We must insist on fairness in recruitment

My senior colleague, Prof Winnie Mitullah, recently expressed her concern regarding what she considers unnecessary interference in the recruitment of staff at the University of Nairobi and went on to chastise some union officials who have protested in some of the instances.

The professor’s piece, published earlier this week in these pages, was full of ironies and contradictions that point to the complexities involved in recruitment of university staff in Kenya, especially senior administrators.

Prof Mitullah, apart from not explaining what “interference” constitutes, also gave undue credit to University of Nairobi Staff Union (UASU) officials while at the same time skirting around the real issues that have emerged around the politics of recruitment to senior positions in Kenya, the universities included.

First, I do not believe that the current crop of UASU officials are capable of interfering with any process at the university. They have consistently shown a lack of critical focus in thought and expression.

In the current staff mobilisation over remuneration, the impetus has often come from below, from the membership, not the union leadership.

Second, and most important, Prof Mitullah’s piece seems to have been motivated by recent press releases in which the unionists have called for merit in staff appointments.

SHOCKING

Coming from a senior and respected university professor, the view that pushing for merit as a key concern amounts to “interference” is shocking.

Her view that “if the unions are not satisfied with the process, they can use administrative and legal means to register their complaints (and) if all these channels fail, unions can call out the membership to demand action” is not practical in present-day Kenya.

The advice is naïve. We know how difficult it is to reverse recruitment at certain levels even when the process is obviously flawed.

In a country where ethnicity, corruption and regional considerations hold sway, it is partly by “interfering” with recruitment processes that a degree of justice and fairness can be ensured. In any event, the considerations that Prof Mitullah suggests — gender, ethnic minorities and physical ability — are themselves “interference” and good reason for more “interference”.

I consider drawing attention to possible foul play to be the kind of “interference” that all stakeholders, including trade unionists, need to engage in to stop any unfair practices by appointing authorities.

It is a way of ensuring accountability in a country where virtually everyone in a position of authority wants to ensure that “my people” are strategically placed, regardless of whether they are qualified for the job.

Considerations such as ethnic and regional balance should be secondary to basic and experiential qualifications because that is the only way to ensure that merit finds a home in our universities.

Subordinating such requirements to “balancing” is unfair to qualified individuals who end up having their ambitions thwarted because some members of their ethnic group or family hold similar or higher offices.

I believe that this unfairness in even more widespread than we know, and that is why we should continue “interfering” with recruitment processes to ensure that merit is the sole consideration for appointment to such positions.

The writer teaches Literature at the University of Nairobi. [email protected].