Editorial:-
The ongoing Adhoc teachers’ confrontation is wrong on all levels – from the manner in which the HRD Department continues to hire teachers on temporary basis for clearly permanent requirements to the mode of protest chosen by the teachers.
First, the hiring process... For all the excuses that the department might proffer, none can justify how and why such a large number of teachers continue to hired by the academic session for such a long time on such exploitative terms. The present lot of adhoc teachers are posted to schools when an academic session begins and begin draw a consolidated salary once they join their duties and stop receiving pay from the day the school closes for the winter break; and then the wait begins for the next academic session. Such an arrangement should be allowed only when the HRD Department has to fill a sudden, unforeseen vacancy. When a teaching post falls vacant mid-term and students need to be attended, such a temporary appointment can be considered. But the Department has been resorting to such hiring for several years now. It is clear that the practice continues because the insecure pool of the unemployed seize even these clearly inconsiderate terms in the hope that it will eventually lead to regularization of service and the more than handsome emoluments that such employment offers. There have been ample instances when rules have been bent to absorb adhoc employees into permanent service to inspire the adhoc teachers to make such demands now and expect them to be met. It is time that the State’s employed demanded that such relaxations be banned because it is tantamount to double denial of opportunities to the unemployed. Adhoc/ temporary employment rules are lax and open to abuse and/ or compromise. To then regularize services which were not appointed under the strictest and most transparent hiring processes can be seen as a second denial of opportunities to others who could have bid for the job. That said, given how such matters have been handled in the past, one could even overlook the aspiration for more permanent employment among the adhoc teachers [for the record, the protesting teachers are not demanding outright regularisation but are seeking more secure employment even if on adhoc basis]. What cannot be overlooked however is the mode of protest chosen by the group. Even after accepting that idealism is lost in the present times, one expects teachers, even those of adhoc nature, to have no priority but the interests of their students. One cannot deny teachers their right to demand, protest, aspire or lobby; but one hopes that they can devise more innovative ways of doing so, modes which do not end up denying students.
At present, the situation has become one of confrontation between adhoc teachers and the HRD Department, and that is probably how it will be addressed and resolved. The situation is however about more than that and what needs to be addressed more importantly is why permanent requirements continue to be filled on temporary basis allowing for uncertainty to prevail, unfair service terms to be imposed, unclear demands to be raised and unmerited aspirations to be voiced.
The ongoing Adhoc teachers’ confrontation is wrong on all levels – from the manner in which the HRD Department continues to hire teachers on temporary basis for clearly permanent requirements to the mode of protest chosen by the teachers.
First, the hiring process... For all the excuses that the department might proffer, none can justify how and why such a large number of teachers continue to hired by the academic session for such a long time on such exploitative terms. The present lot of adhoc teachers are posted to schools when an academic session begins and begin draw a consolidated salary once they join their duties and stop receiving pay from the day the school closes for the winter break; and then the wait begins for the next academic session. Such an arrangement should be allowed only when the HRD Department has to fill a sudden, unforeseen vacancy. When a teaching post falls vacant mid-term and students need to be attended, such a temporary appointment can be considered. But the Department has been resorting to such hiring for several years now. It is clear that the practice continues because the insecure pool of the unemployed seize even these clearly inconsiderate terms in the hope that it will eventually lead to regularization of service and the more than handsome emoluments that such employment offers. There have been ample instances when rules have been bent to absorb adhoc employees into permanent service to inspire the adhoc teachers to make such demands now and expect them to be met. It is time that the State’s employed demanded that such relaxations be banned because it is tantamount to double denial of opportunities to the unemployed. Adhoc/ temporary employment rules are lax and open to abuse and/ or compromise. To then regularize services which were not appointed under the strictest and most transparent hiring processes can be seen as a second denial of opportunities to others who could have bid for the job. That said, given how such matters have been handled in the past, one could even overlook the aspiration for more permanent employment among the adhoc teachers [for the record, the protesting teachers are not demanding outright regularisation but are seeking more secure employment even if on adhoc basis]. What cannot be overlooked however is the mode of protest chosen by the group. Even after accepting that idealism is lost in the present times, one expects teachers, even those of adhoc nature, to have no priority but the interests of their students. One cannot deny teachers their right to demand, protest, aspire or lobby; but one hopes that they can devise more innovative ways of doing so, modes which do not end up denying students.
At present, the situation has become one of confrontation between adhoc teachers and the HRD Department, and that is probably how it will be addressed and resolved. The situation is however about more than that and what needs to be addressed more importantly is why permanent requirements continue to be filled on temporary basis allowing for uncertainty to prevail, unfair service terms to be imposed, unclear demands to be raised and unmerited aspirations to be voiced.
The Current on going Pen down strike called by Adhoc teacher's is a clear indication which will be a regular affair for State Government for the years to come. A dig up well in which government will find itself trapped,The recruitment process for appointment of teacher's in the state is to be judged by requirement not by a kindness act of getting praises from the general public.To shell down a huge amount in salaries to teachers by recruiting more than required is going to give a headache and a will not be a societal act to spend money of public without proper planning and requirement of teacher's.At this current juncture the only solution is to sort out the difference prevailing between HRD and Adhoc teacher's association and provide a regular classes for students who are being muddle up between this fight of justice. Being a more educated state compared to other state we must have a sense of pride that we can discuss all these matter in a more simplistic manner rather then playing a blame game within us.Its time to have a strict and concrete administrative which have to wake up for the poor students who are loosing their valuable studies time.
ReplyDelete