Are the qualifications, experience and expertise of locals worth less than those of foreigners? This is the vexing question perplexing the psyche of dedicated, hardworking, competent and qualified locals as they try to come to terms with the reality that the colonial ghost of the past seems to have manifested itself in the practice of flexible compensation policies, or what some might pronounce as sanctioned nepotism.
In the desperate scramble to scale the wall separating the developed from the developing, Third World natives glorify, deify and "pay-ify" has-beens, discarded and smooth-talking underachievers playing on the peripheral stages of the developed world. Puny First World man, upon inhaling the Northeast Trade Winds, instantly balloon into a colossus humming bird flitting from tropical flowers to the adoring cocktail circuits, being the toast of the town while toasting the local "dough."
On a point of clarification, not all foreign hires are that way and they are not being stereotyped. But costly mistakes have been made, many of which continue to cause financial haemorrhage and it is thus important to not only rectify the situation but to prevent occurrences in the future. It is acknowledged that there are times when specialist expertise that does not exist in the country is needed. But these are short-term consulting assignments and so the cost, though high or very high, can be justified on the immediate need and the resulting transfer of knowledge. But even in these cases, mechanisms must be put in place to ensure value for money through performance bonds and assignment of suitable personnel to benefit from the available temporary expertise.
With respect to established positions, the situation is quite different, as now both local and foreign workers are colleagues and hence terms for employment for both must be the same. Any differential payments must have a reasonable and justifiable basis. Nationality, ethnicity and perceived "superiority" do not satisfy the tests of reasonableness or justification. The cost of passage and shipping of professional effects upon assumption of contract and similar on completion of same are legitimate expenses.
The argument that in their respective countries they would have earned more due to exchange rates being in their favour and hence they must be paid a salary higher than that paid those in similar or higher positions here is just not tenable. They have the choice to earn that type of salary in their country and further they applied for jobs in developing countries voluntarily. (One presumes that, in the first instance, they did not have a job or one at the level advertised and hence the reason for them applying.)
Jobs (academic ones for instance) are advertised both at home and abroad. The position must be in a particular category and hence the salary range defined. The exact position in the salary scale would be determined by years of experience.
The eventual preferred candidate could be a local or foreigner and thus, unless economic apartheid is being practised, people, irrespective of nationality, with similar qualifications and experience must earn similar salaries. The practice of paying foreigners additional perks and benefits is bound to create disharmony and resentment among local staff and would serve as a distinctive demoralising and demotivating force, particularly in new institutions and organisations. It is a well known phenomenon that people are excited by new ventures and hence become quite motivated, be it building a new temple, a new political party or a new university. Nationalism provides an additional motivational fillip. People go beyond the call of duty to ensure the success of the new venture as they feel a personal stake in the growth and success of the new entity.
A flexible compensation policy that puts locals at a disadvantage, while tolerated initially, would not be tolerated for long, as they come to the conclusion that their nationalism is being abused. Such practices are unethical as they are not based on the universal values of fairplay and equity. It violates good HR practices and demonstrates disdain for local staff as it does not take into account that, in their case also, new jobs result in displacement and inconvenience to them through increased travel times, having to rent or buy a house/apartment nearer to the new work place, adjusting to new friends etc. Equality can only mean equal pay for the same job. Financial apartheid cannot and should not be tolerated and does not have any place in any self-respecting society.
Prakash Persad
is the director of Swaha Inc