Should public service be a sacrifice?

Dec 11, 2018 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

Who says that being a public official means one has to make sacrifices?
There is an old joke about a public servant who went home after working at his government job. While going through some empty containers stored in his garage, he found a corked bottle. He uncorked bottle and a genie came out. The grateful genie told the man that he would grant him one wish.
The man, who had laboured as a public servant for more than 30 years, said that he would like never to work again. And ‘poof’ his wish was granted. He ended up back at his public service desk.
Many years ago, a doctor appeared on a talk show and argued a case that when a public official resigns or retires, he should leave poorer than when he entered the public service. It was the doctor’s way of saying that people should serve in public office for the honour of doing so and not for financial reward.
But he was also saying something else. He was suggesting that if a person made a commitment to not benefit financially, apart from his or her remuneration, this would act as a brake on corruption
In other words, what was being proposed was that public service should be considered as a personal sacrifice. A person who takes a public service job, according to this view, should do so in order to give back rather than to receive.
This is how the majority of the population view public service. They believe that when you leave public office, you must do so as a pauper. The slightest evidence of improvement in wealth is treated with suspicion of corruption.
So while it may sound nice to say that people should not serve in public office, unless the government pays people well, it will end up sacrificing quality for poor pay. There is a downside to paying people poorly. As someone once said, you get what you pay for. If you pay people poorly, you will not receive the quality staff.
Today when you read about the salaries of some public officials, you have to question whether public service is a sacrifice or is being excessively rewarded.
Two weeks ago, this newspaper reported that contracted cleaners within the Ministry of the Presidency receive net salaries of over $206,000 per month, inclusive of gratuity and vacation allowance. They must each be working 24 hours a day to receive such a good package.
A typist clerk is paid over $170,000 per month, inclusive of these benefits as well. A contracted driver makes $219,000 and administrative assistants and officers make salaries averaging over $500,000 per month.
Senior officials in the Public Service College are receiving more than 1.9 million dollars per month and 1.8 million dollars per month plus benefits.
It was reported yesterday that an individual whose contract as a permanent secretary was not renewed is now occupying a lower-ranked position, and is being paid in excess of $700,000 per month. There are others who are doing very little work and being paid ‘fat’ salaries.
Of course, some will argue that those salaries are not super salaries. But in life everything is relative. How is it that a headmistress can be paid less than $300,000 per month, yet a retired person is hired to run a training outfit and paid in excess of $1.9 million dollars per month.
So, how fair can it be that a person running a college is receiving five times the salary of a head teacher in our schools, or someone responsible for organizing international conferences is receiving seven times the salary of a sergeant in the police force?
The salaries being received by certain political appointees within the government suggest that public service need not at all be a sacrifice. Indeed, by landing the right job in the government, a person can end up being financially secure for the rest of his or her life.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News