As a Caymanian living in the US I see discrimination all the time. You are right that by law you aren’t allowed to discriminate but lets be realistic and admit that it goes on everyday. If you have a different accent or look different you are subjected to both blatant and subtle discrimination. I am not sure of where you are from but you state that Latino’s and Italian American’s are counted as just American’s. Maybe the Italian American’s are but for sure the Latino’s and African American’s aren’t and they have been in America for a long time. Why would you then expect Cayman to be any different?
What I see over here is no different than what is ocurring in Cayman right now. People are very nationalistic but I think that the size of Cayman makes this even more apparent. It amazes me after having travelled the world to see how people are so willing to accept things in their own country as status quo but the minute they move to Cayman they think it all has to be different. Cayman is no Shangri-La, it has problems too JUST LIKE EVERYWHERE ELSE. I am not saying that it should be accepted but obviously when a country loses it sense of identity and culture to a huge influx of foreign influences there will be some backlash. Stop comparing Cayman to other places and try to be an agent of change. It all starts with you as an individual no matter where you are from.
So here is a scenario for you. I married a Caymanian (originally from St. Lucia, but she moved here when she was just nine years old, and moved in with a Caymanian (born) family. She is a naturalised Cayman (or paper Caymanian as some of you say). I am Canadian, and my 3 kids were born here (after she was naturalised) making them Caymanian.
So are they Caymanian? Are they Canadian? Are they St. Lucian? You tell me. I am the agent of change, I for sure want the culture of whatever Cayman is to survive, but what I don’t appreciate is the fact that Caymanians (born) say they aren’t Caymanians because they are first generation Caymanians.
Now do you can understand the problem. In Canada they would most likely be referred to as "Canadian". They certainly wouldn’t be considered "paper Caymanians" or "not real Canadians".
Simple. If you have to ask what nationality they are then they are not Caymanian. If they (and you) say you are Caymanian, and have the papers, then you are. If you say you are Canadian, and have Caymanian Papers, then you are a paper Caymanian.
I’m sorry but this is just not true. My children were born in Cayman, raised in Cayman, consider themselves Caymanian and get very indignant of anyone suggests they are not Caymanian. True they do not look or sound Caymanian, but their hearts are and if anyone asks them what nationality they are, they will say without hesitation Caymanian.
This has led to many interesting conversations over the years when they have travelled as people are fascinated to learn more and never has any foreigner told them they are not Caymanian. Want to guess who does tell them they are not Caymanian?
O’Really, read my post again. It does not question the "Caymanian-ness" of your children. Only those that do not call themselves Caymanian. If a child does not consider themselves to be Caymanian, why should anyone else?
I did understand your post, I agree with your position that if my children don’t think of themselves as Caymanian, why should anyone else.
But this isn’t my point. The reverse of your argument is that if my children think of themselves as Caymanian and have the paperwork, including a Caymanian passport, then others should think of them as Caymanian. You may accept them as such but their experiences and my observations tell me yours is a minority opinion, not shared by many true born Caymanians.
Perhaps true, and sad if it is. Then I suppose it will be time and persistence that overcomes – but overcome it will – provided Caymanians also feel part of it all and not unduly marginalised as that I fear is the heart of the debate.
Why are they not Caymanian? They were born to a naturalised Caymanian after she was naturalised and while in Grand Cayman, so yes they are Caymanian. Oh, I know everyone here has never been the product (directly or down the line) of anywhere else in the world. Give me a break! If not, you better check your genes as you might have married your uncles brothers wife. Not logical right, ALL Caymanians hail from different parts of the world, just because you have lived here for several generations doesn’t make you any more Caymanian than someone who was born of a Caymanian in the Cayman Islands.
Oh and by the way they can run for office, just as ANY Caymanian can.
That is the problem you see you are classifying people not by their lineage, but by how long they have lived here,or their parents lived here or their grand parents, etc. But then again, I understand if you have or your parents or grand parents have never left here your idea of the world would be very small.
There is no such thing as a Naturalised Caymanian. There are persons who are Naturalised BOTC’s – but that has nothing to do with being Caymanian (Nationality and Citizenship are different things) – so for example – people who are only Naturalised (and even have a Cayman Islands BOTC Passport) still need work permits etc.. unless they are also Caymanian.
And no – they cannot run for office even if they are Caymanian unless parent born here.
I took your statements to task and I have to correct you as you are obviously uninformed , as usual for someone of your posting ability. First, there is not such thing as Status in Cayman anymore, and I quote from the immigration website.
"However, only those people who have acquired the right to be Caymanian (or Caymanian Status as it was formerly known), whether by birth, descent or grant, are actually Caymanians in the context of the Immigration.
And YES they can definitely run for office, please read the elections law below. Please be more informed before making such ignorant statements.
Source: http://www.electionsoffice.ky/cms/index.php/election-process/54-qualification-and-disqualification-of-a-candidate
(1) A person shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the Assembly if, and shall not be qualified to be so elected unless –
A) he possesses Caymanian Status and
B) he has attained the age of twenty one years; and
C) he is, at the date of his nomination for election, domiciled and resident in the islands; and
D) he is a qualified citizen; and either
E) he was born in the islands in the circumstances mentioned in subsection (2)(b) of this section, has resided in the Islands for a period of not less then seven years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election and, subject to subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the number of days on which he was absent from the islands in that period does not exceed four hundred; or
F) he was born outside the Islands, has resided in the Islands for a period of periods amounting to not less than fifteen years out of the twenty years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election, and in the seven years immediately preceding the date of his nomination for election the number of days onwhich he was absent from the islands does not exceed four hundred.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) (D) of this section, a qualified citizen is a British Dependent Territories citizen by virtue of a connection with the Islands, who either –
A) at the date of his nomination for election possesses no other citizenship for which he may be elegible; or
B) was born outside the Islands, has or had at least one parent or grandparent who was born in the Islands and possesses Caymanian status (of if deceased would if alive have possessed Caymanian status at the date of nomination for election), and who at the date of his nomination for election possesses no other citizenship save for any right he may have to some other citizenship by virtue of his birth outside the Islands.
You are wrong. In the States you are required to hire a certain number of minorities, and yes Latino’s are counted (as long as they are there legally) and Black American’s are counted as American’s as well, just look we have a black President! Certainly discrimination will come in different forms, but America has always been a land of immigrants, where Cayman is trying very hard to prevent immigration of other nationalities (despite that it is actually a land of immigrants).
Good points – but everyone is missing the fact that almost 3 out of 4 persons lining here are expatriates. Imagine if Brits, or Americans or Jamaicans had to live in an environment where most of those around them were imposing a foreign culture.
Actually, since Hispanics are about to eclipse Americans, I suspect it is not that much different… BUT, the difference is, the population is spread out over a much larger area and it is possible to live in certain enclaves (say the Hamptons) and never see certain "expatriates" – that is, unless you actually talk directly to "the help".
And the Brits will tell you just how out of control their immigration and emigration issues are…
You are confusing what the law dictates with what is interpreted and accepted by people. Just because the law stipulates that you have you hire a hispanic, it doesn’t mean that an American will accept that person as an American.
I
I thought in England it was the Pakistanis, the Indians (and huddled in a few reservations) the English…
I disagree. I don’t think this problem is isolated to Cayman, I think it is worldwide. In Germany for example, they have had the Turkish, Italians and Greece who have lived there for the last 20 to 30 years. A lot of them have lived within a community mainly made up of people from their own nationality and you would be amazed that there are still plenty who haven’t even learned the German language after all this time. I think most Germans would not refer to those individuals as "Germans".
I think the same applies to Cayman. A paper that says you are Caymanian will not make you Caymanian in the eyes of a lot of Caymanians. There is more to it. Do you mix with Caymanians, have you learned anything about the culture?
Don’t get me wrong, I am a foreigner myself, but I am amazed how many foreigners are on Island (and have been for a long time), but they have no Caymanian friends and do not even socialize with them. From my experience, Caymanians do not distinguish between a "paper" Caymanian and a "real" Caymanian based on a piece of paper, but they determine where your heart is and if you have a real love and appreciation for the country. For example, if you run off Island every chance you get when a hurricane is brewing, and you don’t bother to come back until months later, or if you have a Birthday party and no Caymanian (who was born and raised in Cayman) attends, I would say that you probably won’t be considered to be a Caymanian.
There may be no distinction by law, but there surely will always be a distinction made be people, and again, this doesn’t just happen in Cayman, that goes on everywhere….I think it is just human nature.
I wish that people would stop differentiating between "real locals" and "paper Caymanians," it is a truely ignorant construct that once again divides persons with the ultimate goal of improving Cayman.
I am not unsympathetic to your view – and often shareit. I myself am a "paper" Caymanian. I refer to myself as Caymanian. Even though I am of somewhere else originally, I never refer to myself as Canadian, or British or Jamaican, or American – just Caymanian.
I do not ever refer to somewhere else as "home". I do not go to any particular country for holidays. I do not own a home outside of Cayman, and if I did, it would certainly be no grander than that which I have here.
My retirement accounts are here. My children are being educated here (in a school with "indigenous" Caymanians in it). I may still eat turkey at Christmas – but a little beef and sorrel have found their way onto the menu. I still have a foreign accent but understand the local dialect. I would never say "pronouncing a ‘v’ as a ‘w’ is wrong" – or assume it indicative of a speech impediment.
I have planted fruit trees and hope to be blessed enough to be eating from them in 20 years. I deeply care about what Cayman will be like long after I am dead.
I did not bribe anyone, or sleep with anyone, or do business with anyone, or make promises to anyone, or go out of my way to befriend anyone, in order to receive the honour of status – and I do consider it an honour.
I have close expatriate friends and close Caymanian friends. I know that George Town is two words, that Smith’s Cove is really Smith’s Barcadere, and that Mahi Mahi is the Hawaian word for what we call Dolphin. I know the nearest oceans are on the other side of Cuba to the north, and the other side of Panama to the south, and so do not go swimming in one before work. I understand the difference between South Church Street and South Sound.
… so in fact, I am Caymanian, and am confident of that fact. I am not confused by that and nor is anyone that knows me and deals with me.
And perhaps as part of that I understand what is meant when someone queries "what kind of Caymanian?" – for they are not usually concerned about me. They are concerned about whether the wool is being pulled over their eyes – about whether statistics are being used to further a mis-truth – which is what it is when you go out of your way to make people believe that there has been a Caymanianisation of the Civil Service when perhaps more accurate is that imperfect human beings with imperfect motivation handed out imperfect certificates to other imperfect human beings who threw them in the bottom draw, demanded a continuation of their foreign contracted officer supplement (including paid travel home each year) and then were perfectly happy to be Caymanian (for statistical purposes only).
Under other circumstance I would agree with you but considering these grants were given under terms that some refer to as "unethical" and unfair in some cases we need to make the distiction. If the grants were done in the normal way the law provided this calification would not be needed as the statistics would reflect the "normal" growth of Caymanians.
CNS: Could you get access to statistics broken down as per below for the periods in question? This would shed new light to the statistics.
# of born Caymanians
# of Caymanians by way of status grants
Whilst there is no doubt that there were some expats who received status under BigMac who did not deserve it, there were many who received it then only because it had been unreasonably withheld for many years prior. The mass status grants are simply a convenient way for concerned Caymanians like yourself to perpetuate discrimination.
One of the main factors preventing any meaningful integration of the expat population into Cayman society has been and still is the refusal of true born Caymanians to accept status holders as equal citizens. How many times in these pages do you see comments that for example, a law firm is not Caymanian owned because the partners are only status holders, not withstanding the fact that the individuals concerned have lived here for many, many years?
Expats with status were only " paper Caymanians " for at least 2 decades before BigMac acted. This discrimination is nothing new, it’s just wearing a new face.
O’Really, I find myself rarely agreeing with you but frequently admiring the intelligence behind your positions and the ability (and willingness) to enter into and engage in honest debate. Perhaps it is the exception that proves the rule – but it raised by a somewhat rational Caymanian (some might say "paper Caymanian") who has posted below.
Must a Caymanian really consider someone who was not a victim of injustice, who had been here for (say) less than 5 years, who was handed a possibly unlawful (and therefore void) status grant, who refuses to give up their foreign contracted officer supplement, who still refers to blighty as home, who leaves his spouse and children in a nice home in the shires, and visits them with his free airfares that his Caymanian counterparts are not allowed, all while living in an expat dominated rental condo complex and whose idea of local culture does not extend beyond the rugby club – a Caymanian?
Do you understand how conceivably even the most open minded Caymanian might refuse to accept that individual as a Caymanian and have every resonable right not to. Such persons (and they do exist) do not even consider themselves to be Caymanian – so why should anyone else?
Do you accept that even perhaps in my limited and extreme example there may be a Caymanian who is not?
I believe I acknowledged that some of the mass status grants were given to individuals who did not deserve it for a variety of reasons. I can assure you that I was aware of a number of such persons whose inclusion made my blood boil. Having said this, I could also name quite a few given status when there was supposedly a moratorium in place, which also made my blood boil, so abuse of the process is not new.
So yes, I have no problem accepting that anyone fitting the description ( or any comparable description ) you outline in your post should not have received status. And yes I understand that such individuals are justifiably not recognised by true born Caymanians as Caymanian.
My point though, is that true born Caymanians are lumping all status holders together. They certainly make no distinction between those who deserved to receive status under the mass grant and those who did not. Further, they make little, if any, distinction between those granted status by BigMac and those who got it through the established procedures. Most Caymanians do not accept status holders as Caymanian, it’s as simple as that. Browse the threads on this site and you will see this expressed in various forms over and over again.
Do you think that Tim Ridley would have been removed as the head of CIMA if he had truly been considered Caymanian? Or that Travers would not by now have a quasi-official position to represent Cayman if he were truly considered Caymanian? The term paper Caymanian was in vogue when I arrived here and the concept behind it has never fallen out of favour. As I said, it just has a new face, given a hint of legitimacy because some of the mass grants were wrong.
If Cayman has to wait until all those granted status by BigMac are dead before integration can move forward, we are in for a long and increasingly bitter struggle.
You make good points. Thank you.
CNS can you please break down the figures by:
# of Caymanians by way fo status grants
# of Caymanians by each generation.
I want to know how many of those 2nd or 3rd generation newcomers are at the heart of our problems.
Hilarious!
The comment "hilarious" was meant to apply to the post from Fri 8:17
Cayman did not need any improving , thats why you came here. Now that it is ruined we cant go to your Country, because there is still worst than here.
These stats are garbage. Almost every expat civil servant got status in 2003. Is the anyway to compare the ratio in early 2003 to early 2005? That should give a truer picture.
I thought that the status grants given in 2003 were to poor people who did not have jobs and are now creating hardship for the government as they have to support them. Which is it?
Same thing my friend
You are so full of bigoted horse manure. The civil service has always-repeat always- in the last ten years had a far far bigger percentage of Caymanians-long before the status grants which did certainly inflate the figures when teachers here for 30 years got status (how simply dreadful, my dear). The point is-and always will be- that the civil service takes Caymanians that the private sector doesn’t want/doesn’t need (firemen, postal workers, customs, immigration) as well as those who CHOOSE to work for Government.
The other difficulty is apples compared to apples. Thanks to the wisdom of Gilbert Mclean, the Health Services (some 700+ of them) suddenly in 2002 become non civil servants and became statutory authority people. Same-Gilbert again-with Roads Authority. If this hadn’t happened the present civil service figures would have another 1000 people on the list. no one remembers this but these comparisons are largely meaningless and just serve people’s agendas.
If by turnover they refer to changes in staff, I can assure you that these statistics, like most, are not factual.
I wonder – is the difference between 56% in 2001 and 70% now materially as a result of status grants (ie expatriates becomming Caymanian) or has there genuinely been an increase in the recruitment of Caymanians?
I can now see why the Governor seems so opposed to Expatriate Government employees having work permits like in Bermuda. With ratios like in his office it would be deny, deny, deny.
Good info CNS. Exactly how many of these are Caymanian born or by descent? You see the civil service was virtually Caymanized in one fell swoop by the grant of thousands of status. So to those depts that dont look so good with their percentages of Caymanians – just arrange another round of status grants.
"You see the civil service was virtually Caymanized in one fell swoop by the grant of thousands of status".
This is utter, total complete nonsense and is a sad reflection of the very poor quality of intelligence and objectivity of so many of the posters on CNS on issues like this.
The Status Grants were outrageous in the way they were done-Agreed. But I challenge the poster of that sentence quoted above to provide facts-oh dear such awkward things- to support the sentence. And facts, sir or madam, are not " I had hear that she had say that Mac had say that Roy had say that you had say that Julianna had say that……………well, you get the picture I hope. If you don’t, well, that’s sad.
Seeing that every teacher & nurse that I know got status in 2003, I that the earlier poster made a valid point.
It is interesting. Even the defenders of the status grants now say that the way it was done was outrageous. As someone who suffered prejudice for speaking out about the way they were done at the time – and effectively silenced – does anybody out there actually believe they were correctly handled? Anyone? Anyone? (except you, Gordon)