I agree such shitty matters exist...sometimes inferior regulars are retained or even promoted on their ability to bootlick their bosses rather than based on their performance, ability and inherant potential.
This is one inherant problem found within any uniform organisations let alone ours. Unlike commercial companies, a uniform outfit cannot hire and fire as it wishes and still retain the same operating capacity. Its has to painstakingly groom and nuture its pool of regulars to staff the various manpower demands within the organisation. For example, a armed forces simply cannot head-hunt a service chief whilst a commercial company can simply look for suitable external candidates to fill their CEO position, such candidates may have never worked in the company and even at times have no prior experience in the industry . A uniformed personnel would have to be groomed and trained through various appts in the organisation to equip him with the right experience and skill sets to assume senior appts. On the same note, the same applies to most if not all uniform appts. in the military service.
The problem is a tricky one, as contracts serve as a double-edged sword.
On one side, it is nessasary to tie people to contracts due to the nature of national defence coupled with the inherent long training and grooming process.
On the other side, contracts breeds complacency and in some cases even redundancy as the regular may not be performing and imposes his work on others. There is this infamous hokkien quote: (Whether i work, or i do not work, i just have to wait for the 10th of each calender month to collect the same pay cheque)
In a perfect world, every orgianisation would want to only retain capable staff and purge the incapable ones from the system.
Sad to say in reality, sometimes the incapable and inept are retained and even promoted due to factors such as manpower shortages, organisational restructuring and force transformation etc
Thats my 2 cents worth of opinion on the matter....what do the rest of u think
