Can the Salaries and Remuneration
Commission (SRC) "set and regularly review
the remuneration and benefits for State Officers" successfully?
For an uninformed casual reader,
the following headlines appearing in the media recently, are unhelpful, and
convey messages that, in my opinion, are unhealthy: "MPs top losers in new
salary slash." "Serem cuts salaries in tough job changes."
"Shocker for MPs as Serem releases new pay structure". "Serem
stuns State Officers with salary cuts in sweeping job changes".
We are continually bombarded with
negative media messages that have little informational value except to generate
emotions, that raise expectations that are unrealistic. You don't have to be a
transactional analysis expert to understand the hidden meanings behind the above
quoted headlines.
Every Kenyan now expects the State
Officers' salaries to be slashed come August 2017, when the new salaries and
allowances take effect. The problem is: the SRC is not the employer, and
cutting pay is not part of the Commission's mandate. In any event, slashing of
salaries must be approached with caution, and with a lot of planning, by
considering all compelling reasons and circumstances that would warrant pay
cuts. Failure to follow acceptable processes and procedures are likely to be
resisted, and most likely, lead to legal tussles.
Slashing salaries, as a mechanism
for managing wage bill, whether for organization's survivor, or otherwise, must
be done in the open, and must involve all the stakeholders. It is not an
activity that can be executed without the involvement of the key stakeholders.
Often, the process will have several options to work with. Common among these
will be attrition, voluntary early retirement packages, reorganization and
consolidation of functions, cut back on projects and programs, and if
necessary, pay cuts may be considered as a last resort.
In the absence of a credible
process for the pay cuts, legal challenges cannot be ruled out. There is no
guarantee that the courts would uphold the SRC's decision to slash the salaries
and allowances for the State Officers should this be challenged in court. It is
instructive to note that a case challenging the SRC's authority to tamper with
allowances for the officers of the judiciary is currently before the courts.
Should the State Officers resist
the implementation of the pay cuts, it would put the President in an awkward
position. The Constitution of Kenya does not give him the powers to
enforce the SRC's remuneration structures for the State Officers. This leaves
the courts as the legitimate avenues for arbitration. This is more the reason
that the Commission knows, with certainty, that its actions are based on the
best professional advise available.
One cannot also rule out the possibility
that the 12th Parliament, like the 10th and the 11th Parliaments, may well decide to award its members,
salaries, and allowances outside the SRC's guidelines. It will be interesting
to see how the SRC responds to such a move by an all-powerful Parliament.
Political offices will always be a
challenge for the SRC. It is not even clear why elective offices are classified
as State Offices. This does not seem logical.
As a political institution,
Parliament can only change through political will and actions. This can happen
where the elected men and women, are motivated by the passion to serve the
Nation, and not driven by the urge to make money, and the desire to lord over
everyone else. Unfortunately, we have in Kenya, created a 'gold rush reality'
in elective offices. Changing this reality will take deliberate political leadership, and
administrative decisions and actions, way beyond the SRC's mandate and
abilities.
The suggestion that slashing the
salaries will have an impact on the public sector's wage bill is a little
far-fetched. A saving of 8.8 Kenya billion shillings does not make a dent on
the current wage bill of 627 billion shillings! In fact, the savings are
immediately obliterated by the CBAs that are due for implementation at about
the same time when the pay cuts are to take effect.
Clearly, the wage bill problem is
for the employer to address since this would require drastic reorganization and
restructuring of the entire public sector. The SRC's argument that there is
need to bring down the wage bill to 35 percent of the total revenue, would mean
bringing it down by over 200 billion Kenya shillings! It should be obvious that
the SRC's action has very little impact, if any, on the wage bill. In any case,
the wage bill problem is for the employer in the public sector to fix, and it would seem obvious that this is beyond the SRC's mandate.
At this time, it is not clear
whether the SRC's decision has been arrived at on the basis of a job evaluation
exercise conducted over a period of eighteen (18) months, at a cost of KES 1
billion, or the decision is based on, as the media suggests, a job evaluation
exercise conducted in 2012, If the decision is based on the latter, then the
question that begs an answer is: What happened to the results of an exercise
that cost the taxpayer over 55 million Kenya shillings a month, over a period
of 18 months?
One does not have to know that there was no comprehensive job evaluation undertaken in 2012, to understand that one cannot possibly apply results of a job evaluation exercise conducted five years ago, to today's jobs! It is five years since 2012! Furthermore, a job evaluation exercise can be conducted only within one organization for the purposes explained here below.
One does not have to know that there was no comprehensive job evaluation undertaken in 2012, to understand that one cannot possibly apply results of a job evaluation exercise conducted five years ago, to today's jobs! It is five years since 2012! Furthermore, a job evaluation exercise can be conducted only within one organization for the purposes explained here below.
A problem of the SRC's own making, is the idea that it is possible to set remuneration and benefits structures
using job evaluation exercises! Remuneration structuring and job evaluation are two completely different activities. Job evaluation becomes necessary where a
remuneration structure is inequitable. The purpose of a job evaluation exercise
then, is to remove, or minimize the disparities in the remuneration structure!
Job evaluation results can also be used for other purposes like:
· Training and
development
· Transfers and
promotions
· Performance
improvement, and
· Minimizing complaints
and grievances that can emanate from imagined, perceived, or real disparities in
a remuneration structure.
In the absence of a clear and credible process of arriving at the decision to slash the salaries, the SRC will have difficulty defending its actions.
It is interesting to note that the "new pay structure for State Officers excluded Chief Justice David Maraga's pay following a dispute between the Judicial Service Commission and the SRC whose matter is in court."
It is interesting to note that the "new pay structure for State Officers excluded Chief Justice David Maraga's pay following a dispute between the Judicial Service Commission and the SRC whose matter is in court."
May be Kenyans may not be aware, or have forgotten that the pay
for the Judiciary was not included in the Gazette Notice No. 2885 dated March
1, 2013. Furthermore, as recently as February 2017, it was reported in the
media that: "Job evaluations have not been done for the national security
organs and the public universities because the SRC is yet to secure a
consultant. But Parliamentary Service Commission (PSC) and the Judicial Service
Commission (JSC) have resisted the evaluation".
To the extent that the SRC has failed to follow the correct
processes and procedures for setting remuneration and benefits structures for
the State Officers, its legitimacy to enforce pay cuts for the State, or Public
Officers, is diminished.
Dr.
Daniel C. Macaria is an OD professional with expertise in compensation
structuring and job evaluation systems. website:
www.od-internationalconsulting.com
