Pakistan Observer

Bill for regularization of 100,000 contractual, adhoc workers passed

Irfan Aligi

Friday, March 15, 2013 - Karachi—Sindh Assembly on Thursday announced to confirm more than 100, 000 contractual employees as well as those that had been working on ad hoc basis. This the Sindh Assembly had done by passing a Bill, Sindh Regularization of Ad Hoc and Contract Employees Bill-2013. According to the Bill thus passed, contractual and ad hoc basis employees working in grade-I to grade-18 would benefit from the passage of the Bill. The lawmakers had greatly hailed the government for passing that Bill in favour of the people. However, those employees that were working on daily wages basis and work charges would not benefit from the Bill.

All the contractual employees and those working on ad hoc basis in different public departments would fall under the category of confirmed employees from now onward. Sindh Law Minister Muhammad Ayaz Soomro had tabled the Bill in the House while opposition leader in the Sindh Assembly, Syed Sardar Ahmed from Muttahida Qaumi Movement had suggested to the Speaker that the Bill should be deferred at least for a day as the Bill was illegal. He said that the government had provided a legal shelter to unlimited employees. The MQM was not against the steps for confirming the contractual employees but only those that were in real working as the contractual and ad hoc workers should only be confirmed.

Sindh Local Government Minister Agha Siraj Khan Durrani while responding to opposition leader Ahmed said that the Bill pertained to the poor only and should not be opposed.

Soomro also said that the Bill was in lines with the provision of law and it was the commitment of the Pakistan People’s party (PPP) that the contractual and ad hoc employees would be confirmed. The Bill would help eradicate the poverty and would help the poor to raise their standard of living. The Sindh Assembly had already passed a Bill under which contractual employees of grade-17 and 18 were confirmed so the poor should also be considered as eligible.
comments powered by Disqus