Reference is made to the article ‘Chief civil servant refuses to say how many public jobs became permanent’ (May 10).

I daresay that, for correctness’ sake, fundamental crucial facts should have been highlighted in the article.

Prior to April 2017, previous administrations, on the eve of a general election, always reached an agreement with one particular trade union, which transformed the definite contracts of public sector employees to indefinite contracts. This scenario did not give any peace of mind to those employed on a definite contract basis. Practically, they lacked job security.

This was also discriminatory against those seeking a career in the public sector.

Public sector employees on a definite contract could only attain an indefinite status in the fourth year of employment.

This meant that these employees had a probationary period of three years while employees in other sectors benefited from a probationary period of not more than 12 months.

The directive issued by the Principal Permanent Secretary effectively did away with this discrimination and brought a change to the system.

Previously, nearly every public sector employee was on a definite contract basis tied to a three-year probationary period. The directive set up a system that was not dependent on a general election to ensure that public sector employees attain indefinite status.

The measure did not apply to those who occupied a position of trust and those who had positions specifically tied to short- and medium-term projects.

When one recalls the criticism meted out against the public sector’s decision-making and implementation processes, it is ironic that this newspaper is now frowning on the fact that a “10-working-days” deadline was imposed to get things done expeditiously!

The newspaper had every right to submit a freedom of information request. Likewise, the Office of the Principal Permanent Secretary believes that it acted according to the law regarding its decision not to divulge the requested information.

The Office of the Principal Permanent Secretary will defend this decision with the Information and Data Protection Commissioner and, no doubt, will abide by the commissioner’s ruling.

This is how the rule of law works.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.