The positions and ranks of civil servants below the county level are parallel.

Recently, the seventh meeting of the Central Deep Reform Group reviewed the Opinions on Establishing a Parallel System of Civil Servants' Positions and Ranks in Organs below the County Level (hereinafter referred to as the Opinions). The meeting pointed out that it is also good and feasible for grass-roots civil servants to open up channels for promotion outside their posts and carry out this reform in organs below the county level throughout the country. This means that grassroots civil servants will "enjoy the treatment of officials without being officials".

Grade evaluation should jump out of "company-level dependence"

The focus and difficulty of civil servant rank reform is the fairness of civil servant assessment, reward and punishment, and promotion and demotion. We should strictly restrain the will of officials and establish democratic evaluation, appeal investigation, burden of proof, accountability and other systems.

The Opinions clarify the reform of the civil service rank system, which is undoubtedly expected. It is also an echo of the "establishment of a system in which civil servants' positions and ranks are parallel and ranks are linked to wages" proposed by the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee. It needs to be clear that the civil service rank system is a part of the "civil service system" related to the government ruled by law. It needs to follow the principle of rule of law, and should also make efforts in technical methods, mechanism design and related systems.

As far as the system reform itself is concerned, I think we should pay attention to at least several aspects: First, we should dissect the institutional reasons of the existing system. The rank and position of civil servants have always been closely linked. One of the disadvantages is that there is no position and the rank cannot be promoted. At or above the county level, there are vacant positions such as researchers and inspectors; There are no vacancies at or below the department level. The second drawback is that the rank of civil servants is too dependent on the rank of the unit where they work, which leads to the fact that the temple is small and the monk is small. It is obviously unfair that a competent old criminal police officer in a county-level public security bureau may only be at the department level when he retires, while ordinary people in state ministries and commissions are at least at the department level before they retire. This is a system problem, which needs to be adjusted in system design.

Secondly, the goal of this reform should be as clear as possible: the goal of the department level should be to relatively separate ranks from posts, assess promotions separately, and establish corresponding treatment systems. The evaluation and adjustment of corresponding ranks should be based on morality, ability, performance and qualifications, but the level of the unit to which they belong should also be considered. Civil servants below the county level can be seen everywhere, especially at the bureau level; Or according to the classification of civil servants, reasonably determine the range of ranks.

As for the salary and property status of civil servants at all levels, categories and individuals, we should strictly follow the principle of transparency and accept the supervision of the whole society. Those who have illegitimate interests should be dealt with according to law, and if necessary, they will be demoted and removed from office; If you accept any gift, you should report it in time and make it public, and prove that it is not illegal.

However, the rank reform of civil servants needs many related institutional reform measures. For example, improve the exit mechanism of civil servants and abolish the de facto iron rice bowl. For each civil servant position, its responsibilities should be clearly defined as far as possible, and its performance should be evaluated internally and externally. According to the appointment system of public institutions, some civil servants are also given appointment system and lifelong system, which breaks the lifelong system. For another example, different types of civil servants in the same rank should be treated differently according to the complexity, danger and urgency of official duties: for example, the treatment of criminal police is higher than that of most types of civil servants.

Another difficulty is the fairness of civil servant evaluation, rewards and punishments, promotion and demotion and related incentive mechanisms. For a long time, the mechanism of appointing officials in charge has caused a lot of harm. Relevant reforms should strictly restrain the will of the Chief Executive and establish democratic evaluation, appeal investigation, burden of proof and accountability systems. If the person in charge especially advocates the promotion of someone's rank, he shall bear the burden of proof to the organization and the public, and bear the "guarantee responsibility" for the morality, ability, performance, awareness of the rule of law and law-abiding status of the promoted person; For unfair and improper termination, the responsibility of the responsible person should be strictly investigated.

In short, in this reform, we should pay attention to the right medicine, meticulous methods, openness and fairness, law enforcement and the rule of law, especially to control the responsible persons at all levels.

Chen Bulei (Professor, Southwest University of Political Science and Law, expert on civil servant salary reform)

I'm afraid it's difficult to implement "parallel position and rank"

In the actual annual assessment of civil servants, although there are many documents that require civil servants to be fair and true as far as possible, the actual implementation effect is not ideal due to the limitations of the world and the solidification of interests.

As a grass-roots civil servant, it is very gratifying to hear the news that "you can enjoy the treatment of officials without being an official" and to see a programmatic document on rank reform: after all, it is conducive to solving the problem that welfare benefits remain at a low level for a long time due to job bottlenecks.

But while I am gratified, there are also several hidden worries: the implementation of this system is a good thing from the perspective of overall social benefits and promoting fair treatment at the grassroots level; But for individual grass-roots civil servants, it does not necessarily mean that wages and psychological feelings must be fair.

There are two obvious meanings for grass-roots civil servants below the county level to implement the parallel position and rank. First, the purpose of policy implementation is to encourage grassroots diligent civil servants to work harder; Second, it is necessary to effectively and fairly select civil servants with diligent characteristics to motivate them, thus playing a role in boosting morale.

However, in the actual annual assessment of civil servants, although the relevant parties have tried their best to introduce fair and true opinions and systems, the actual implementation effect is not ideal, and it has largely fallen into the strange circle of "Hello, I am good, everyone is good". No matter whether you are diligent or not, no matter how big or small your work performance is, as long as there are no obvious problems, the annual assessment is above "competent". The assessment under the kidnapping of human feelings and relationships is likely to make diligent civil servants and idlers achieve promotion and salary increase, but it is difficult to reflect the differences in ability and performance; And this hidden injustice of "doing well but not doing well" will eventually run counter to the original intention of grassroots civil servants to implement parallel positions and ranks.

Speaking of it, the parallel of position and rank is a basic system endowed by the civil service law, including the grassroots, but it has not been implemented for quite some time. There are many reasons: for example, the financial resources at the grass-roots level are limited, such as the inertial cognition that positions are linked to treatment-to some extent, the treatment of officials is also a way to show their identity and brush their sense of superiority. In the end, it is also to maximize the power gains in the hands of some local leaders, such as selling deputy directors and directors as "officials" and accepting rent-seeking through the private relationship of these "officials". first