You must Sign In to post a response.
Category: Miscellaneous
#768464
This point was there in the mind and even in discussion among people some years ago also. The unemployment during those times were much higher than as it is now. There were large gaps among family and households in the employment cases especially in government sector jobs.
Some families, due to various reasons, had more than one (or even all adult persons) employed in government jobs . At the same time there were many households where no one was properly employed. There were and are such inequalities. Why government jobs are taken for consideration is because government is the largest employer and government has a responsibility to see every family have reasonable earning to sustain. As, for many matters the family or household is taken as base, it would not have been wrong t restrict government job per family or household to one person.
Added to some other statutory benefits many such households having more than one government employed literally enjoy the scarce resourced benefits in multiple degree.
Though it is not easy to implement such stipulations and for obvious reasons no political party or government will even try for that, it is welcome that such analytical thoughts are coming to peopl.
Some families, due to various reasons, had more than one (or even all adult persons) employed in government jobs . At the same time there were many households where no one was properly employed. There were and are such inequalities. Why government jobs are taken for consideration is because government is the largest employer and government has a responsibility to see every family have reasonable earning to sustain. As, for many matters the family or household is taken as base, it would not have been wrong t restrict government job per family or household to one person.
Added to some other statutory benefits many such households having more than one government employed literally enjoy the scarce resourced benefits in multiple degree.
Though it is not easy to implement such stipulations and for obvious reasons no political party or government will even try for that, it is welcome that such analytical thoughts are coming to peopl.
#768472
Restricting government jobs in a family to only one may help to some extent in reducing unemployment but today the unemployment problem in our country is so severe that this measure will only do some equitable distribution of government jobs among the population and that is it.
Due to the good pay scale and a large number of facilities in Govt jobs, it is obvious that people have a great attraction to that and everyone is trying to get a Govt job.
Govt has a great responsibility of providing jobs to unemployed persons but increasing the Govt vacancies is not a solution as that would only increase inflation and divide society in an economic sense.
The solution lies in providing a hassle-free environment for business entities and reducing the Govt vacancies and creating a conducive environment for creating more jobs in the private sector.
Frankly speaking, more jobs with low to medium salary structures are required today if we want to accommodate our unemployed people in a large number. It is also obvious that salaries in Govt sector are to be reduced to match them with that of the private sector. All that seems to be a difficult proposition but that type of action is required to be taken up seriously.
Knowledge is power.
Due to the good pay scale and a large number of facilities in Govt jobs, it is obvious that people have a great attraction to that and everyone is trying to get a Govt job.
Govt has a great responsibility of providing jobs to unemployed persons but increasing the Govt vacancies is not a solution as that would only increase inflation and divide society in an economic sense.
The solution lies in providing a hassle-free environment for business entities and reducing the Govt vacancies and creating a conducive environment for creating more jobs in the private sector.
Frankly speaking, more jobs with low to medium salary structures are required today if we want to accommodate our unemployed people in a large number. It is also obvious that salaries in Govt sector are to be reduced to match them with that of the private sector. All that seems to be a difficult proposition but that type of action is required to be taken up seriously.
Knowledge is power.
#768476
I think that the proposal mooted by Bhushan Sir is revolutionary. I would like to examine the proposal threadbare. But before that, I would like to inform Bhushan Sir that in different rules of Government, the definition of family is different. For example, the definition of family in Leave rules, LTC rules, CGHS rules, Staff Car rules, FR/SR, Disciplinary rules, etc. are different. Bhushan Sir is proposing to restrict Government employment to one from each family. In that case. I would request Bhushan Sir to mention his definition of family for the proposal.
After that, I promise I would dissect the proposal with an (imaginary) scalpel and surgical knife.
(a) Those who have forgotten Noakhali, how can they protest Sandeshkhali?
(b) Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it. ---------- Salvador Dali
After that, I promise I would dissect the proposal with an (imaginary) scalpel and surgical knife.
(a) Those who have forgotten Noakhali, how can they protest Sandeshkhali?
(b) Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it. ---------- Salvador Dali
#768482
That is a good idea. If we consider wife and husband as a family also, there are many families where wife and husband are in government jobs. If a rule can be made by the government to that effect we may see some better chances for some other families in getting government jobs. But our people are very intelligent. Even they can go for divorce on paper so that both of them can have government jobs but can live together. This trend we have seen when the land sealing law was introduced.
As mentioned by the author there are many families where both wife and husband are in government jobs. At the same time, many families will not have even a single family member in a government job.
By bringing in such a rule. more families can have at least one government employer. But as long as these vote politics remain it is not easy to bring in such changes in our country. If any political party try such changes, the public will not accept them.
drrao
always confident
As mentioned by the author there are many families where both wife and husband are in government jobs. At the same time, many families will not have even a single family member in a government job.
By bringing in such a rule. more families can have at least one government employer. But as long as these vote politics remain it is not easy to bring in such changes in our country. If any political party try such changes, the public will not accept them.
drrao
always confident
#768506
I am eagerly waiting for a response from Bhushan Sir. What is his definition of family for the purpose of this proposal.? I am ready with scalpel and surgical knife for dissection.
(a) Those who have forgotten Noakhali, how can they protest Sandeshkhali?
(b) Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it. ---------- Salvador Dali
(a) Those who have forgotten Noakhali, how can they protest Sandeshkhali?
(b) Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it. ---------- Salvador Dali
Return to Return to Discussion Forum