Part 2

2. ILO policies and activities related
to the public service in structural
adjustment and transition

Over the years, the ILO has remained steadfast in its conviction that an effective public service is a prerequisite for economic and social development -- and this, it believes, also holds true in times of structural change and transition. It has long argued that negotiation and social dialogue are as important in the public sector as they are in the private sector, being vital to the effectivity and productivity of both sectors. The ILO's concern that labour relations and trade union rights did not always enjoy the same recognition in the public service as in the private sector led, in 1978, to the adoption of specific labour standards for the public service: the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention (No. 151) and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 159). Earlier in 1971, the ILO had established a Joint Committee on the Public Service in order to examine overall developments in the public service and to discuss specific issues of relevance to the public service. After the 1994-95 evaluation of the Sectoral Activities Programme which organized the Joint Committee's sessions, the Governing Body established Joint Meetings for the public service; the first of such meetings took place for the public service in 1995. In addition to meetings and labour standard-related activities, the Office has compiled a number of studies and provided advisory services, technical cooperation and training activities in this area. Some of these activities are described below.

2.1.  Freedom of association standards and principles relevant to the public service

ILO Conventions of particular relevance to public service workers are the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). The situation of the public service is specifically dealt with in the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 159).

Although some countries make no difference between the public and private sector as regards freedom of association, others restrict the right to organize for public servants to certain categories of public servants or specific types of unions. A few countries deny completely the right to organize to the public service. An examination of the legislation of different countries shows that the terms used to refer to public servants vary a great deal.⁽³³⁾ The ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (referred to hereinafter as "the Committee") has always considered that the exclusion of public servants from this fundamental right is contrary to the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)⁽³⁴⁾ -- irrespective of whether they are engaged in the state administration at the central, regional or local level, are officials of bodies which provide important public services or are employed in state-owned economic undertakings. In some countries it is impossible to determine from the legislation in force the exact extent to which public servants enjoy the right of association in practice.

Convention No. 87 does, however, allow for an exception in the case of the armed forces and the police on the grounds of security. But no exceptions are made for fire service personnel and prison staff. Despite this, a number of countries deny the right to organize to these categories of public servants. Some countries draw a distinction between the personnel and management in the public service with a view to limiting the right to organize of senior officials and public servants holding managerial or supervisory positions of trust. The Committee, while not accepting a ban on the right of these public servants to establish and join trade unions, has permitted limitations on the type of organizations that such workers can join. While public servants exercising senior managerial or policy-making may be barred from joining trade unions that represent other workers, such restrictions are to be strictly limited to this category of workers and they should be entitled to establish their own organizations.⁽³⁵⁾

The right to strike, however, has to be examined specifically as it raises special difficulties for the public and semi-public sectors -- also in view of the problem of essential services⁽³⁶⁾ which arises here more frequently than in other sectors. As regards the restrictions for the public service, national legislation varies widely, from recognizing the right to strike to prohibiting it or remaining silent on the matter. The definition of the concept of the public service is often decisive for the scope of the restrictions. Too broad a definition is likely to result in very wide restrictions or even in a prohibition of the right to strike for these workers. The Committee endeavours to establish fairly uniform criteria in order to examine the compatibility of legislation with the provisions of Convention No. 87. It considers that the prohibition of the right to strike should be limited to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. In borderline cases, a solution might be not to impose a total prohibition of strikes, but rather to provide for maintaining negotiated and defined minimum services, when a total and prolonged stoppage might result in serious consequences for the public. This solution is also recommended in the case of "essential services" which include the hospital sector, water and electricity supply and telephone services, which in many countries are closely related to the public service. Workers' organizations should be able to participate in the definition of such minimum services along with employers and public authorities. "Where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain essential undertakings or services, adequate protection should be given to the workers to compensate for the limitation thereby placed on their freedom of action with regard to disputes affecting such undertakings and services."⁽³⁷⁾

Although the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), allows some categories of public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, the Committee has adopted a restrictive approach concerning the definition of those who may be exempted from the right to collective bargaining. The Committee could not allow the exclusion from the terms of the Convention of large groups of workers employed by the State merely on the grounds that they were formally placed on the same footing as public officials engaged in administration of the State. A distinction therefore had to be drawn. ⁽³⁸⁾ And those enjoying the guarantees of the Convention and therefore able to bargain collectively should also enjoy there rights in situations of structural adjustment and transition.

The Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 159) also allows certain categories of public servants to be excluded from its scope, namely: "high-level employees whose functions are normally considered as policy-making or managerial, or ... employees whose duties are of a highly confidential nature", as well as the armed forces and police. It also provides for some flexibility in the choice of methods to determine conditions of employment in the public service "such other methods as will allow representatives of public employees to participate in the determination of these matters". It should be noted that as of June 1998, only 33 member States had ratified Convention No. 151. This reluctance on the part of governments is somewhat hard to understand in view of the fact that Convention No. 87 already covers the right to organize for the public service and Convention No. 151 does not modify the right to strike. The text of this Convention spells out various ways and means of collective bargaining, arbitration, conciliation and mediation and several governments have already implemented such provisions. A large number of complaints that have come before the Committee on Freedom of Association have arisen on account of structural adjustment plans involving unilaterally imposed wage freezes on public employees.

2.2.  Sectoral meetings

From 1971 to 1994, when it held its last session, the Joint Committee on the Public Service not only examined overall developments in the public service but also labour relations, disciplinary codes, equality of opportunity and treatment, employment and working conditions in local government, social security, part-time and temporary work, and the effects of structural and technological change.

At the Joint Committee's fifth and last session in May 1994,⁽³⁹⁾ the general discussion already focused on structural adjustment and covered such matters as decentralization, privatization, the contracting out of services and cuts in public service personnel. It was stressed that the public service required skilled and motivated personnel and that retrenchment should be coupled with improved human resource management. In many developing and transition countries, however, the major challenge facing the public service at that time was that pay had fallen below the poverty line; furthermore, in industrialized countries salaries had decreased in real terms. Often no alternative employment existed and structural adjustment had led in a number of countries to sudden and massive unemployment. A number of countries, however, highlighted the positive aspect of a growing private sector but insisted that the State needed a competent and efficient administration to back up a well-operating market economy.

The Joint Committee underlined the ILO's role in re-establishing the public image of the public service's fundamental value and mission and called upon the Organization to carry out comparative studies and collect statistical data. It also invited the ILO to ensure that collective bargaining, joint consultation and trade union right in the public service were covered in all training programmes for public service employees.

The specific technical agenda item on the agenda of the Joint Committee Meeting was the terms and conditions of employment of part-time and temporary workers in the public service. That same year, 1994, the International Labour Conference was due to consider for adoption a Convention and a Recommendation on part-time work in general (they were, in fact, subsequently adopted) and the Joint Committee took the opportunity to refer to the definition of part-time work contained in the instruments in the light of specific issues for the public service. As a result, conclusions were adopted which noted that: part-time and temporary work were growing in the public service of both developing and industrialized countries; women represented a substantive majority of part-time workers and an important proportion of temporary workers; the potential of these forms of work in reconciling the operational requirements and efficiency of the public service with the needs and preferences of the workers concerned was being increasingly recognized; the terms and conditions of employment, notably freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively, recruitment and career development, remuneration and other benefits should be the same for part-time workers and comparable workers in the public service; standard-setting activities were of primary importance for the regulation of these forms of work in the public service; data collection and statistical analysis of these forms of employment should be undertaken; and studies should be conducted on the experiences of part-time and temporary work, covering subjects such as the relevance of these forms of work in enhancing the role and quality of the public service.

As mentioned earlier in this report, the first Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment in the Public Service (Efficiency, Quality Improvement and Working Conditions) was held in May 1995.⁽⁴⁰⁾ In the light of the debate about the role of the State, which placed ever-shifting emphasis on public or private initiatives, the Meeting addressed a number of questions: the restructuring of the public service in times of structural adjustment; employment policy and staffing levels with their specific impact on women's employment; and the structuring of wages in the public service. It was agreed that there had to be a balance between necessary cost containment and the best use of human resources to ensure not only quality services but also quality of working life. The Meeting also recognized that structural adjustment in the public sector was a universal phenomenon but that it was occurring in varying cultural contexts. Moreover, the objectives of and processes involved in implementing such policies had to include labour and human rights standards in order to reduce the economic and social costs of restructuring. At this point, it is worth recalling that the Meeting was held shortly after the World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen and that it examined all these issues in the light of the Social Summit's findings.

The conclusions of the Joint Meeting underlined that public sector reforms presented opportunities to create a more effective public sector better able to fulfil its responsibilities. They specified that these "... reforms should be designed to facilitate sustainable economic and social development, including full employment ..." and maintained that "of particular importance is equitable access to services satisfying basic human needs and eliminating poverty; providing essential health and education; safeguarding the environment; and improving and enhancing democracy and security of human rights". They spelled out a number of basic guiding principles which should be respected in public service reforms namely: continuity in the values of communities and cultures within countries, particularly for accountability to democratic political processes and institutions; transparency and openness of government policies; partnerships in decision-making; impartiality and equity in access to public services; provision of better services to citizens; and the importance of good working conditions and the application of international labour standards for morale and performance of the public service. The conclusions noted that the interests of public sector workers should not be in conflict with those of other citizens. They should work under mutually agreed codes of ethics and regulations which set out their rights and obligations and have the right to organize collectively and be represented by free and independent trade unions in accordance with international labour standards concerning collective bargaining, freedom of association and trade union rights. It was also underlined in the conclusions that public sector reforms were most likely to achieve their objectives of delivering efficient, effective and high-quality services when planned and implemented with full participation of public sector workers and their unions and consumers of public services at all stages of the decision-making process.

These considerations are also valid for measures of structural adjustment. The conclusions stressed the need for monitoring and evaluation to measure the attainment of structural adjustment objectives. Where restructuring called for changes in staffing levels and tasks of the public service, these should be accompanied by training or retraining, skills assessment and redeployment. Redundancy was considered a measure of last resort. It was recognized that public sector workers were a major resource to the community and that their knowledge and skills contributed to reform. The decline in the real value of public wages had been almost universal, leading to poor morale and performance and difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified staff. There was a need for competitive pay rates in the public service and pay systems should be negotiated with unions. Finally, the conclusions pointed out that flexible pay systems including performance-related pay should only be used where their potential contribution to achieving efficiency, effectiveness and quality could be demonstrated.

Other sectoral meetings of relevance to the public service and focusing on the impact of structural adjustment include: the Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment on Educational Personnel in 1996; the Tripartite Meeting on the Human Resource Dimension of Structural and Regulatory Changes and Globalization in Postal and Telecommunication Services in April 1998; the Joint Meeting on Terms of Employment and Working Conditions in Health Sector Reforms in September 1998; and the forthcoming Tripartite Meeting on Managing the Privatization and Restructuring of Public Utilities in 1999.

2.3.  Follow-up activities: Regional workshops for the public service

In the conclusions of the Joint Meeting in 1995, the ILO had been called upon to identify and facilitate the exchange of experiences among countries on agreed best practices -- "benchmarks" -- in public sector reform, through joint regional meetings and networking arrangements of representatives of unions and governments. It subsequently organized two regional events to foster social dialogue between governments and workers' organizations representing public service personnel: one workshop was organized for the Caribbean countries in 1997 and another one for Transcaucasian Republics in 1998.

A number of Caribbean countries had previously expressed their specific interest in issues related to public service reforms. Since 1995, several regional governmental meetings and declarations had established the importance of HRD for the success of modernizing and adjusting the public service; however, a lack of strategic planning in this area had been noted. When embarking upon comprehensive HRD, the Caribbean member States therefore sought cooperation with the ILO, including its Training Centre in Turin.

In view of the interest of the Caribbean countries in this issue, the ILO, in collaboration with CARICAD (Caribbean Centre for Development Administration) and the Training Centre in Turin, convened a regional workshop on HRD in the public service in CARICOM (Caribbean Community) countries in October 1997 in Barbados. At this workshop, governments and unions of public service workers discussed the current challenges, problems and potential for public service reform, the role of social dialogue and terms of employment and working conditions in the reform process -- including "benchmarks" -- and best practices in human resource development and management. Moreover, the workshop set out to identify needs and discuss an implementation strategy to ensure HRD in the public service in the context of structural adjustment of Caribbean countries and effective workers' participation in reform processes.

In its conclusions, the workshop noted that the role of the public service was crucial to the growth and development of society as a whole -- and this was particularly true for the small States of the CARICOM region. A strong public service was vital to allow countries to meet the challenges of globalization and the need for regional integration, economic growth and an equitable distribution of wealth. As the public service was the largest single employer (16 to 38 per cent of total employment) in all CARICOM countries, it had to ensure the highest standards in its human resource policy and labour relations. Public service reform should therefore be part of overall reforms designed to facilitate sustainable economic and social development, including full employment and other human development targets agreed at the World Summit for Social Development in 1995. This required a workforce with appropriate skills, competencies, motivation and awareness of their duty towards society in order to provide high quality services in an effective and efficient manner.

The workshop considered that the full participation of public service workers, their unions and associations in public service reform -- as well as the participation of the users of public services -- was a prerequisite for the success of this reform; and this required the establishment and strengthening of appropriate legal and institutional frameworks and the sharing of information. It was stressed that public sector workers needed strong unions to be able to participate fully and freely in these reforms and not to fall victim to them. Furthermore, it was pointed out that collective bargaining must be seen to include service quality and delivery targets and monitoring of service performance and not just as a mechanism to negotiate conditions of employment. Codes of ethics must ensure and protect the neutrality of the public service. The conclusions reiterated that the fundamental workers' standards of the ILO should be ratified and national legislation enacted accordingly.

In regard to human resource development, the participants at the workshop felt that any HRD policy for the public service should be based on HRD policy for society as a whole; they noted that HRD in the public service should not be considered merely a matter of training and retraining. It should encompass a more comprehensive approach to managing people and include: fulfilment of job performance; recognition for contribution; equitable hiring and promotional systems based on merit; performance appraisal for individuals and organizational unit; appropriate rewards for excellence; and mutually acceptable terms and conditions of employment. The discussions during the workshop revealed that a participatory approach in a number of countries had achieved very positive results: in Grenada a new performance appraisal system had been introduced: in Trinidad and Tobago a new code of conduct had been established; and in Jamaica public service reform was making headway.

The conclusions of the workshop expressed a strong need to strengthen HRD capabilities in the public service of the participating countries as well as within the unions and associations representing the public service. This led to further consultations between the ILO, CARICAD and the governments and unions of the region, culminating in the joint development of a project proposal on "strengthening social partnerships for HRD in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)". On a regional basis, the project aims at focusing on: the harmonization of structures, rules and regulations affecting Caribbean public services; the implementation of appropriate management information systems; the benchmarking and documentation of best practices to facilitate more informed decision-making processes; and the continuous sensitization of decision-makers in the reform process.

The Transcaucasian Republics (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) are undergoing, as are many other transition countries, vast structural adjustment programmes which also imply the reform and modernization of the public service. In July 1998 a subregional conference was carried out in cooperation with Public Services International (PSI) in T'bilisi/Georgia, as a follow-up activity to the 1995 Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment in the Public Service. The event was also intended to have a training effect for the planning and implementation of processes of social dialogue in the public sector in this subregion. The main aim of the conference was to examine the experiences of public service reform in the region and its role in the critical process of economic and social restructuring and transition and to create awareness of the need for social dialogue. Those participating were representatives of the governments and workers from the public service and the health and municipal services of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The conference endorsed the conclusions of the ILO Joint Meeting in 1995, particularly with regard to the need for participation of public employees and their unions in the restructuring process and the need for continuous training and good working conditions for the delivery of efficient public services. It noted that not all public services lent themselves to privatization and recommended a step-by-step approach. In cases in which public services were privatized, their quality and effectiveness should be maintained and equal access to them be guaranteed. The conference also provided a valuable forum for an exchange of experiences on structural change and privatization among the participants from the three countries.

2.4.  Research activities, advisory services and technical cooperation

Since the last sectoral meeting for the public service was held in 1995, research on the situation of the workforce carried out by the Sectoral Activities Programme has focused on country experiences in human resource development in structural change⁽⁴¹⁾ and on concepts and experiences in the privatization of services.

In 1996-97, the ILO launched -- in the context of an interdepartmental action programme -- a series of studies on the restructuring and privatization of services of general interest which focused specifically on social and labour issues. The sectors selected were health care, telecommunications and utilities (water, gas, electricity).⁽⁴²⁾ The results of these studies were complex and vary: by form of privatization; by sector; by region; by country; and by type of social dialogue.

These various factors also interact and influence each other. Privatization, which is occurring not only in the industrialized and developing countries but also in economies in transition, is often taken merely to imply the withdrawal of the State from the provision of services of general interest. In fact, it takes many forms, ranging from introducing private-type management and competition in the provision and finance of services of general interest, to the contracting out of such services to the private sector, to selling the facilities, to licensing the provision of the services to the private sector, and to privatizing the finance of the services. The question of ownership is only one and perhaps a minor issue in privatization. The studies show that the form it takes is often decisive.

In 1998, the ILO's Bureau of Statistics and the Salaried Employees and Professional Workers' Branch are to carry out a survey on public sector employment. The results of this survey will complement the information in this report. The data collected will focus on public sector employment in relation to total employment in the economy and on the development of public sector employment during privatization and structural adjustment. As far as possible the survey will also give information on public sector pay.

The ILO and WHO are embarking on a joint effort to elaborate country case-studies on the impact of public service reforms on employment and working conditions of the workforce in the health sector. In most countries the health sector is predominantly a public sector and therefore influenced by public service reforms. The achievements of and improvements in the health sector are crucially dependent on the performance of staff at all levels which, in turn, is contingent upon the terms of employment and working conditions in the widest sense. By documenting details of selected reform processes and assessing their impact on the quality of health care services, it is expected to draw lessons from individual cases and, on the basis of these, to help governments and organizations of civil society to implement health sector reforms more effectively. The Public Administration Promotion Centre of DSE (German Foundation for International Development) and Public Services International (PSI) will assist the implementation of this work.

In 1997, the ILO was requested to provide advisory services to the Department of Public Services and Administration in South Africa on the labour relations aspect of a structural adjustment package to "right-size" the public service (see also section 1.3). This "three-year package" had been introduced in 1996 and was subject to negotiations between the social partners. It was designed to link the amount of wage increases with savings achieved through right-sizing and provide for the introduction of a new grading system to be negotiated during the various stages of implementation. The Government, however, was encountering difficulties in implementing this programme which were compounded by a skills deficit -- worsened by a voluntary severance package. The situation was not helped by the lack of a sound tradition of consultation and cooperative collective bargaining and the absence of experience under the new Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council Constitution.

The ILO consultant made a number of recommendations on human resources management and on legal provisions in the light of international labour standards. These recommendations were drafted on the basis of an overview on the South African public service and on technical cooperation programmes provided by a number of donors. The ILO put specific emphasis on the involvement of trade unions and employee associations in the implementation of the programme. It also envisaged providing practical training for public sector managers and trade unionists in collective bargaining and dispute prevention, especially in the context of right-sizing the public service.

2.5.  Training activities carried out by the ILO

In 1990, the International Training Centre of the ILO developed a comprehensive training package on human resource management in the public sector to train senior government officials and trainers of public administration institutes involved in this issue. Those participating in the workshops were expected to adapt training modules of this package to the specific needs of their country. In order to have a competent group of persons in each country, the participants normally took part in the regional workshops as national teams. The training was conducted in French, English and Portuguese and addressed only African countries. The programme was originally financed by a pool of donors, including the ILO, the World Bank, the United Nations and UNDP, as well as bilateral donors such as France, Italy and Portugal. The number of persons trained amounted to over 230. After the initial evaluations of the workshops in 1994, the training materials were adapted; and the participants were mainly funded by governments or individual fellowships. In 1996, the Turin Centre started to develop a new training package on public service reform in cooperation with UNDP. This training package will be finalized in a validation workshop in August 1998 and tested in a pilot training course for senior public service reform managers later in the year.

3. Training for the public service in
countries undergoing structural
adjustment and transition

The report to the Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment in the Public Service in 1995 had already pointed out that training needs were often underestimated in processes of structural change and transition even though some countries gave high priority to training. Nevertheless, the report noted that training and retraining had been a basic element in assistance programmes for laid-off public service staff to find employment.⁽⁴³⁾ The Joint Meeting concluded therefore that "governments should make adequate investment to maintain and improve the quality of the public sector workforce on an ongoing basis ... Employers and staff should take a positive approach to training opportunities".⁽⁴⁴⁾

It should be recalled at this stage that training is only one aspect of human resource development, as described in section 1.2 of this report. But training is a complicated system of concepts, actors, and structures and can only make an impact if it is incorporated into the overall process of public service reform, transition and change. Training prospects are, like the public service itself, contingent upon the given situation in any country and region and the way they interact in the global economy. Some of the present problems and needs of training systems, as well as their potential, are highlighted in this chapter.

Despite the fact that training is only one aspect of HRD policy, it is of key importance in times of structural adjustment and transition for a number of reasons. Indeed, it is required:

• to create the capacity to govern. In the broadest sense, training -- or indeed the lack thereof -- affects a whole range of policies. It is obvious that even the most skilled politicians cannot actually realize their programmes unless they can rely upon a well-trained and motivated administration. In the absence of the latter, political programmes remain declarations of intent -- which, as seen far too often, undermine public acceptance of the political system as a whole;
• to ensure the success of reform policies. It is commonly accepted that market reforms are doomed to fail, if they are not backed up by the necessary legal provisions and the institutional mechanisms required for their implementation. The quality of public sector personnel is also of crucial importance in this respect.

3.1.  Training as a condition for management of change

A transformation of the public service from a law-executing body to an agent of change -- which promotes and facilitates economic development and fosters the well-being of citizens -- is still on the drawing board in many countries. The extent to which this transformation towards private sector management in the public service should take place differs from country to country. Implementing a new management culture within the public service calls for a continuous training effort; and this, in turn, implies an increased financial commitment to training in the public service. Irrespective of the value which may be placed on training in the wider context of public sector reform, the costs associated with this training are all too often viewed as prohibitive. Indeed, account must be taken of the financing involved but this must not preclude action in this area. What is important is at least to set in motion the mechanism for developing a comprehensive and coherent training system. Of course, this also requires some increase or reallocation in budgetary resources. In the medium term, needs assessments, coordination and accreditation may be expected to eliminate duplication of training, hence reducing the financial burden.

Training is a condition for successful management of change in public service reform. It has to correspond to the following quality indicators:

• it has to improve more than the individual skills of public servants and build up institutional know-how in order to be sustainable;
• it must be based on a personnel development concept in order to combine individual motivation with institutional needs;
• it has to incorporate training methods which are consistent with the training objectives -- implying participation of all parties concerned;
• it has to be tailored to suit local conditions and include a strong participation of local training institutions and public servants in order to guarantee the local ownership of public service reform.

Training is an appropriate way of familiarizing the staff and general public with the objectives and instruments -- but also with the more or less favourable effects -- of reform. If it is well prepared it can provide an opportunity for those involved to feel more integrated in, motivated by and committed to public service reform. The training element is therefore a crucial component for successful management of change (see also section 1.2).

3.2.  Actors involved in training

Public service training objectives and concepts are, in principle, entrusted to the public bodies responsible for the public service and personnel policy. These can -- as in France, Spain or French-speaking African countries -- be ministries for the public service or ministries of the interior, as in Germany or the Netherlands. In the case of countries with an Anglo-Saxon tradition, civil service commissions are responsible for this task.

However, training policy is also influenced by other actors such as training institutions which might be independent, government-run or decentralized bodies. In Germany the federal and Länder ministries intervene, as does the Federal Academy for the Public Service. But Parliament, political parties and their political associations, universities, the media as well as public service trade unions and associations, also participate in the discussion of reform and training programmes.

Training is carried out by various institutions which include public training institutes at the central, regional and local level, universities and other academic institutes and private enterprises specialized in public service training. In Europe, there are several institutions financed by more than one government, such as the Maastricht European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA) or the Euro-Institute in Kehl, which offer short-term training courses and carry out specific research on European governance, public management and legal systems.

In the majority of countries there are institutions -- such as universities or the "grandes écoles" in France -- which are responsible for the initial long-term training or courses for public servants before or after their recruitment. Continuous training linked to career paths is mostly entrusted to other institutions; two examples are the Civil Service College in the United Kingdom and the Federal Academy in Germany. But institutions responsible for pre-service training are increasingly expanding their scope and entering the new market of continuous training; the Ecole Nationale d'Administration (ENA) is a case in point. In addition, private institutions and individual consultants offer training courses in special fields, like information management, business management or labour psychology.

Training institutions for the public service have international platforms and networks to organize their cooperation and discuss topics of public service training; examples include the International Association for Schools and Institutes of Administration (IASIA) in Brussels; the European Network of Training Organizations (ENTO) in Strasbourg; and the European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA) in Maastricht.

In all regions, any successful reform process, whatever its objective, needs to be understood by the people directly concerned by the reform. In the case of public service reforms these are the public servants themselves and the trade unions. The following paragraphs highlight some of the specifics in training of the public service in various countries.

3.3.  Developing countries

The public service in developing countries also has its own training institutions -- with more or less extended structures, curricula and trainers. During periods of structural adjustment, however, these are increasingly exposed to budgetary constraints. A number of countries have therefore opted to merge the training of public service personnel with other training programmes or to give lower priority to training when reallocating public budgets.

Technical cooperation for the in-service training of public service personnel -- and even for the retraining of retrenched workers -- might provide a solution, although this is likely to be of short duration. However, technical cooperation which focuses on capacity-building is not always ideal because it might only ease budget constraints and fail to support public service reforms as a whole. Another disadvantage is that, since there is a decline in real wage levels and less incentives, public servants tend, once they have obtained better qualifications through training, to move over to the private sector. Furthermore, with poor material incentives, many projects report on "underperformance" and unmotivated local staff.⁽⁴⁵⁾

Almost every industrialized country has a special institution which offers capacity-building programmes for the public service in developing and transition countries. Examples include: the Maastricht European Centre for Development Policy Management, financed by the Netherlands; the Public Administration Promotion Centre of the German Foundation for International Development (DSE/ZÖV) in Berlin; and the International Institute for Public Administration (IIAP) in Paris.

DSE/ZÖV promotes the establishment of a professionally qualified and efficient public administration at national, regional and municipal level in developing and transition countries. The Centre organizes training and dialogue events targeted at specialized and managerial personnel in public administration and carries out its programmes with a network of national partners. Its cooperation programmes are designed to promote the development of these national partners and thereby create a sustainable national capacity for public service training. As DSE/ZÖV is convinced that newly acquired knowledge and changed attitudes can help stimulate motivation for change and reform, new issues are continuously integrated into these programmes. For example, since 1997 efforts have been made to mainstream gender issues in the programmes of DSE/ZÖV and its partners. As the Centre was concerned to create awareness and guarantee sustainability, it invited staff and partner institutions to participate in the analysis and development of guidelines on gender issues in public administration. As the first geographical region to receive attention was southern Africa, the partner institutions of this region were involved, namely: the Foreign Service Institute in South Africa; the Centre for Public Service Training in Namibia; the Zimbabwe Institute of Public Administration and Management (ZIPAM); and the National Institute of Public Administration (NIPA) in Zambia.

The IIAP in Paris provides short- (for senior officials) and long-term courses (for junior officials) to participants from over 80 countries with a view to improving training for the public service and its reform and modernization in general. In addition, the IIAP is involved in research work which analyses developments in public administration reforms and training. It maintains specific relations with the International Association for Schools and Institutes of Administration and has partnerships with institutes in the home countries of the participants. The IIAP also organizes two major symposia every year in connection with its research activities. Similarly, United Nations development agencies such as UNDP provide assistance in this area.

As a number of countries in Africa have become dependent upon external support for their HRD programmes for the public service, it is vital that technical cooperation develops the capacity of the national institutions to carry out programmes on their own. Training on policy, gender and technical aspects of the reform has to be conceived and organized in such a way that it allows ownership of the countries concerned. In Africa there are many examples of donor-driven reform and training activities which have little chance of success because they are "blueprints" imposed by the North in the South -- and hence inappropriate.

At this point, it is relevant to recall the training package on human resource management in the public service for French-speaking and English-speaking countries put together by the ILO Training Centre in Turin. In May 1996 a workshop was held to review the training material. A number of representatives from African countries, more particularly those from South Africa, criticized the fact that the training material was elaborated in the industrial countries and disregarded local realities. They maintained that it would not help countries acquire national ownership when transferred to the South unless it was adapted accordingly. The workshop recommended an adaptation of the training courses by a regional training institute.

In East Asia and the Pacific most countries have established public service training systems over the past three decades. During this period, training activities have expanded considerably both in scope and size; however, governments in this region often seem to regard quantitative expansion as the principal indicator of training programme development. Training requirements are increasingly extensive and sophisticated -- ranging from pricing policy and budgeting to research and technological development -- but do not include the acquisition and adoption of skills and changes in attitude and "cultures".

Although the various structures in all these countries -- such as grading systems, task allocation or performance appraisal -- are changing rapidly, public servants rarely receive the level or quality of training needed not only to cope with change but to take an active part in designing and implementing change.

3.4.  Countries in transition

The flexibility which characterized the early days of government reform -- and was appropriate at the time -- may now be counter-productive inasmuch as it can act as a brake on the development of expertise. Indeed, there is normally no provision for public servants to attend training sessions for a specific number of days per year. In this context, it may be worth mentioning that labour codes or collective agreements for the private sector often include the right to about one week of educational leave per year. In most cases, it is still up to the public servants themselves to decide whether or not they want to participate in an in-service training activity.

It may well be possible to familiarize public servants with new legislation during an information day; yet the adaptation of legal and procedural bases necessary for future accession to the European Union will certainly require a longer-term commitment of trainers and trainees.

These comments should not, however, be taken as undue criticism of training systems in countries in transition. The problems involved are often a direct result of funding difficulties and institutional overlap and therefore not directly related to the training programme in question. It is for this and other reasons that it may be advisable to institutionalize a coordination mechanism for both pre-service and in-service training. In this context, a national school for public administration might be entrusted with the standardization of pre-service training and examinations, as well as with the coordination of in-service training activities -- both of which could be internally and externally funded. One advantage of having a single institution for linking training programmes would be that it might create an esprit de corps uniting rank and file public servants and further strengthen the overall cohesion of the public service.

The approach to training public servants in Central and Eastern European countries mirrors, to a certain extent, the phases of public sector reform as a whole. Since 1989, it has undergone a number of changes. Although this approach is still in most cases not final, it is possible to locate each of the training systems under consideration somewhere within the following -- by no means mutually exclusive -- categories:

• Training efforts during the period immediately following the fall of communist regimes were experiments rather than anything else; they were not actually based on specific needs and demands. Given that public sector training had been either wholly party-based or at least ideologically dominated, the training system was discredited in the eyes of public servants and the public alike and this -- coupled with the scaling-down of public sector activities, institutional flux and political instability -- made it impossible to replace existing training routines immediately with a comprehensive new policy. In any case, it is hardly surprising that training for and within the public sector was not given top priority in the aftermath of the political upheavals. Training programmes, which took place nonetheless, were predominantly short term and often inconsequential.
• While the first step in the development of public sector training was, therefore, somewhat of an "external shock", the second may be said to have been "demand-led" in so far as pressing needs began to draw a more concentrated and sustained response. The legal, organizational and procedural changes enacted during the transformation and consolidation phases of public sector reform gave rise to a need for suitably qualified public servants. However, while there was certainly more continuity, training policies at this stage lacked structured aims and objectives and were very much ad hoc. An almost frantic process of institution-building ensued, leading to a multitude of public as well as private training centres competing for scarce resources with uncoordinated -- frequently overlapping -- programmes.
• The resulting need to introduce some consistency and coherence in public sector training led, in most cases, to the creation of an institutional "focal point", either in the form of a coordinating ministry (mostly that of internal affairs) or state offices specifically created for this purpose. Though not with immediate effect on the structure and content of the training system, these first careful steps towards institutionalization allowed (or will allow in future) for a more evolutionary approach by focusing on crucial elements such as funding, organizational prerequisites, teaching personnel and content. Decisions to implement change were planned rather than being ad hoc.
• A fourth step (still be taken by many of the countries under consideration) involves a broad institutionalization of public sector training in the form of a school for administrative issues (or governance in general). Such schools may not only provide programmes which lead up to official entry or promotion examinations, but may also coordinate the training curricula of other institutions and decide on the accreditation of degrees, diplomas and certificates offered by the latter. One of the prerequisites for this coordinating function is, of course, the establishment of a system of checks and balances to avoid a combination of demand and supply roles, which may allow national schools manipulating standards to favour their own training programmes over those of other suppliers. The schools for administrative studies may also be entrusted with organizing cooperation with foreign donors and international organizations, as well as with conducting more thorough and continuing needs assessments than those hitherto carried out.

3.5.  Industrialized countries

"When cost cutting is in order, training is often the first thing to go, including induction and ongoing ethics training."⁽⁴⁶⁾ So says a recent OECD study, and the record in various countries confirms it. Yet the new range of tasks, internal and external relationships and responsibilities thrust upon public service managers and their staffs by structural and organizational reforms, as well as the introduction of new technologies, imply a need for more rather than less training. The need to invest in training can be considered as part of any programme to limit or reduce staff. In the majority of OECD countries, training is reported to be an important cross-cutting strategy in realigning the public service workforce in order to manage with fewer overall resources. Moreover, it appears to be particularly important during staff reduction periods during which hiring freezes and voluntary redundancy programmes slowly bleed a public service of new talent and ideas and departures are not targeted or controlled, resulting in mismatches between the workers on hand and the needs of the workplace.⁽⁴⁷⁾

Despite the rhetoric, training receives little priority even though a number of countries, such as Austria, Hungary, Ireland, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom, have reiterated a central commitment to training and skill-building in the public service. Furthermore, Austria, Norway and the United Kingdom are taking a broad perspective on training by linking training and development to the goals and challenges facing departments and agencies.⁽⁴⁸⁾

The implementation of such declarations of intent is, however, not always rated satisfactory. In the United Kingdom, where human resources in the national public service have been decentralized to departments and agencies, "there has been a complete lack of professional training and support for personnel officers to handle the tasks with which they have been faced", says a public service union. "The bigger, better resourced departments have coped but many of the smaller bodies have been in considerable difficulty."⁽⁴⁹⁾

In Austria, the Government has declared that on-the-job training is being extended beyond the post-recruitment phase with the aim of enhancing "social competencies of personnel". It has also stated that "elements of economics and business administration will be integrated" into the training programmes.⁽⁵⁰⁾ Nevertheless, there are also criticisms about a lack of training and the underdeveloped performance appraisal system.⁽⁵¹⁾

Some governments have earmarked specific funds for human resource development. In Ireland, for example, the Government has publicly committed itself to an increased emphasis on skills acquisition, training and development, with each department increasing its training budget to 3 per cent of payroll (compared to an average of 0.75 per cent at present).⁽⁵²⁾

But not all examples are so encouraging. In Sweden, the National Institute for Civil Service Development was closed down in 1992, while in the Netherlands the State Training Centre has been privatized and there is now no national career development programme for public servants.

In Canada, although it is acknowledged that training should be improved to develop the continuous learning environment for sustained quality improvements, there are serious fiscal restraints hampering this development. The Treasury Board of Canada, the body responsible for public service human resources management, has issued a Declaration of Quality Services Principles as part of a quality services initiative.⁽⁵³⁾ The training implications of such goals are obvious, and the Training Board also spells them out in another of its Quality Services series of booklets. To promote basic knowledge and skills among employees, a training strategy is recommended to:

• identify employees who are already at base level;
• establish a training plan for the remaining employees to reach the base level;
• determine a time frame to get all employees to the base level; and
• ensure all new employees have access to tools that allow them to reach the base level.

In addition, a training strategy to build up the stock of specific skills and specialized competencies should:

• identify the skills needed to support the initiative;
• identify the number of employees who should have each of these skills;
• identify employees who already possess these skills;
• identify gaps; and
• establish a training plan to educate employee leaders.⁽⁵⁴⁾

These employee leaders would be expected to help their colleagues give better service and encouraged to update their skills and competencies continuously. They would also be encouraged to network with colleagues in similar fields in other departments to share practices and find out about new ideas. Yet, despite the ambitious nature of the programme, the same guide points out: "No new funding is available for these learning initiatives. Departments are expected to reallocate resources to respond to their quality service training needs."⁽⁵⁵⁾

In France, claims by some unions that their Government's commitment to training in support of restructuring and reorganization efforts was not matched by commitment of resources prevented those unions from supporting the initiatives (see Chapter 7). Nevertheless, some unions have been party to a series of framework agreements under which the percentage of payroll supposed to be devoted to training has steadily increased. The first framework agreement, in 1989, signed by all unions except the CGT and FO, affirmed the principle of equality of access to professional training and increased training budgets. It established the right of every public servant to three days of professional training over the duration of the agreement and obliged every ministry to allocate a sum equivalent to 2 per cent of its wage bill to training.

The second framework agreement, signed in 1992 by all unions except the CGT, noted that during the lifetime of the previous agreement, ministries had, on average, exceeded its terms for training budgets by allocating the equivalent of 2.7 per cent of their wage bills to professional training, enabling more than 99 per cent of public servants to take part to the extent of their three-day annual entitlement. The new agreement increased these terms to 3.2 per cent of the wage bill and extended to a fourth day the training entitlement of public servants on grade C (the least-qualified stratum of the three grades of the French public service).

The third framework agreement, completed in February 1996 -- the first to be signed after the December 1995 wave of industrial action and demonstrations by public service workers and their supporters -- was again signed by all the unions except the CGT. It extended the minimum annual number of training days due to all public servants over the three-year duration of the agreement from three to four days for grades A and B and from four to six for grade C. It also obliged ministries to spend the equivalent of 3.8 per cent of wage bills -- up from 3.2 per cent -- on training. In addition, the new agreement loosened the obligation of public servants to remain in the national administration in return for access to training by extending the scope of a commitment facilitating mobility to local government and the health service.

These framework agreements have been built on a 1985 decree (itself based on earlier legislation guaranteeing the right of French public servants to professional training) which set out strategic objectives for professional training as well as conditions of access to it. Its salient concerns are to provide public servants with capacity to:

• improve their efficiency and to better satisfy users;
• facilitate internal mobility; and
• promote more equitable access to training between men and women.

The decree also provides for a scheme entitling public servants to individual training meetings with managers to identify their skills, abilities and motivation in order to design a career project and an individual training plan.

The relationship between institutional structures, career development paths and training is well demonstrated in the French case. The fact that, in the past, career progression was based on seniority rather than competencies has tended to obstruct in-service professional training because there has been little incentive for public servants to take up what opportunities might be on offer. Consequently, reforms in this area are seeking to ensure that training programmes correspond to the promotion, evaluation and interministerial redeployment and cooperation measures being introduced while making best advantage of the high average academic qualifications of French public servants. The new focus is on skills, efficiency and initiative -- the aim being to facilitate both horizontal and vertical progression. Programmes designed by the central training body (ministries have responsibility for their own training programmes, but interministerial training is the responsibility of this separate body) include opportunities to take courses in topics not directly related to an individual's job so that they serve not only the needs of the service but also the personal interest of public servants and their capacity to accomplish a career change if they wish. The programmes are also being designed as an instrument of social promotion to provide less-educated public servants with a second chance and those who are educated with a second initial training and the possibility to obtain the diploma-equivalence needed for promotion.

Anecdotal evidence suggests there are still significant inequalities in the access to training, not only between ministries but also between departments, hierarchies and genders. A difficulty with evaluating the performance of each ministry with regard to training is that available statistics are partial and reflect only averages. More detailed statistical analysis covering the three last years is due for completion by the end of 1998. What is known now is that, on average, ministries spent an equivalent of 3.5 per cent of their wage bill on training in 1995; and that, on average, public servants received 3.8 days of training year.

However, these figures do not reveal all. In fact many public servants did not have any professional training at all between 1992 and 1995 whereas others benefited well in excess of their entitlement. While disparities of this kind could reflect an attempt to correct inequalities of competence and of earlier access, they could also reflect their exacerbation.

Just as important as the volume of training required for successful implementation of change strategies in the public service is the nature of that training. Effective cost-cutting and quality improvement programmes involving public service labour unions in both the Swedish public services (the social partnership mechanics of which will be explored further in Chapter 7) and the United States City of Indianapolis have focused on enabling workers to measure the costs associated with their activities and raising awareness about these costs.

In the model developed by the Swedish municipal workers' union Kommunal -- which has set up an organizational development consultancy selling its services to more than 60 Swedish public service institutions -- workplace groups are established which, among other things, minutely measure costs in their departments, breaking down budgets into their smallest component parts. Although a controversial starting point in the view of some other public service unions, who fear that focusing on costs can deflect attention away from quality, Kommunal's approach is that quality initiatives can only realistically be based on developing knowledge and responsibility about cost management among all levels of workers.

In Indianapolis, under the terms of agreements on labour-management cooperation in the context of forcing in-house departments to compete with external providers to continue to provide such services as vehicle maintenance and solid waste collection, union representatives and other workers have taken turns to go on training courses which equip them with accounting skills. Now they are able to measure and exercise control over their own costs and bring pressure to bear on other departments to reduce theirs costs when their own competitiveness requires this.

33.  ILO: Freedom of association and collective bargaining, International Labour Conference, 81st Session, Geneva, 1994, p. 25.

34.  ibid.

35.  ILO: Freedom of association. Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition (revised), Geneva, 1996, para. 230.

36.  ILO: Freedom of association and collective bargaining, op. cit., pp. 68-72.

37.  For the list of what may be considered essential services see ILO: Freedom of association. Digest, op. cit.

38.  ILO: Freedom of association and collective bargaining, op. cit., p. 91.

39.  ILO: Note on the Proceedings, Joint Committee on the Public Service, Fifth Session, Geneva, 1994.

40.  ILO: Note on the Proceedings, Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment in the Public Service (Efficiency, Quality Improvement and Working Conditions), Geneva, 1995.

41.  M.M. Sissoko: "L'ajustement structurel et la gestion des ressources humaines: le cas de Mali", ILO Sectoral Working Paper, 1996, No. 89; K.R. Mudhoo: Adjustment in the Public Sector and Management of Human Resources in Mauritius, ILO Sectoral Working Paper, 1995, No. 92; A.A. Tall: "L'ajustement dans le secteur public et la gestion des ressources humaines: le cas du Sénégal", ILO Sectoral Working Paper, 1995, No. 87; A. Adérito: "Document d'orientation sur les politiques de privatisation du secteur public", ILO Sectoral Working Paper, 1995, No. 90.

42.  G. Ullrich (ed.): Labour and social dimensions of privatization and restructuring: Health care services (ILO, Geneva, 1998); T. Ishii (ed.): Labour and social dimensions of privatization and restructuring: Telecommunication services (ILO, Geneva, 1998); L. de Luca (ed.): Labour and social dimensions of restructuring (Public utilities: water, gas, electricity) (ILO, Geneva, 1998).

43.  ILO: Impact of structural adjustment ..., op. cit., pp. 21-22 and 37-38.

44.  ILO: Final report, Joint Meeting on the Impact of Structural Adjustment in the Public Service, Geneva, 1995, p. 22.

45.  R. Klitgaard: Cleaning up and invigorating the civil service, op. cit., p. 494.

46.  OECD: Ethics in the public service: Current issues and practice (Paris, 1997), Occasional Paper No. 14, p. 19.

47.  OECD: Issues and developments in public management: Survey 1996-1997 (Paris, 1997), p. 51.

48.  ibid.

49.  IPMS: Civil service 2000: A strategy for the 21st century (London, 1996), p. 49.

50.  OECD: Issues and developments in public management: Survey 1996-1997, op. cit., p. 94.

51.  N. Flynn and F. Strehl (eds.): Public sector management in Europe (Prentice Hall, Hertfordshire, 1996), p. 196.

52.  OECD: Issues and developments in public management: Survey 1996-1997, op. cit., p. 180.

53.  Treasury Board of Canada: Quality Services: An overview (1995), p. 4.

54.  Treasury Board of Canada: Quality Services: Guide IV -- A supportive learning environment (1995), p. 2.

55.  ibid., p. 1.

 SECTOR | ABOUT SECTOR | SECTORS | MEETINGS | PUBLICATIONS | WHAT'S NEW