By Aristotle Lyngdoh
In a profession there are neither friends nor enemies. Through this writing, I am trying to address economic growth from the third eye which is by itself an element of growth. In economic terminology, it is described as labour, a factor which constitutes the working class, because apart from the availability of raw material and infrastructure such as land and machine, labour is a major contributing factor to economic activity. In return, labour is the only factor that receives its reward in the form of wages. Labour is nothing but the service of a person hired to do work. It includes technical, mechanical and physical including those who are keeping records or doing paper work. On the other hand, labour is complex because it deals with human beings who have feelings and emotions and above all, the will to function. In the macro concept, labour is always seen as profession or occupation. Today, labour has become more of a consumption factor rather than a contributing factor. This is detrimental to economic growth. With the advent of management science, labour is now referred to as human resource that further necessitates its development and professional management in order to make a person more productive according to the concept of Human Resource Development (HRD).
A labourer is not hired because he/she is a close friend or relative, nor is labour denied to another because the person is a stranger. But, all types of professions, directly or indirectly contribute towards the economic growth of the society or it’s GDP. It is important here to understand that if one of the components of labour is not performing or doing his job, he is not contributing anything to that economic activity, and therefore, no reward or wage is deserved. The same principle should apply at the macro level too; in other words, the economy of the state or country. As a matter of fact, in the private sector, economic activity has reached a level of stability and sustainability because the profession has graduated to professionalism, where the quality of service and performance is never compromised at any point of time. In contrast, in the public sector including government establishments, this concept is still far away from being accepted or realized.
The common understanding of profession is simply a livelihood but those who earn from a livelihood should also realize they are also contributing something to the resources of the society in the form of transferred payments or revenue. Therefore, we can call the working class as operators of this engine for economic growth. Further, profession and professionals are divided into various categories depending upon their ability, experience and knowledge of the work such as the workman, the managers, the planners and the decision makers. When the respective category focuses on its role with commitment and devotion without encroaching into another’s domain, the mechanism of growth is kept running and expanding. But the failure to understand this role and purpose has cost many big establishments to collapse, leaving behind a huge burden to the state.
In reality, the employment and recruitment system is shattered by one perspective i.e. a share of reward. Employment is seen as a right to a livelihood and not as a privilege to do something to contribute to the overall growth of the economy. It is this desire to get a share of reward from the collective resources without contributing to the growth engine that has destroyed the morale of the working class and led to its complete collapse. As a result ethics and principles have disappeared and professionals from all categories and classes are no longer exhibiting those work ethics. People are pushed into professions, preferably government funded or sponsored because they think that at the end of the month their reward is assured for attending the workplace, whereas the workmanship spirit is not evident and the outcomes are not measured. Workers are only interested in a job from where personal benefits accrue and then only the level of interest and enthusiasm is high.
Further, the mindset and attitude that only close friends and relatives should be recruited first has destroyed the very function of the workplace that ultimately affects the entire machinery. What will happen if only friends and close relatives are in the same workplace? Believe me, rules and regulation will not prevail; there will be only goodwill and adjustment which is completely opposite to professionalism. It is an open fact that there are many salaried people languishing in many departments with practically no job to do but earning their monthly salaries. Government jobs are seen as a lifetime security of assured salary. But in fact, government resources depend entirely on the revenue received from the society by way of taxes. The higher the revenue, the higher will be the spending of the state, but there is a big gap here because there has been a misuse and dishonesty at various levels. In the absence of a clear benchmark for measuring work ethics it is difficult for a person to take any corrective measures against anyone who is not performing at all because that defaulter may be his own relatives or close friends. If an establishment is moving in the right direction, workers should work without favour and the need to be intimidated.
Recently I learned of an incident involving two colleagues of a particular central government school. One of them being the head solicited the favour of his colleague to share his vehicle in order to reach their workplace daily. But when his colleague reaches five minutes late to the class, a memo is issued by the head. On one hand, this action sounds harsh and vindictive but professionalism demands that a job has to be executed in a specific period. There is no friend or enemy only colleagues because if one of the colleagues is not performing adequately and effectively the entire team suffers.
Most people have only a vague idea about labour as a factor of economic growth. Some people don’t understand that the only reason they are paid is because they are part of the production process that moves the business establishment or society and economy to higher levels of growth. Because of this misconception, entrepreneurship is hardly sustainable unless the entrepreneur himself or herself is able to perform their duties in case their employees are absent. Let us not forget that those who invest their money outside their geographical boundaries will not blindly put their funds without studying the nature and types of labour that exist in that country or region.
Kudos to those who are regular and punctual to their workplace, but, at the same time it is very disheartening to see only a handful of people who are punctual in the entire State Secretariat. What about those employees who are beyond the purview of the constant surveillance system? It’s a pitiable state of affairs to think of their situation. How many more years it will take for people to understand and how long will our state continue to remain underdeveloped because of an unproductive workforce? The unemployment rate is growing but the ability to absorb this work force is completely absent. Those who want employment should be aware of their employability and competency. One of the factors that determine employability is skill, commitment and loyalty to the job without pre-conditions whether cultural or social.
Unless and until our people understand the meaning and concept of labour and professionalism, it is very difficult to expect any achievement or growth in the economy. Since the driving force behind this is the mindset of the people who constitute the work force or human resources, in the absence of a sincere working force, economic progress will never happen and sustain in any manner.