Forgoing real benefits

Recently, 31 government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) have been reported to be giving illegal bonuses to their employees in 2012. The total amount of the bonuses that were simply just as lavishly given was Php 2.313 billion. Reports range from the bonuses being approved by the regulatory commission, the Government Commission for GOCCs (GCG), to the Commission on Audit (COA) not conferring final notices of disallowance, to facts stating that the GCG law excludes local water districts and economic zone authorities which are included in the 31 GOCCs, all in the light of PNoy’s good governance platform.

In this issue, there are many sides of the story: Everyone tries to defend himself or herself, why they give such bonuses, why they authorized these bonuses, why COA is asking just now, etc. Personally, what is the point of giving such incentives to these government officials? I have nothing against the 13th month pay, but I just want to know what specific guidelines should be followed in order to have such bonuses. Did they accomplish an important project well? Did they deliver the best service they could? How are these being assessed and regulated? With these questions, the problem now comes with the regulating body, the GCG. But you cannot forego that these bonuses are also considered illegal because they are above board benefits.

Bonuses are just additional compensation – they are gifts. But I agree with a column I have read in the Inquirer, that even if these are legal, it seems immoral that these GOCCs have such big bonuses. I just feel that they shouldn’t be given such incentives considering the work they’re doing. Philhealth, for instance, fails to achieve universal coverage. These people are given incentives without actually doing “well” in their jobs.

An incentive is something that is granted to people in exchange of what they have done. It acts as a reward or stimulus to motivate someone to perform or act in a way the incentive provider wants.

Inside the University, incentives are popularly known when a student who does not have class on Fridays but is suddenly lurking around the school because he or she has a talk to attend to, kasi may incentives. They are also present when there are “parties” hosted by different organizations, often tacking a manila paper with the list of professors who will give incentives in exchange of attendance to these parties at the booth.

Incentives can also be present during the general elections for the student government, where a student has the chance to showcase his or her platforms once elected and maybe some see that the incentive is doing “well” in campaigns. You have uniform t-shirts, displaying the persistence in asking students if they have already voted or not, and with not so well researched platforms but good-sounding ones gives them a good sounding voice to lead them to victory.

With regards to talks and parties, I think professors are really nice in considering giving incentives in exchange of just attendance to these events, especially to the parties. The thing that I’m concerned of is with the students, who are thinking that just having their attendance they would gain something of benefit to them (additional points in their grades) but not the real benefits. For instance, talks may yield additional knowledge or trigger interest in special topics because I know professors are rational enough to make students attend talks which only related to their class. Sometimes, the problem with the students is that they automatically perceive talks as boring and a waste of time. Maybe so, but only because of incentives.

These bonuses and incentives are generally much awaited by people. These are things someone look forward to and motivates them to perform at their best. However, back to the case of the government, it seems that they do not deserve the bonuses because really, are they performing at their best? And you know it, money is involved. These are the bonuses and the only thing that comes to mind is corruption, which is becoming more and more a normal thing in our government. Disappointing but true.

In the case of the University, it seems that the concept of incentives is taken for granted. Some students tend to have their attendance in talks and seminars without actually participating. Maybe that is why it is just called  an incentive – just be there and you’ll get a 4.0. What do the students get out of it? I mean, with parties in particular (talks are forgivable). Moreover, because of this culture, students also become hunters of incentives; hunters in that they just do something if there is an incentive for doing that certain something. I know people would say, “kaya nga incentive eh,” but don’t you think incentives should be given for worthwhile actions?

I’m not opposed to giving incentives. I just think that incentives should be given appropriately, in the right manner with the right objectives, not just to let activities of organizations gain attendance, not just to let others get something they don’t deserve, not just to let someone win elections just because of campaigning well and looking good and not just to make someone do something he or she has got nothing to do with. It comes to the point that incentives are not really fitting to someone but because you give incentives, they are forced to do it, thereby forgoing the real benefits.