The recent furore over the Union government’s proposal for lateral entry into senior civil service positions raised an important issue which needs further discussion. The Opposition parties as well as allies of the government raised the valid concern that allowing such contractual recruitments to take place would also mean undermining the reservation policies in place.
The usual rules of reservation that apply to regular appointments can be circumvented. Although this particular notification for appointments to the positions of joint secretaries and directors in some specific ministries has been withdrawn, a number of issues related to appointments and the changing nature of government jobs still need to be debated.
There is no doubt that the civil services need various reforms to make them more transparent and accountable, and to ensure better delivery of services to people across sectors and geographies. Alongside is also the question of keeping the goal of providing equal opportunity central in all appointments.
While affirmative action has allowed many from backward castes access to public employment and education overcoming some of their generational disadvantages, all data points to continuing discrimination and hence the need to continue the policy of reservations.
Even 75 years after Independence, significant gaps remain in incomes, jobs and education between the upper castes and others. Reservations continue to be an important way in which those belonging to marginalised groups can access higher education and jobs. However, with increasing privatisation, the number of opportunities available where there is affirmative action is reducing. Private universities for instance are not bound by reservation policies.
Government jobs have also been reducing in number. A recent article by Akhil Alha in the Economic and Political Weekly shows that between 2003 and 2021 regular employment in the Union government saw a decline of 15.6 lakh jobs, a reduction of 45%, and the number of SC employees during the same period reduced by 2.85 lakh or 47%. He argues that the reduction in the volume of government and public sector enterprise jobs (especially at the lower levels) has disproportionately affected those from marginalised social groups.
Not just fewer jobs but also the changing nature of government jobs in the form of greater contractualisation and outsourcing undermines reservations. Appointing honorarium-based or incentive-based workers is another source of cheap and unregulated labour for the government such as ASHA workers and mid-day meal cooks and helpers.
With the lack of opportunities in the private sector especially in rural areas, these jobs are also really coveted despite the low pay and poor conditions of work. These jobs are also largely performed by women raising a whole host of concerns regarding valuing women’s work and decent jobs for women. A thorough review of representation in government employment is needed, with gender and caste disaggregated data being made available across all kinds of employment in government – regular, contractual as well as temporary/honorary/voluntary.
Reservations and provisions of public services
It must be noted that there is no conflict between the objectives of improving the quality of services provided and equality of opportunity in public employment. In fact, enabling diverse representation, especially of those from marginalised groups, among the service providers at all levels not only ensures access to these jobs for those from these backgrounds but also contributes to greater democratisation of the system in the way in which it deals with citizens.
The presence of those from Bahujan communities in the planning and implementation of programmes and policies can ensure that their concerns are incorporated. In public-facing positions, having representation of those from Dalit, OBC and Adivasi communities makes these offices more accessible to people from these groups. Similarly, the presence of more women in various positions brings the concerns of women into policy making and service delivery. This has been shown in many studies on reservations in panchayats for instance, where representatives who came in through reserved seats were able to also shift the priorities towards issues that affected the more vulnerable groups.
There are often reports of caste discrimination faced by students in government schools or patients in government hospitals. The presence of a larger number of people from these communities as teachers, doctors, and nurses has been seen to contribute to making these services less discriminatory. Of course, it is not as if all discrimination ends – the employees themselves also face discrimination – but it is a step forward in making these spaces more democratic.
Representative image. Photo: Nidhi Jamwal
Another example is giving priority to Dalits and Adivasis as cooks in mid-day meals. It provides some employment opportunities to those belonging to these marginalised groups, especially women from these groups, but also plays an important role in the socialisation of children in schools. Children of all castes sitting together and eating food cooked by cooks across castes contribute to breaking age-old barriers. These processes are of course not without conflict, but where the administration has been determined and stood by this policy, it has been seen that all children do participate in the meals even though there might have been some initial resistance.
Discussing merit and efficiency in the provision of government services without considering issues of equity and representation would be self-defeating. What we need is a broad-based discussion on democratising the provision of public services and making them more accountable to the most marginalised.
Dipa Sinha is a development economist.
