Fixers and inefficient workers

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO 

By March Fianza

The dictionary defines it as someone who intervenes with authorities for a person in trouble, usually using underhand or illegal methods for a fee, while the Thesaurus levelled it to an “influence peddler or an influential person, an important person whose actions and opinions strongly influence the course of events.” Apparently, the definitions talk about a person outside of the organization where an action is being requested.

At the door entrance of many government offices one reads the tarp signs that shout: “Report fixers” or “Bawal ang Fixer”. In some offices, the sign says: “Report the name of the fixer, name and location of government office… etc.” These signs point to no other but to persons outside of the organization. What if the “fixer” is an insider?

Early this year, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) reported that 67 government offices failed in the anti-red tape test it conducted for 2013.  According to results of the Report Card Survey (RCS), the offices of the Land Registration Authority (LRA), Land Transportation Office (LTO) and National Prosecution Service (NPS) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) are the worst when it comes to frontline service delivery. My personal evaluation of these agencies goes with the CSC’s findings. Although as far as I have seen and based on what people have experienced, there are many agencies in the Cordillera that are failures when it comes to delivery of frontline services.

Republic Act No. 9485, also known as the “Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007” or “ARTA” was crafted supposedly to “eliminate red tape and improve frontline service delivery in government agencies.” The CSC said government clients are given the ARTA survey form right after they avail of a frontline service of a government office.

Compliance with ARTA requirements sees to it that frontline offices have the Citizen’s Charter visible to transacting clients and an anti-fixing campaign poster, if frontline staff wear identification cards, if there are no hidden transaction costs, if there is a manned public assistance and complaints desk, and if the frontline unit observes the no noon break policy. In addition, it checks overall client satisfaction in terms of service quality, physical setup, basic facilities and respondent-client satisfaction.

How effective is the law? The CSC report mentioned the LRA. There is no doubt in the report as there are numerous complaints of office workers unwilling to reply to requests or delay the issuance of public documents. This, in addition to hundreds of complaints of fake titles scattered nationwide that were issued by the agency and that are now subject to costly court proceedings. Here, the fixers are insiders or part of the organization. The common term is “sindikato”. Our clan, my in-laws and other innocent Ibaloy families in Baguio and Benguet are victims of these scammers.

In the case of the LTO, this is overshadowed and less comparable to what transpires in other agencies. What I know is that those private persons assisting private clients for more speedy transactions may not be described as fixers as they only guide the clients on what to do. They do not sign documents nor occupy government positions, but of course receive voluntary money for services of assistance to clients. There is not enough proof that they can be branded as fixers because the real Macoy is the guy that sits behind a government table.  

On the other hand, there are government workers who bow down to pressure from powerful and influential personalities for fear of receiving an unwanted “early retirement” order from his boss. In other words, he may be removed permanently from his source of bread and butter. How can this be checked with the ARTA provisions?   

My attention was caught by a provision in the ARTA implementing rules that stated “re-engineering the systems and procedures of each office or agency with regard to the manner of transacting with the public. Thus, each agency is required to simplify frontline service procedures, formulate service standards for clients to observe or follow in every transaction and make these standards known to the client.” But how can changes be made if the personnel in the offices already have their own “standards” that they have been practicing since they occupied their positions?

Another interesting ARTA IRR provision states that “No application or request shall be returned to the client without appropriate action. In case an application or request is disapproved, the officer or employee who rendered the decision shall send a formal notice to the client within five working days from the receipt of the request.” These are violated repeatedly but no one is punished. And what about a personnel who stays out from office longer than the time it takes one to pee?

What about frontline personnel who make their clients go around the bush. Incidentally as I was on this article, my in-laws informed me that DENR personnel at Wangal and Baguio were pointing fingers at other regarding the issuance of a certification that has been requested. Without studying the situation in order to be able to address the problem, both offices quickly claimed they cannot issue the required document saying it was not within their jurisdiction. Who then will issue the document? Paging DENR RED Paquito Moreno. You have incompetent workers under you.  – ozram.666@gmail.com