KMC and ghost employees

.


Editorial November 29, 2024

print-news

Ghost employees are making headlines again as the KMC is found to have no mechanism to verify how many of its 12,000 employees are actually working. A provincial Public Accounts Committee meeting found the municipal body is completely reliant on physical attendance registers, with no biometric oversight. Similar archaic practices abound in government offices and state-owned enterprises across the country. Conservative estimates suggest that ghost employees cost the taxpayer several billion rupees in salaries and perks.

But the issue of ghost employees is not just a matter of money. It also undermines the quality and integrity of public service systems. Ghost employees often pay off coworkers or superiors to avoid detection, and are involved in other shameful conduct, such as reportedly taking bribes for grave plots. PIA is among the SOEs most notorious for having ghost employees, as it is the only explanation for the airline having one of the highest employee-to-aircraft ratios in the world.

At the heart of the ghost employee epidemic is a lack of transparency and accountability. Without effective monitoring mechanisms, thousands of jobs can be exploited, leading to substantial financial losses for taxpayers and diminishing the quality of services offered to citizens. For instance, the absence of biometric attendance systems in many government offices raises significant concerns about how employee attendance is tracked. Manual attendance systems are prone to abuse and allow individuals to exploit the system, leading to both fraud and a culture of impunity. The existence of ghost employees also impacts the efficiency and morale of genuine employees, who are left overworked and disillusioned.

A functional democracy relies on the integrity of government institutions. Exorcising the house of ghosts would be a major step in this direction.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ