The personnel directors at the legislature

Some time ago, I e-mailed an old friend and rather half-jokingly, half-seriously, urged him to fire a government employee I did not particularly care for. My friend was (and still is, I gather) a board member of the government agency that, for unfathomable reasons, continues to employ the mainland American government worker I so despise.

To my simultaneous disappointment and admiration, however, my old friend would have none of it. He promptly informed me, in very diplomatic terms, that, as a board member, he was in no position to be rendering hiring and firing decisions. Such decisions, he informed me, remained in the exclusive purview of the director and the personnel department. It would be quite improper for a board member of any government agency to influence individual employment decisions, he said.

In telling me all of this, my board member friend took the liberty to complain about hiring and firing pressure from our incorrigible legislators on the hill. Evidently, quite a few of our legislators feel it is their direct responsibility to influence individual hiring decisions throughout the myriad government agencies. They even improperly put pressure on government board members and directors, which is totally improper and probably should be made illegal.

Indeed, when a constituent lobbies a CNMI Senator to help hire his son or daughter at a particular government agency, the Senator should openly state that this is completely out of his hands. The Congressman should refuse to see such constituents and refer them instead to the CNMI Personnel Department or appropriate government agency.

Our legislators and government board members (except for the top Secretary positions) should not involve themselves in the mundane hiring decisions, because when legislators act as hiring bosses, they only promote corrupt, influence-peddling big government and threaten personal liberties.

Moreover, it would be in a Congressman’s best interest to detach himself from ordinary government hiring decisions. By refusing to entertain the job-pleading constituent, the congressman can then concentrate on doing the things that are properly part of his actual job description: namely, promoting liberty. To accomplish this end and also avoid the unpleasant hassle of having to deal with desperate constituents seeking jobs in big government, our legislators should pass a law barring themselves from improperly influencing ordinary individual hiring decisions at the government agency level.

Once our legislators pass this necessary legislation, they can then turn to their menacing and desperate government job-seeking constituents (“Hire my wife or I won’t vote for you”) and confidently say, “If I were to comply with your request, I am afraid I would be breaking the law and risking impeachment. I am very sorry. Goodbye.”

And if they don’t pass such legislation, then, my dear congressmen, while I don’t want anybody hired, can I at least lobby to have a few rascals fired? I won’t vote for you if you don’t promise to have so-and-so fired or at least never hired, which, coincidentally, also happens to mesh with my views on limited government. Thank you.

Strictly a personal view. Charles Reyes Jr. is a regular columnist of Saipan Tribune. Mr. Reyes may be reached at charlesraves@hotmail.com