Friday, June 15, 2007

High-quality police force OR low-quality PhDs?

DAP's economics pointman, Tony Pua, gets his name figured prominently in the major Malay papers again (pic from Tony Pua's blog) - in retaliation for his earlier blurb about the civil service being a dumping ground for unemployable Malay graduates.

It's apparently a good thing that 5 highly educated individuals willingly became beat cops.

Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian both carried a Bernama report which said that five individuals with Master's and PhD qualifications had enlisted in the police force and were now constables at the Bakri police training college.

College commandant Datuk Zakaria Yusof said they were willing to do so after their recent application to be placed as inspectors had failed.

“All five of them really wanted to join the police force and they were willing to be constables,” he said.

Zakaria added that the five were among the 500 constable recruits who proved that the police profession was gaining recognition among youngsters, including those with high qualifications.

Ref: The Star
The conclusion the Malay media and the police force has drawn from this, is that the police profession and by extension, the civil service, was "gaining recognition among youngsters, including those with high qualifications."

However, I would ask this question instead: Why did PhDs/Masters holders fail to qualify for a simple entry level position of cadet inspector?

And according to PDRM's website, even STPM holders qualify as cadet Inspectors. So, what subjects were their PhDs/Masters for? History? Malay studies? Religious studies? Which universities did the degrees come from?

Was this willingness to downgrade and discount their qualifications due to a true love for the police profession, or does it indicate the concerned individuals' basic inability to secure employment elsewhere? (which ironically goes back to support Tony Pua's dumping ground assertion).

2 comments:

lucknow said...

Sorry to use BM in English language blog. Below is Copy-Paste from Tony Pua:

"Saya lihat dari dua sudut: Pertama dari sudut pemohon itu sendiri dan keduanya dari sudut majikan pula.

Pemegang ijazah Sarjana dan Kedoktoran tentu sekali memiliki sesuatu yang lebih daripada pemegang ijazah Sarjana Muda, Diploma, lebih-lebih lagi STPM/SPM (kelayakan konstabel). Anehnya bagaimana mereka yang berlima itu menilai dan menghargai ijazah yang mereka miliki dengan memohon pekerjaan yang tidak setaraf dengan kelulusan mereka? Apakah mereka tidak yakin dengan kemampuan mereka sendiri sehingga sanggup menerima pekerjaan yang menjatuhkan martabat mereka? Atau terlalu kecewa kerana telah lama jadi penganggur? Mengikut definisi ekonomi, mereka masih menganggur selagi mereka belum mendapat jawatan yang sesuai dengan kelayakan mereka. Pengangguran di kalangan siswazah adalah masalah kerajaan/negara. Pemerintah harus mencari jalan bagaimana hendak mengatasinya. Kecualilah kalau kerajaan tidak menganggap mereka ini aset negara yang berharga.

Dari sudut majikan pula (JPA, dan sebagainya) harus jelas dengan syarat-syarat kelayakan untuk menjawat satu-satu jawatan. Seorang yang terlebih layak tidak boleh diterima ke jawatan rendah kerana ia meletakkan pemohon pekerjaan itu dalam situasi yang sukar. Dia mungkin akan diperlekehkan oleh rakan sejawat nanti. Itu cuma satu contoh. Kesulitan lain, dalam bentuk psikologi, sosiologi, dan sebagainya mungkin timbul. (Akibat perkara ini boleh sama-sama difikirkan dan dibincangkan.) Kesan pada pasaran sumber manusia akan timbul, yang mana sekarang ini pun pemegang SPM hanya layak bekerja di jawatan yang tidak memerlukan kepandaian akademik. Kesan kepada martabat pendidikan negara juga lahir jika lebih ramai pemegang ijazah tinggi diterima memegang jawatan rendah. Kita tidak mahu negara kita jadi seperti Bangladesh dan India dan seumpamanya. Bukan begitu?"

Anonymous said...

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/competition/
Do you think Malaysia needs an Anti Monopoly policy?