However as a class, the bureaucracy the world over, is known to survive any disciplinary action against them as immortalized by the ‘Yes Minister’ television series, since they see the ministers as temporary, but themselves as playing the long innings till retirement and see any attempts to discipline them as one that is bound to fail. After a few days of on-time reporting the situation would gravitate to status quo ante.
Therefore there has to be a long term solution. Civil servants, like private sector employees, need to be sufficiently oriented and motivated by the department’s mission, vision and made aware of their own role, to stay focused and challenged. Failure to do so results in they presuming that their job as only to push files.
The Sixth Pay Commission while justifying the hike in salaries and perks to civil servants had said that its terms of reference were to transform the government organisations into modern, professional and citizen-friendly entities that are dedicated to the service of the people and the huge pay hike was to be linked to promoting efficiency, productivity and economy, by rationalizing structures, organizations, systems and processes within the Government, with a view to leveraging economy, accountability, responsibility, transparency, assimilation of technology and discipline. Indeed these are laudable goals but has any evaluation been done whether these have been achieved, after implementing the VI Pay Commission pay packets? By and large no!
The bureaucracy has to believe that they are there to serve the people; and cannot justify their absence without sufficient reason and advance notice. Additionally, movement registers have to show their whereabouts. While there are many assiduous civil servants there are many who shop, loiter around the city and gossip during office hours, while those loaded with work, sweat it out in the office.
Besides punitive measures, the state government should assess what needs to be done for civil servants to achieve the aims outlined by the VI Pay Commission and the newly passed Public Services Delivery Act.
The government has to set tangible department-wise targets, to rate performance and based on this, Performance Related Incentives should be given. Increments too should be performance based, as suggested by the Fourth and Fifth Pay Commissions, to the exceptionally meritorious performers and denied to non performers.
Though the VI Pay Commission drained Central and states treasuries, the Pay Commission said that every rupee spent on allowances, facilities and salaries of Government employees has to translate into a specific measure for public good and the hike has to prove beneficial for all the people.
The performance of the civil servants has to be measured not only in terms of efficiency (to achieve department-wise programme targets) but through effectiveness in achieving the social goals of improving the quality of life of the people, better parking, reducing accidents, saving lives, better electricity, solving people’s problems, etc.
The Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) have already implemented Performance Linked Incentive Schemes by paying 5 % of the distributable profit to performing employees, as per recommendation of the Justice S Mohan Pay Revision Committee which proposed that all payments over and above the 50 per cent ceiling should be entirely in the nature of Performance Related Pay.
Punitive measures are good, but why have State governments not shown the courage to do a more serious exercise and set performance based incentives to their staff, through civil service reform, as a long term solution? Why have they not given performance based increments and frozen increments of non performing and absentee employees? Is it due to vote bank politics?
