The Acting Secretary to Cabinet, Patrick Kangwa has expressed concern with increasing numbers of public service workers being surrendered to the Public Service Management Division (PAMD) or transferred to other Ministries or departments on the basis of misconduct.
Mr. Kangwa has since directed PSMD not to attend to such requests, further urging controlling officers to also refrain from making the requests.
He was speaking in Lusaka today, when he officially opened a meeting of Permanent Secretaries and Directors of Human Resource and Administration on the Public service disciplinary code and handling staff offences.
He explained that requests of surrendering or transferring an offending officer to another ministry or department does not solve the problem but instead it is just transferring the problem to another environment.
Mr. Kangwa said the trend has led to an increase in the number of officers facing disciplinary action without proper conclusion of the cases.
He wondered why despite having the authority to warn, charge, demote, suspend or fire erring officers, people entrusted with such responsibilities have failed to do so.
He explained that there is need for the officers to be proactive and timely deal with challenges that affect the effective provision of public services.
“Surrendering or transferring of staff is not in any way dealing with a problem, we need to be proactive, and failure to deal with an officer who is indisciplined is an indication that you have also failed. This is why I am directing PSMD to discontinue receiving requests of surrendering, and you PSs not to make those requests of surrendering, “he added.
Mr. Kangwa cited the continued citing of public service workers in the Auditor General’s report and the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee as an indication that there is a lot of disorderliness in the service.
He stated that the new administration is committed to seeing a civil service that is vested with knowledge on the government procedures and operations for effective public service provision.
The Acting Secretary to Cabinet explained that this is why government has embarked on human resources management reforms aimed at equipping the head of Human Resource and Permanent Secretaries on how to efficiently deal with issues to do with personnel.
He also called for strict observance of confidentiality when handling government documents and matters.
Mr. Kangwa further added that the cabinet office will continue with such engagements in order for controlling officers and other key staff to have knowledge and understanding on professionalism that will in turn benefit the workers.
The practice of zero accountability from PF 10 years is what we are seeing today………
To have a properly functioning civil service , people should be sacked for gross misconduct which includes corruption and dereliction of duty………..
The transfer was introduced to monitor the worker in a different environment. It wasn’t a final resolve on it’s own. It was to give a chance to the worker to prove himself. Especially when the accused errant worker’s defense was that his managers were deliberately creating a hostile environment at his original workplace. If the same problem was to arise at the new workplace it then could be concluded he was the problem. Firing a worker anywhere ought to be a last resort.
Erring officers should be SACKED
Transfer just means transferring the problem and giving someone else headache. Also it means erring officers will continue erring knowing fully well that the most punishment they can be given is a transfer so the best option is just to fire them. That will be a deterrent to everybody else.
@2 When I worked in the Civil service I discovered that my boss was stealing public funds. I reported this to the ACC. They did nothing but leak my report to the boss who then made my job very difficult. So who should have been sacked in this case? In the higher position the boss would have unfairly fingered me as errant. And following Mr Kangwa s advice, fired me. Wrongly. Fortunately an overseas firm saw my potential and hired me. Unfortunately the boss is still stealing more money from the civil service
It’s not right to transfer someone because they have disciplinary issues which the controlling officers have failed to manage.
Follow disciplinary processes in dealing with erring officers to rid the civil service of inefficiency.
If a worker is accused of misconduct, indiscipline, underperformance or whatever he should be charged accordingly and a case hearing should take place chaired by an independent chairman (different department or external). If the problem is the manager a good chairman can easily pick that up during the proceedings and find accordingly. If there is a trend, coupled with departmental underperformance, the manager should be cautioned/retrained/removed.
You can’t waste resources and time experimenting if a worker will turn a new leaf in another department.
Some of you take great pleasure in firing others. That’s why you will lose at the labour court. Take note it’s not all civil servants who get transferred on discipline grounds. A bigger fraction is fired before this can happen. But like it’s pointed out above the disciplinary process can be misused to punish for other personal reasons.
There has been very very few cases in which managers have been found guilty by a DC. The DC always sides with the manager meaning these DCs are prone to bias. So don’t act like you are God’s. The worker has rights too.
@passing by “Good chairman”. That’s an extinct species in Zambia. If the courts can’t rule against a sitting president, bang! goes the virtue of justice anywhere else in the Republic.