Dr Merang
Kohima
As an educated youth looking to secure a position in academia in Nagaland for several years now, I have given up all hope and realized that it is a road that will take me nowhere. While the discontentment and anger expressed by the student community against the absorption of 147 contract employee under the department of Higher Education in Nagaland may have offered a glimmer of hope initially; of awakening public consciousness about rights, equality, fairness and justice, and about the importance of quality higher education. However, on deeper reflection, one may realize that the current movement against absorption by numerous student bodies and the students’ community in general is merely a phenomenon that would neither lead to realization of the above mentioned values nor improving the quality of higher education in Nagaland even if the absorption order is revoked. The rhetoric around the current movement reeks of deep seeded hypocrisy and morally convoluted arguments without any sense of consistency. Emotions may be genuine but certainly the rationales are superficial. This fight is a fight to uphold and legitimize an unfair and unjust system and ultimately aiding its continuity.
The purpose of my argument here is not to support the absorption of contract employee, even though it may sound that way, but to question the inconsistency of our moral compass and our sense of fairness, equality, rights and justice. I believe any reasonable person would not deny that the ethos of our society today is characterized by a healthy tolerance for corruption, denial, inequality and unfairness manifested in different forms. In fact, corruption is so internalized that fairness appears like corruption, while not engaging in corruption may invoke disbelief. Within a context such as ours, the question is, how do we understand fairness, justice, rights and equality. Selective and situational outrage towards injustice and corruption is a reflection of such internalization. Students and any member of the public have the right to protest and demand justice when injustice is perceived or committed. Yet when such protest in its foundational basis negates the very values that it purports to espouse in the name of public interest, it loses its credibility and becomes a breeding ground for contesting interest.
Since we are talking about justice, equality, rights and fairness, we might as well lay down all our cards on the table. Primary argument against the absorption hinge around accusations of “stealing jobs, “amoral”, and “corruption” and countless unsavoury labelling of contempt and mockery all across social media. While the concerns raised by the agitators are legitimate and they have the right to agitate, let us also pay attention to the nuances of the issue. Shortage of faculties in higher education institutions in Nagaland has been a long standing issue with no room for other academic engagements other than teaching. Even after upgradation of our institutions to impart masters and Ph.D. level education, no measures have been taken by the government to recruit appropriate faculties to teach such courses. Anyone familiar with higher education is well aware that in certain cases just having a masters’ degree with NET qualification is not sufficient to impart quality masters level and above education. Very specific subject matter specialization is often essential in many disciplines.
In addition to shortage of faculties due to non-recruitment by the government, the existing system of faculty recruitment through CESE by NPSC is simply not calibrated to recruit such faculties. Anyone familiar with CESE would agree that there is slim to no chance for any accomplished scholar of any discipline to get through the CESE process. The system is not designed to select such candidate, which is a gross injustice to many deserving candidates and a violation of UGC guidelines as well. Besides that, contractual teachers have for many years filled that void in our colleges. Whether through side door or backdoor, the need of the time was and is being fulfilled through their service with outrageously low pay for a full time teaching position. Our students’ community and public in general seems to have not yet arrived to a conscious realization about labour exploitation of contractual employees not only in higher education department but across all departments.
The condition of currently absorbed contractual employees is nothing short of gross labour exploitation and denial of fair compensation amounting to human rights violation. But for whatever reason we are not concerned about it. It is utter shame to say that they should not speak of “sacrifice” because they have been “paid”. It cannot be compared with the police department issue because we are talking about different needs, service and priority. The severity of the issue with higher education is that even a day of absence of all the contractual employees would severely paralyze the colleges, while some department did come to the verge of closure due to lack of teachers but now we know why it did not. Shouldn’t our students’ community and anyone who care about education and human rights be demanding that the contract teachers be fairly compensated for their service? Does our right to fairness and justice triumph over their right to not be exploited? Should our right to equal opportunity triumph at the expense of someone else’s sacrifice? Where were the fair minded student community when contractual appointments were made to meet their needs, and now that their service has been utilized and time has arrived for us to look for job we tell them to come in line? Maybe it is true when we say we are not against any person but against the system, but we should also remember that the system is made up of people. Emotions may run high, and rightly so, but we cannot drive reason and logic off the cliff.
We must also remember that if the absorption order is revoked, the government is under no obligation to requisition the 147 post to NPSC since those are not sanctioned post. They could simply continue the current process of recruitment. On the other hand, though it is a contentious issue, absorption of ad-hoc/contract/guest faculties in Indian colleges and other departments are not new. For example, regularization of temporary teachers in Delhi University in the year 1979-80, 87-88 and 1998-99, absorption of temporary teachers in 2008 in Rajasthan, regularization of around 700 guest lecturers in West Bengal in 2010, regularization of 27,000 employees under Punjab government and 70,000 employees under Delhi government. But since we are fighting for fairness and justice, if the 147 post were to requisition to NPSC, the current aspirants should have no claim over the post since these are positions needed 10 or 15 years ago. Therefore, aspirants eligible within that appropriate back dated age bracket should be given the opportunity to fill the positions.
When we say everyone should have equal opportunity and given fair chance through NPSC, especially with regard to Combined Educational Service Exam, are we saying that the existing system provides equal opportunity and is conducted fairly? Maybe it is maybe it is not. We might as well look at the condition of higher education in our state. How many of those “fairly” selected teachers through NPSC has taken our institutions to new heights? We will most likely find that our institutions today have no noticeable academic advances than what they were 15 or 20 years ago. “Fairly” selected teachers have not made our institutions any better and neither have the “contract” teachers made our institutions worse. In fact, in departments with masters’ level and above which requires highly specialised faculty, contract teachers have been instrumental, sometimes solely, in imparting very specific and specialized knowledge to the students, which apparently the “fair” selection process could not offer.
Given such condition, the question of compromising academic integrity by absorption of contract faculty does not arise. I believe we could make a strong case that appointments through backdoor or side doors or any door other than the front door has better chance of scouting and absorbing the right, deserving, and motivated candidates if we care about the quality of education. As someone who deeply cares about academia in our state, I would any day take my chances with contractual appointees. All NPSC entrants are not deserving and all contract appointees are not undeserving. Apart from the perceived fairness, the “fair” process have not delivered anything meaningful and worthwhile systematically and institutionally. If after serving in higher education institute for 10,15 or 20 years, the only notable achievement a teacher could present is that “I came through NPSC”, that is just shameful. Such teachers have no business teaching in institutes of higher learning. Yet I do not blame our teachers that came through NPSC. Most of them came with motivation to get a job, not academic zeal, and they achieved it and got moulded within an institutional culture that continues to reinforce the system we have now.
There is no doubt about their dedication and sincerity but I believe it has nothing to do with the “fair” selection process. The run to secure Ph.D. degree after being “fairly” selected to open prospect for future promotion, and to be able to enrol research scholars to earn credentials for institutional reputation is yet another disease that has infected our academic ethos. Our institutional trajectories are guided by people with agenda to keep the system in which they have rooted comfort unchanged. Well, it is not illegal but certainly unfair, unjust, amoral and perhaps legitimized corruption. So, is it possible that the current agitation is also underpinned by such motivation to reinforce a systemic process in which they have rooted comfort? Because to a critical thinking mind, the agitators cannot be against corruption when they demand that “fair” process be enforced; a process that is inherently unfair. As Augustine of Hippo wrote in the 4th century AD “for I think a law that is not just, is not actually a law”.
The appetite and tolerance for corruption in our society has become the glue that binds our social fabric especially in terms of social and political interaction. Just how many of the government employees in Nagaland, from the lowest to the highest level, past and present, do we think have secured their job fair and square? That includes your mother, father, sister, brother, uncle, aunty, nieces and nephews, friends, and all the rest of the God fearing people. We have not even counted the contract employees, project fund allocations, contract allocations etc. etc. Are we to actually believe even for a moment that the current absorption of the contractual employee is the problem? No, it is a symptom of a bigger rot that we as a society have not only tolerated but nurtured, protected, and beneficiary till now. The current protestors are not unemployed because of the absorption, but because of a larger and much deeper systemic failure which they seem to have completely missed. To carry home this logic, what do we have to say about the backdoor appointments of the past who are still serving in higher education institutions and many other departments? And what do we have to say about the “fair” NPSC process of conducting exams and interviews, past and present and across all services, which never seem to free itself from public suspicion about its fairness? If there is smoke maybe there is fire.
We cannot have problem with the current absorption without having problem with the past absorptions. Some might argue that we have to start somewhere. And they would be exactly right in saying that. But justice would not be served and the system would continue to remain unfair, unjust and exploitable. In fact, why not demand for complete adherence to UGC guidelines for recruitment into higher education institutions? Why not demand for proper constitution of selection committee for CESE interviews in line with UGC guideline? Of course that would render many of the CESE aspirant insufficiently qualified to compete for want of experience, research and publications since it carries considerable points in recruitment process, but at least the better qualified and academically motivated aspirants would get a fair chance and hopefully pull our institutions out of the ditch we are currently in.
Why not go a step further for justice and fairness sake and demand evaluation by UGC the already selected Assistant Professors through CESE? Let us ask whether proper criteria were used to evaluate the academic credential of the candidates, and whether proper selection committee was constituted for the interview. And if not, call for the revocation of their appointments. We cannot continue to take academic integrity for granted in the name of “fair” process and job aspiration. When talking about fairness, equal opportunity and justice, I believe that is not too much to ask for? In fact, that should be the benchmark. If we think that the hard work, sacrifice and dedication of the contract employees is no ground for absorption because they have been “paid”, the hard work and dedication of candidates who cleared CESE and many others aspirants currently working hard is no ground to assume that they are the deserving ones when academic integrity, norms and procedures are conveniently overlooked. We cannot hold back any of our cards if the fight has to be genuine. Anger and frustration cannot be grounds on which to demand a process that is inherently unfair to the most deserving candidates. Hypocrisy cannot fight corruption no matter by what name we call it.
Opportunities were never equal and the system was never fair to the deserving candidate to begin with. It is no wonder that most of the highly academically accomplished Nagas are based outside of Nagaland. Our institutions of higher education are soulless, just a certification pathway, a means of employment and the thought process of my fellow aspirants currently protesting largely embodies that. Anyone familiar with academic requirements and recruitment process must be aware by now that the current “fair” process specifically and very efficiently filters out the most academically motivated and achieved candidates almost as if by design. Now, is that what we want? Whether the system is deliberately designed so or not is arguable but the fact remains that it is unfair and unjust. Therefore, where does our sense of fairness lies under the given circumstances when we demand for equal opportunity and fair exams?
To my dear college students who are currently drawn apart by this issue, fairness and justice are not onetime procedure but a process. None of us would disagree that the rightful and deserving people should get equal opportunity and fairness, only then can we call it justice. How many of us could confidently say with absolute certainty that we have passed or are passing our exams fairly in terms of scoring and attendance? It is a question of integrity, dignity and fairness that has consequences on how current teachers are selected and how future teachers will be selected. How many of us would be brave enough to say that in the name of fairness there should be no consideration whatsoever on any ground in marks allocation and attendance? That assessment of student’s performance by teachers should be purely based on merit to make it fair and square.
To be completely honest, a considerable number of our current protesting aspirants might have never graduated without such “unfair” consideration, and many, if not more, current college students would not clear their exams without consideration on humanitarian ground by their teachers. But since we all seems to want fairness and justice why not demand that academic rules on marks allocation and attendance be strictly implemented so that justice is done to the genuinely hard working students. Why not demand that performance of past and current students be fairly revaluated in order to uphold the principle of fairness and justice? Only then the truly deserving candidates would get a fair and equal opportunity to compete on the ground of merit and transparency which has been denied to them. If humanitarian ground is not a reason to absorb the contract employee, it is also not a reason to promote students and hand over graduation degree. Such “unfair” and undue considerations to students are rampant at the expense of hard working students. But such process is considered illegal, nepotism, unfair, injustice and corruption with regard to the contract employees. On closer examination it seems that the student community are more concerned about job and not about fairness, equal opportunity, transparency and justice. The yardstick of fairness should be uniformly applied.
The solidarity statements issued by numerous students’ union against the absorption rather seem coincidental and not driven by a sustained vision to fight for the welfare of the students’ community they claim to represent. It can be sometimes confusing to understand the real purpose and goal of the existence of these unions. While there is nothing wrong in them issuing such statements, right thinking citizens cannot help but question the purpose, values and principles driving these unions. Unions that are supposed to act as a counter balance towards corruption, injustice, exploitation and deprivations have largely remained dependent for wisdom and money on the very entity they are supposed to fight against. Students unions leeching on to politicians, bureaucrats, teachers and anyone with means to fund their endless activities like fresher’s day, parting social, sports meet, jubilees, conferences and other student-life experiences have eroded away any sense of agency and independence from their existence, while fighting for the rights and welfare of the students has just become a circumstantial and coincidental hiccup to be done away with. Tokenistic action by the unions mirrors the government’s tokenistic, once in a blue moon, beneficial action done for the public good. Imagine our unions, led by the NSF and the tribal students’ unions and every union in between waging a sustained movement for total reform of at least the education system in our state. Wouldn’t that be a sight to behold? No one has betrayed our students’ community more than the countless students’ unions we have in Nagaland. It is questionable whether the statement issued by various unions against the absorption stands to serve the reputation of the unions or the welfare of the students’ community. Either way unless the root cause of the problem is address, such statement will neither serve the unions’ reputation nor do anything to fight injustice, nepotism and corruption. In other words, even if the absorption order is revoked, the system will remain the same and our higher education institutions will continue to see the rot. As the comedian George Carlin said “… if we have selfish, ignorant citizens, we are gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders…it is garbage in, garbage out”.
To match the revolutionary fire in our belly here are some ideas that could bring about systemic change and restore justice, equality, fairness and meritocracy:
1. Demand for complete adherence to UGC guidelines for recruitment of Assistant Professor into Higher Education Institute.
2. In addition to the current demand against absorption, demand for evaluation and revocation of all past backdoor appointments under higher education.
3. Demand for evaluation of past and present recruitments done through NPSC, CESE with regard to selection criteria and constitution of selection committee.
4. Demand that Department of Higher and Technical Education, Nagaland directs the colleges for re-evaluation of past and present students’ academic performance on ground of unfair practices and violation of academic integrity, and demand strict adherence to academic norms for evaluation of students’ performance.
5. Once the higher education is reformed, take the revolution to the rest of the departments.
For justice, equality and meritocracy to prevail, principles of fairness must be upheld at all level of education, not only in job recruitment.
