Employees can be hired on rolls by PSU only if their pay is performance driven, and promotion is based on merit.Assured promotion scheme should be removed. Where and till when it is difficult to implement it is advised to hire employees on contract. Each employee's contract in that case should be renewed only on performance. This should improve the image of government sector where employees believe removing them is more difficult than appointing. Such assumption pulls down the performance based culture and change needs to be brought inhere.
FELIX MARTIN - 7 years ago
The top positions in has to be necessarily occupied by persons who have commitment towards the organisation and the vision and the mission of the organisation can be pursued vigorously and aggressively only when the top positions are handled by people who have true commitment . But the jobs at the lower levels particularly the menial tasks can be let out on contract basis because they are not result oriented and choosing people on permanent basis with permanent pay and pension has often found to have been misutilised by the employees and the outcome is not good. So mix up both is good.
Droma Bank Dominic Kat - 7 years ago
A mixed of the two is prudent in that accountability is mostly ensure by Accounting Officers and hence they should utmost be hired on contract basis. However, if the contractor performs well , he should be allowed to stay as long as his skills and knowledge are required. While the operational staff of the middle and below can be hired on permanent basis to allow them build the professional moral an the like.
asingh - 7 years ago
A mix of both is good - as there are some people who don't like a binding job - might want to change after a few years - while others might want the security of a permanent job - but then accountability should not be compromised - there can be instances where a permanent job gives a comfort zone feeling and at times does not encourage one to learn , go beyond the fixed line of delivery- become complacent. My vote would be to have a mix of both, thanks,
Palwasha Mirbacha - 7 years ago
I think it highly depends on the type of jobs. In Afghanistan technical and vocational education teaching jobs are currently all permanently hired government staff with good education background but no practical or industry experience. Whereas, the sector needs more competent practitioners from the labor market and industries to train trainees on market relevant skills and serve as a bridge for the graduate to employment. Given that these practitioners are actively engaged in the labor market and have the most update knowledge ad skills sets contracting them is the best option. This way the quality gap of TVET is filled and government fiscal space is not tightened either. Training the existing teacher cadre and providing them practical experience is long-term process and resource demanding as well.
Abebe Zerihun - 7 years ago
A genuine mix of both permanent and contract arrangement, which is based on the real need on the ground will be judicious. Thus, public institutions convincingly need Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers to handle periodic /none-core transactions.
Abebe Zerihun - 7 years ago
A genuine mix of both permanent and contract arrangement, which is based on the real need on the ground will be judicious. Thus, public institutions convincingly need Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers to handle periodic /none-core transactions.
Kwabena Gyan Kwakye - 7 years ago
A pre-requisite for a successful contract worker hiring policy in the public service will be a strong HRMS. In most (developing) countries such as Ghana where it takes more than a year (in some cases) to regularize new employees in the public sector, it will be almost impossible to hire contract workers for short periods.
Marlene Sims - 7 years ago
Everyone should be given the opportunity to be a permanent worker in a work place. In addition, as much as possible benefits should be provided by the work place, in some instances with the help of the government. Society would gain so much from having a happier work force.
To me, a mix should be considered: Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers for other than core businesses.
Shiva S. Makki - 7 years ago
The 1980 Reagan experiment with replacing federal work force by contract workforce has been failure. Federal budget has gone up, while the quality of work done by the federal government has gone down. The case in point is USDA's economic research and statistical work.
Karima - 7 years ago
Service Providers could be contracted to increase accountability but regulatory bodies, administrators, policy making institutions can be more permanent staff.
Employees can be hired on rolls by PSU only if their pay is performance driven, and promotion is based on merit.Assured promotion scheme should be removed. Where and till when it is difficult to implement it is advised to hire employees on contract. Each employee's contract in that case should be renewed only on performance. This should improve the image of government sector where employees believe removing them is more difficult than appointing. Such assumption pulls down the performance based culture and change needs to be brought inhere.
The top positions in has to be necessarily occupied by persons who have commitment towards the organisation and the vision and the mission of the organisation can be pursued vigorously and aggressively only when the top positions are handled by people who have true commitment . But the jobs at the lower levels particularly the menial tasks can be let out on contract basis because they are not result oriented and choosing people on permanent basis with permanent pay and pension has often found to have been misutilised by the employees and the outcome is not good. So mix up both is good.
A mixed of the two is prudent in that accountability is mostly ensure by Accounting Officers and hence they should utmost be hired on contract basis. However, if the contractor performs well , he should be allowed to stay as long as his skills and knowledge are required. While the operational staff of the middle and below can be hired on permanent basis to allow them build the professional moral an the like.
A mix of both is good - as there are some people who don't like a binding job - might want to change after a few years - while others might want the security of a permanent job - but then accountability should not be compromised - there can be instances where a permanent job gives a comfort zone feeling and at times does not encourage one to learn , go beyond the fixed line of delivery- become complacent. My vote would be to have a mix of both, thanks,
I think it highly depends on the type of jobs. In Afghanistan technical and vocational education teaching jobs are currently all permanently hired government staff with good education background but no practical or industry experience. Whereas, the sector needs more competent practitioners from the labor market and industries to train trainees on market relevant skills and serve as a bridge for the graduate to employment. Given that these practitioners are actively engaged in the labor market and have the most update knowledge ad skills sets contracting them is the best option. This way the quality gap of TVET is filled and government fiscal space is not tightened either. Training the existing teacher cadre and providing them practical experience is long-term process and resource demanding as well.
A genuine mix of both permanent and contract arrangement, which is based on the real need on the ground will be judicious. Thus, public institutions convincingly need Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers to handle periodic /none-core transactions.
A genuine mix of both permanent and contract arrangement, which is based on the real need on the ground will be judicious. Thus, public institutions convincingly need Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers to handle periodic /none-core transactions.
A pre-requisite for a successful contract worker hiring policy in the public service will be a strong HRMS. In most (developing) countries such as Ghana where it takes more than a year (in some cases) to regularize new employees in the public sector, it will be almost impossible to hire contract workers for short periods.
Everyone should be given the opportunity to be a permanent worker in a work place. In addition, as much as possible benefits should be provided by the work place, in some instances with the help of the government. Society would gain so much from having a happier work force.
To me, a mix should be considered: Permanent workers for the core businesses, and contract workers for other than core businesses.
The 1980 Reagan experiment with replacing federal work force by contract workforce has been failure. Federal budget has gone up, while the quality of work done by the federal government has gone down. The case in point is USDA's economic research and statistical work.
Service Providers could be contracted to increase accountability but regulatory bodies, administrators, policy making institutions can be more permanent staff.