24 APRIL 2008

pcij.org


us your views and comments about this article.

Or discuss it in our blog.

SEE ALSO

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

RELEVANT LINKS

PREVIOUS REPORTS




 P C I J    I N V E S T I G A T I O N  —  NEW CSC CHIEF FACES PACK OF INELIGIBLE BUREAUCRATS


NO MERITOCRACY
Eligibility is supposed to be a stamp of approval by the CSC that assures the security of tenure of career service personnel. Eligibility promotes the principle that meritocracy, not patronage, should drive reward and punishment systems for civil servants.

The civil service workforce has three tiers of personnel: clerical, professional, and managerial.

Only 10 percent or 14,000 of the bureaucracy’s 1.4 million personnel are non-career officials (political appointees, co-terminus hires, elective officials, casual or contractual workers). Yet they supervise and command the 90 percent required by law to be eligible.

The irony is that the fewer but more favored ineligibles Arroyo has appointed now lord it over the multitude of eligible civil service rank-and-file personnel. The sad result: a politicized, less professional bureaucracy.

The government is the country's single biggest employer. Personnel services take up 31.4 percent, or P384.8 billion of the total P1.23 trillion national budget this year.

In contrast, capital outlay for 2008 for the entire bureaucracy comes up to a pithy P131.5 billion, or just a third of the amount that goes to salaries and compensation for the bloating bureaucracy.

HAVEN OF INELIGIBLES
Data from the Civil Service Commission show that agencies with either the biggest budgets or the most lucrative and sensitive regulatory and revenue functions — or both — also have the biggest number of ineligible and unqualified undersecretaries and assistant secretaries. (see Table 1)

Table 1: Top Ten Agencies with the Biggest Number of Ineligible Undersecretaries and Assistant Secretaries

Source: Civil Service Commission
A. BY VIRTUE OF REPUBLIC ACT
AGENCY
ELIGIBLE
%
INELIGIBLE
%
RANK
Department of Energy
0
0%
4
100%
1
Office of the President
4
11%
33
89%
2
Department of Justice
1
13%
7
88%
3
Department of National Defense
2
22%
7
78%
4
Department of Tourism
2
29%
5
71%
5
Department of Agriculture
3
30%
3
70%
6
Department of Education
3
33%
6
67%
7
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
5
45%
6
55%
8
Department of Labor and Employment
3
50%
3
50%
9
Department of Trade and Industry
5
56%
4
44%
10
B. BY VIRTUE OF EXECUTIVE ORDER OR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
Office of the Press Secretary
0
0%
4
100%
1

These 10 agencies alone account for 79 undersecretaries and assistant secretaries without civil service eligibility, or more than two-thirds of the 113 total ineligibles for their rank in the Executive branch (excluding DFA appointees).

The PCIJ had requested the personal data sheets and resumes of these officials for this report. Yet up to today, over a month later, only three agencies have provided the information requested. These are the Office of the Press Secretary (no eligibles), Presidential Management Staff (33 percent not eligible), and Department of the Interior and Local Government (70 percent not eligible).

Three other agencies — Office of the President, Department of Tourism, and Department of Agriculture — denied the PCIJ's request, while the remaining seven agencies — Department of Energy, Department of Justice, Department of National Defense, Department of Education, Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Labor and Employment, and Department of Environment and Natural Resources — have yet to provide information.

Data from the DND website show that none of the undersecretaries are Career Executive Service Officers (CESOs). Only two out of five assistant secretaries are CESOs, and only six directors are eligibles.

There are also four other DND staff who are eligibles. An undersecretary, meanwhile, has passed the first and second stage of the third level examinations, along with 12 DND employees.

Click here for more!


Email us your comments about this article, or post them in our blog.



Copyright © 2007 All rights reserved.
PHILIPPINE CENTER FOR INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM