EUPAN meeting
Brussels, 21-22 January 2016
Civil service merit values between
employment security and flexibility
Tiina Randma-Liiv
Professor of Public Management and Policy
Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance
Tallinn University of Technology
[email protected]
The importance of merit values in the civil service
• Modern civil service has its roots in merit values requiring civil
servants to be recruited, selected, promoted and dismissed on the
basis of merit by that assuring professionalism and civil service
independence from political intervention.
• Merit values aim to enhance integrity, performance, transparency
and good governance, opposed to patronage, favoritism,
politicization, and corruption.
• Merit systems are more complex and more profound than simple sets
of rules and regulations of civil service employment conditions – they
can be seen as important facilitators and guarantees of democratic
governance and separation of powers.
Merit values in the design of the civil service system
• transparent and fair recruitment and selection process based on
competence of candidates. The World Bank good governance indicators
importantly include a degree of civil service independence from political
pressures by emphasizing “professionalism” as opposed to “politicization”.
• employment security, tenure, predictable and long-term careers.
Employment security can be seen as a guarantee to avoid patronage,
favoritism and politicization in the civil service as it sets limits to
managerial discretion in terminating employment (and replacing civil
servants).
Evans and Rauch (1999) study of 35 countries: Predictable prospect of longterm career rewards reduces the relative attractiveness of the quick returns
available from corrupt individual practices. The combination of meritocratic
recruitment and employment security significantly enhances prospects for
economic growth.
Reality check
• Hertie report:
• “only in a minority of countries in present-day Europe we do encounter a clear
majority who believe that success in either of the public or private sectors is due to
merit.”
• the belief in the meritocracy in public sector is the highest in Nordic countries, and
the lowest in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE)
• Why so?
• although several CEE countries have succeeded in introducing (more or less)
meritocratic recruitment practices in their civil services, they have not yet been able
to establish civil service employment security during their post-communist history
• Employment security, initially designed to protect employees, has become a rigid
system of rules inhibiting dismissal of civil servants for ethical or performancerelated motives
Has the merit-based civil service system lost a proper balance between
protecting civil servants and holding them accountable?
In search of flexibility
• Tendencies towards alignment between civil servants’ and private
sector employees’ employment conditions
• Pluralization of public employment status
• Decentralization of unitary public sector HRM
• Increase in managerial discretion, including in recruitment, selection
and dismissal
• Increase in „at-will“ employment
• Increase in temporary or fixed-term positions
• Gradual disappearance of life-time tenure, weaking of employment
security
The impact of fiscal crisis on merit principles
• Dilemma between classical employment security and some cutback
measures (e.g. layoffs)
• Proponents of cutbacks argue for increased flexibility of personnel
systems (easy dismissal, fixed-term and part-time contracts, etc.)
• This endangers employment security and potentially makes civil
service more dependent on external (political) influence
• In several European countries greater value has been given to purely
fiscal considerations through radical personnel cutbacks rather than
to employment security as a cornerstone of merit principles
- layoffs in Central and Eastern Europe
- layoffs required by the Troika in bail-out countries
-> increasing the possibility of patronage
Staff layoffs
(1-not at all, 7-to a great extent; 16 countries, n=7077)
COCOPS survey (2012-2013)
The implications of fiscal crisis on civil service reforms
• Short-term (temporary) shifts in governance versus formal (legislative) changes and civil service
reforms triggered by crisis
• Civil service reforms can be seen as part of „efficiency savings“ during the fiscal crisis (short-term
fiscal goals).
• Evidence in some European countries of reforms increasing political appointments and formalizing
political discretion in recuitment, cutting civil service rewards (pensions) and employment
security:
- Hungary: 2010 law established „political loyalty“ as an employment criterion, dismissal of civil
servants without justification, large-scale politicization in the (top) civil service, spoils system
- Ireland: increased flexibility in the civil service system, increase in managerial discretion, fully open
recruitment at senior levels; employment security and pensions were retained
- Estonia: new law 2012 - a quarter of civil servants lost their civil service status, abandoning seniority
pay and civil service pensions, job security equaled with that in the private sector
• No evidence of recent reforms in the opposite direction (stregthening employment security;
reduction of political appointments).
• Civil service reforms in the period of austerity are likely to further push civil service systems
towards flexibility and away from classical employment security.
Downside of flexibility
• Abolishing traditional civil service rewards (employment security,
pensions) may in the long-term endanger civil service neutrality and
open a window for instrumental, short-term and easily transferable
loyalty, and political interference.
• Managerial discretion may bring along arbitrary action, patronage
and corruption, and in extreme cases endanger core democratic
values in society -> particularly in countries with higher corruption
levels and limited democratic experience
How much flexibility can be introduced without threatening core
merit values in the civil service?
Merit values between employment security and flexibility
Employment
security
Flexibility
Merit values
Trade-offs between employment security and flexiblity
• Employment security vs performance: finding a proper balance between
employment security and holding civil servants accountable
• Transparency vs managerial autonomy: ensuring transparency of
recruitment, promotion and dismissal, especially when managerial
autonomy gets increased
• Employment security vs merit recruitment: when reducing employment
security, even more attention should be paid to guaranteeing the presence
of merit principles in recruitment in order to reduce the opportunities for
arbitrary action and political intervention
• Motivation of civil servants vs employment security: introducing
supplementary ways of motivating civil servants in case employment
security is reduced
• Layoffs vs employment security: during fiscal crisis, the use of alternative
cutback measures to layoffs can be considered including hiring freeze
and/or pay freeze
• ...
Cross-country differences
• There are no universal solutions for employment security – flexibility dilemma:
each country should find its own optimal equilibrium, without sacrificing merit
values to flexibility
• Different departure points when addressing merit values: while one country may
be in need for more flexibility, another country may have to strengthen
employment security in order to guarantee basic merit values in the civil service
• High-trust vs low-trust societies (see the Hertie report):
• flexibility is a luxury that high-trust societies can afford without threat to merit values
• low-trust societies may need more regulation than flexibility-oriented reform agendas
presume because more rules are required to create conditions for the elimination of
patronage
• Imposing additional rules might be counterproductive in stable and highly developed
democracies where generally accepted public values and merit principles are already in place,
but it is unavoidable in countries where the rule of law is not yet in place, and where
corruption in society is high
• The liberalization of employment conditions in low-trust societies may lead to a further
increase in politicization, enhance rather than eliminate instability and increase levels of
corruption
Questions for discussion
• What is the status of employment security – flexibility dilemma in
your country? Does it incline more towards employment security or
flexibility?
• Are there any recent reforms in this regard?
• How has your government addressed different trade-offs to ensure
merit values in the civil service?
• Has the period of austerity influenced the employment security –
flexibility dilemma?
• What are the pre-conditions for a well functioning merit-based
system that guarantees employment security and flexibility at the
same time?
• What recommendations could be proposed for your government, for
EUPAN or for the EC?