Topic of discussion

THE recent regularisation of officers acting in positions of leadership by the Ministry of Education is the topic of discussion in the teaching fraternity at the moment. There is a huge hue and cry from those who were acting as Head of Department and were not confirmed in this regularisation process. Some of them have been acting in those positions for over a decade. They have been doing work diligently and ensuring excellent results for the department.

The permanent secretary for Ministry for Education via Circular No.2 dated 29. 01. 24 informed all stakeholders of the criteria to be used in the regularisation process. She also acknowledged the fact “that there are several scenarios that will be unique to MoE and Circular No.2/24 would not apply”.

I applaud her good sense and acknowledging the reality on the ground.

The Circular also stated that to qualify, amongst other things, one must have the “Relevant Qualifications”.

I acknowledge the fact that it must have taken the PS some real presentation to convince the Public Service Commission to agree to the regularisation process.

The Minister for Education honourable Gavoka is also complimented for endorsing the process.

I have received many calls and messages from members of the Fiji Teachers Union who were acting as HODs but were not considered in this regularisation process.

I infer that under “relevant qualifications” for HOD, the Ministry wanted the officer to have graduated in both subjects that comes under the department. For example for HOD maths the officer to have maths and physics, for HOD social the officer to have history and geography etc.

The question asked by these aggrieved officers is why did the ministry promote/ regularised the positions of assistant principal, vice principal and principal when some of them have only certificate / diploma or degree in only one subject area?

I believe that their question is genuine. I also believe that these affected officers had a legitimate belief that they deserve to be confirmed as they have been acting on that position for several years, some over ten years.

I remember that when I used to attend the ministry’s central staff board meeting, those who had graduated in only one subject area were promoted and given three years to complete the minor subject. I belief the PS should consider the above and regularise their positions as these teachers have been carrying out their duties diligently. At the moment their morale is at the lowest ebb.

This action would also achieve the purpose — “to retain and motivate the Civil Service”.

I have just read a message from the general secretary of Fiji Teachers Union that “FTU’s matter is before the High Court”.

I believe that FTU has filed an injunction against the ministry’s regularisation process. It is unpalatable to me as why FTU did not file the injunction before the process was implemented. Now that many of FTU members have benefited from the process, and rightly so, the question then is whose interest is FTU now looking at?

I am of the opinion that as soon as MoE sent the Circular, FTU should have met the Ministry and impressed upon them that those who have been acting as HODs for several years and have performed exceptionally well, be confirmed in their position and time be given to them to do the second subject as minor.

I appeal to the honourable minister and PS to look at the aggrieved cases with empathy and give them natural justice by regularising their positions as well.

ARUN PRASAD Dilkusha, Nausori