Editorial
En masse promotion without posts
Politicisation goes top-heavy
That seven hundred promotions are in the offing for the posts of additional secretary, join secretary and deputy secretary in a week is quite extra-ordinary. Yet, the government is doing it in style. Clearly, it is not aimed to strengthen bureaucracy, rather it will weaken it. This could in effect leave the administration and policymaking more politicised, more partisan.
Actually, the promoted would neither fill in potential or real vacancies. They are just being upgraded in rank, status and scales of salary and perks without having to discharge the obligations that their elevations should have placed on their shoulders.
The reason apparently given for the en masse promotion is extension of the retirement age from 57 to 59. Why should an increase in the retirement age, which would be for all bureaucrats to enjoy, would necessitate almost instant promotion on such a massive scale where consideration of merit or availability of posts is not being weighed up at all?
It has been openly admitted that the move is aimed at defusing a 'growing discontent'. We are all for vertical mobility or rewarding deserving bureaucrats with promotion and incentives. But blanket promotions can not be helpful to administrative integration nor can it enhance professional competence as the left-out would be groveling.
More importantly, in the present context, it leaves no room for staggering the impact on the national exchequer which otherwise could have been ensured through selective and well-merited promotion against actual vacancies. It is more outrageous than surprising perhaps that the people in authority do not even mention the need for austerity and cutback on government expenditure, far less show any sign of practicing it.
In a time of high inflation we didn't even blink an eye while frequently traveling abroad, sometimes with large entourages.
En masse promotion is symptomatic of a general policy of appeasement the government pursues being totally oblivious of the high cost it extracts from governance overall.
Comments