Editor,

REFER TO the story, "Govt releases guidelines for public service restructuring” (The New Times, August 8). I’ve witnessed cases of human resources managers asking supervisors to revise their low performing staff’s evaluations to "help” them not be terminated. My point here is: How do we avoid "sentiments” in the public service? 

I’ve had friends who lost their jobs in restructuring simply because their bosses didn’t like them. 

How do we avoid this bias/nepotism? I think we need a more objective mechanism for evaluation of staff performance, if this restructuring is to bear any fruit other than cost reduction…which is hard to achieve with inefficient and ineffective "leftovers”. 

One proposal for objective evaluations is third-party outsourced staff evaluators.

Arthur, Rwanda

************************

EMPLOYEE LAY-OFF is a normal process in modern economies where we align supply and demand. I understand the Government of Rwanda is planning to do more with less and this is the reality of the new world. 

Technology has simplified a lot that you don’t need countless employees to perform complex work; you need just smart human capital to use technology and agile processes to deliver service and hence become competitive. However, the Government of Rwanda and private sector should introduce unemployment insurance – something I have seen in developed countries – where the laid-off employee receives at least 75 per cent of their salary for the next 12 months (plus termination benefits). 

This will help both sides (the employer and employee) to move smoothly in the current economic environment. Also, banks should participate in this process where they can put on hold mortgage payment claims till the employee gets another source of revenue (of course in limited time).

Cyubahiro, Canada