Retiring package for Article 71 office holders, an albatross?

Salary administration, or compensation for working people in the country, is a headache for the government, employers and labour.

It was in an attempt to address this challenge that the Ghana Universal Salary Structure (GUSS) was introduced, which was subsequently replaced by the Single Spine Salary Structure (SSSS) in 2010.

The implementation of the SSSS has not been without strong disagreement; as of now some labour unions are agitating for the payment of market premium and placement on proper levels of the structure.

This is a clear indication that salary administration does not lend itself to simple implementation and popular acceptance by the working people.

Salary administration became more complex when the 1992 Constitution identified a section of working people as Article 71 public office holders who appear to receive preferential treatment during their working life and after exiting employment.

In 1993, when the First Parliament of the Fourth Republic came into being, there was a huge debate over the emoluments of Members of Parliament (MPs) and Ministers of State.

It will be recalled that accommodation for the MPs became a big issue until a place was found for them at the SSNIT Flats at Sakumono.

The public and MPs have always been locked up in a tussle over vehicles for our legislators, even though the money for the purchase is a loan.

This debate has always drawn in other Article 71 office holders, such as Ministers of State and judges who are provided free accommodation, vehicles and other perks.

As if that is not enough, the retirement benefits of Article 71 office holders have always ruffled feathers, with some members of the public expressing outrage at the package, including huge amounts of money, vehicles and houses.

The Daily Graphic thinks it is not just enough for Parliament, the elected representatives of the people, and the President to determine the emoluments and other benefits for Article 71 office holders. As workers too, their conditions of service must be in line with what obtains in the Public Service of Ghana.

We are of the view that the time has come for another look to be taken at the emoluments of Article 71 office holders to take into account the resources of the land.

Unfortunately, when the national cake is being shared in our part of the world, little note is taken of the resources of the land.

The recent brouhaha over the retirement accommodation for former President John Mahama would have been needless if all this while the concerns of the people had been factored into the package for all Article 71 office holders.

The decision to give office and residential accommodation to all our former heads of state cannot promote sustainable development because we need a policy that takes care of the present generation while providing for the future.

The Daily Graphic is of the view that if we do not beat a quick retreat from the policy prescribing benefits for Article 71 office holders, it will over-burden the state and become an albatross.

Public service, as President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo has said, is not a place for making money and those who agree to serve the people must do so with the interest of the public at the forefront and not personal gain.