Structuring and exemptions

The restructuring plan endorsed by the second Bakhit government in 2011 is considered to have dealt the heaviest blow to the public sector, stripping the state’s administration of its truly competent staff and limiting its options to those working either at the Civil Service Bureau or others who found an in through “wasta”. اضافة اعلان

The threat posed by the public sector plan go beyond its cost, which exceeded JD500 million despite initial estimates of a JD82 million price tag. Its true threat lies in the way it has methodically driven out the public sector’s experts, who worked on the basis of contracts awarded based on expertise and competence. Note that most of their allocations, which were high in comparison to those of their peers at the Civil Service Bureau, came from foreign grants and international organizations that provided aid to Jordan without cost to the Treasury.

The restructuring plan, however, sought equality for state employees working under the Civil Service Law. It worked to increase the raises and boost the profiles of the remaining public sector employees under the comprehensive appeasement system, to improve their living conditions. This drove several contract employees to pursue work outside the country or opt for early retirement, leaving us with only civil service employees and those who entered the sector through “wasta” (using personal connections to obtain favors or posts).

The restructuring plan’s greatest repercussion is that it paved the path for a period of stagnation at ministries and public institutions by limiting their ability to hire external experts, given that there is a single recruitment regulation for the sector, which cannot be bypassed. 

The only entity that was exempted from the restructuring project was the Central Bank of Jordan. All others institutions were deprived of this waiver on the pretext that hiring from outside the civil service scope is prohibited.

What public sector institutions and some independent bodies have to deal with is a tragedy as they are restricted to hiring from the Civil Service Bureau. The Social Security Investment Fund (SSIF), for example, has not been able to hire a financial expert to perform the investment studies it needs.

The issue is not limited to the SSIF; major financial and oversight institutions, such as the income and sales tax department and the Audit Bureau, require the assistance of think tanks and experts to sustain their business development, and continue serving citizens and the public sector. 

The committee tasked with developing the public sector cannot make plans or set strategies for the public sector’s functioning without assessing the catastrophic results of the public sector restructuring plan. The committee must dispose of the plan’s red tape to make its objectives more achievable, including using flexible measures that allow for differentiation between employees and experts, as opposed to imposing blind equality.

Read more Opinions.