Qatar’s human resources (HR) law obliges all government agencies to make optimal use of human resources to realise objectives, develop individual skills and maintain a fair and safe working environment.
Therefore, a complete understanding of their duties and rights and a clear-cut legal framework to deal with injustice drive employees to do their jobs efficiently.
But we are in a dilemma over a number of articles in the HR law that sometimes harm employees and strip them of their rights.
Due to problems caused by these ambiguous articles, civil servants have been impatiently waiting for more than two months for amendments to HR Law No. 8/2009.
In 2009, the Cabinet said a review of the law would be due after three years. Unfortunately, the committee in charge of drafting the amendments has not finished its work yet. We call on the committee to take into account the following suggestions:
1. Chapter III of the law says appointment to posts should be done on merit and through a public announcement. This article should be activated because it is evident that some unqualified people have been appointed and even promoted to higher positions.
2. Articles in Chapter IV do not make a distinction between operational and supervisory jobs. There’s no exact ministerial classification of operational and supervisory missions as some ministries and authorities carry out both duties at the same time. There should be a table of positions giving job descriptions and the qualifications required for promotion and bonuses.
3. There should be a clause in Chapter VI that outlines the evaluation of employees according to clear-cut standards. An employee may be stripped of a promotion because of the annual evaluation.
4. Employees with “good”, instead of “very good”, evaluation reports should be promoted according to seniority, as Chapter VII says. Why should a law-abiding civil servant be denied the right to promotion after spending the required number of years in one position? He might be qualified for a higher evaluation grade but his superior officer may withhold his due for personal reasons. A promotion in such a case would be qualitative, not exceptional. Authorities make exceptional promotions, while seniority automatically upgrades an employee to a higher post.
It would be useful if civil servants were surveyed on the draft amendments prior to their endorsement. Lawyers known for their patriotic feelings and legal experience should also be consulted.
Regulations should be explained in an uncomplicated way and annexed to the law, to avoid any future arguments over ambiguities, as loopholes can be a misfortune for civil servants.
LEGAL QUERIES
We thank our wise leadership for setting up a court for administrative disputes. But what we have observed is that the court accepts grievances that date back only to 2007, when it was founded. It rejects any claims of administrative abuse prior to that date. What will oppressed civil servants with claims prior to 2007 do?
We also wonder why most of the HR law’s articles are derived from other countries with different administrative environments. Wouldn’t it be appropriate if the law conforms to Qatar’s socio-economic and cultural characteristics?
Some retired civil servants have not got their financial and occupational dues. We wonder on what pretext these people are denied their rights.
Is there any intention to honour those claims according to the law? How would these people get their rights in case of stalling or rejection?
Finally, why do ministries and authorities refuse to pay end of service benefits that are stipulated in the law? End of service is not a donation or aid being paid from the pockets of these officials.
