I have worked in the civil service for five years, and before that I worked in the economy, and I can tell you that there is a big difference between the work of people in one sector and the other, because in the civil service, managers simply do not have the leverage to take quick and effective action against employees who are not working or are working very badly.
We know that there are instruments to take action when, for example, work is done negligently and when the amount of work done by an employee is minimal. However, these procedures take a huge amount of time and energy. With all the work and the inefficiency of the legislation, because the law is very kind to irresponsible people and judges tend to take the weaker side, as they say, it is very time-consuming to bring proceedings against bad workers. With legislation that gives most weight to procedural errors rather than substance, the substance of the offence is of absolutely too little importance in the decision-making process (and I am not talking here about lack of competence, but about lazy and irresponsible people, even if we do not want to admit it, there are some of us!), so in most cases proceedings for negligent performance and for individual inefficiency are simply not brought.
Above all, the fact is that until the state changes labour law, all other legal changes are ineffective, because regulations are implemented by people and even a good regulation has no effect if it is not implemented.
First proposal,
- Include a variable component in the salaries of civil servants, which should depend on the performance of the employee.
- Managers should get a performance bond, not an effort bond (both in business and in the civil service), which is what the current legislation states! Then good workers will not be exposed by incompetent managers, because the manager will be held accountable for a job well done.
- The regulations defining the work of judges, lawyers and public prosecutors should be amended, because the existing regulations are too vague in defining the scope, quality and effectiveness of their work and what constitutes professional diligence and their responsibility to the client or customer. The quality of the work of judges and their knowledge of the areas on which they rule is in many cases unprofessional and inadmissible. As a result, great harm is being done to the country and to citizens.
Only then will it make sense to regulate other regulations.