New pay scale
S. Andaleeb On e-mail
A recent DS report (April 9) indicated that the Pay Commission (PC) has decided to implement the new pay scale (up to a whopping 90% pay raise) for public servants in three phases, retroactively from January 1, 2005, that will cost the nation "an additional" Tk.6, 712 crore each year. When this idea first surfaced, I had questioned the efficacy of such a move (see DS, February 7). Since it was not clear where the funds would come from, who would be taxed and how much, what would be the effects on inflation with the new influx of money in the system and how it would cause any behavioral change (higher performance, fewer absenteeism, less corruption etc.) among the recipients whose take-home pay would double with the stroke of a pen. I was also awaiting others to join the fray, especially the intellectual community and the civil society that have a responsibility to comment on the effects of such a draconian measure on the health of the economy. Unfortunately, that discussion has not been as inquiring, intensive, and incisive, as it needs to be before such a mammoth plan is finalised.I would certainly like to see our public servants get better remuneration, especially when compared to their private sector and international counterparts, so that they do not have to resort to corrupt or other manipulative practices to pay their daily bills. In fact a senior official at the Bangladesh Bank, supporting the PC's decision, remarked that "If you pay peanuts, you only get monkeys!" Perhaps that "is" the problem with the nation and I do not completely disagree with the official. But what needs to be made clear is how the new pay package is linked to their productivity and the enhanced service outcomes they will provide to society that is palpable, measurable, and justifies the raise. What if nothing changes in performance parameters and the public servants merely walk away with a fatter paycheck that someone else has to foot? It would be nice if the present "paymasters" share the PC document widely and appear in public forums to help the general public for better understanding the rationale behind the decision. Also allow further discussion and act transparently; else, their decision is likely to be seen as a display of "I do what I please" which usually does not stand well with voters.
|
|
