In a recent job advertisement, a Department had adopted a long-in-use description of an academic requirement applicable to different disciplines of a grade. The description, however, was too general for the current exercise targetting at specialists holding specific qualifications. It did not take into account the latest changes in the landscape of post-secondary education, particularly new academic programmes recently offered for the relevant profession, leaving much room for varied literal interpretations. The ambiguity was worsened as the other grades in the same Department had adopted the same description of the academic requirement in their job advertisements, but inconsistency in interpretation appeared among different Divisions of the Department.

The Commission noted with concern that the lack of clarity in presenting the academic requirement had attracted queries from both the candidates and serving staff of the relevant Division about the standards and consistency in determining the eligibility.

Taking heed of the Commission’s advice, the Department had conducted a holistic review of the entry requirements for all the grades concerned. Upon review, the Department had fine-tuned the description, elaborating on the expected requirements with details and updates in the light of the different academic qualifications in the prevailing education system. It also standardised the interpretations across the board. We believe what the Department has done will be able to provide clarity for potential job applicants and thus facilitate the recruitment process.

In another case, the lack of clearly articulated entry requirements appeared in the description of the academic subject, causing confusion and false expectation among some job applicants. While the Department concerned was actually looking for candidates who had completed tertiary education in a specific subject, it set out the requirement in a much broader way in its job advertisement, resulting in a large number of applications from job seekers graduated in other subjects of the relevant discipline. This attracted complaints from such applicants, who were invited to selection interviews amidst the qualification assessment process but were ultimately deemed unqualified for the position due to their failure to meet the specific entry requirement of the Department.

Interviewing unqualified candidates not only incurs nugatory administrative work, but also causes confusion, false expectation and disappointment for candidates, which will undermine the credibility of the recruitment exercise. By providing clear and concise information regarding the qualifications expected for each position, the Department can prevent misunderstandings and ensure that candidates have a realistic understanding of what is required. Such enhancement will benefit the recruitment process, streamline administrative efforts, and maintain the integrity of the selection outcomes.

The Commission has advised the Department to clearly specify the required qualifications in job advertisements for future recruitment exercises to enhance clarity. We have also reminded the Department to complete the qualification assessment in future recruitment exercises at an earlier stage, whenever possible, especially in cases involving very specific qualification requirements as well as only local qualifications and in-house assessment. This will be conducive to the recruitment efficiency and avoid any false expectation from the job applicants.

After the selection interviews of a recent recruitment exercise, a Department intended to appoint a former civil servant who had previously served in the same Department but was ordered by the Department to retire in the public interest under section 12 of the Public Service (Administration) Order not long ago. While such critical piece of information could be found in the candidate’s prior employment record kept by the Department, it was regrettably overlooked during the vetting process.

Only upon the Commission Secretariat’s request for further information about the recruitment board’s recommendation, the problem was revealed, resulting in the proposed appointment of the candidate concerned being rescinded by the appointment authority after scrutiny of all relevant records. This had unfortunately caused an undue delay in the recruitment process which was entirely undesirable.

The Commission expressed serious concerns to the Department about its apparent negligence in recognising the candidate’s previous retirement record as this exposed significant deficiencies in the vetting process of a recruitment exercise and serious miscommunication among the various units and the recruitment board involved in the recruitment process. Such oversights are totally unacceptable as unsuitable candidates would be appointed to the Civil Service. The failure to act upon known information at the opportune juncture could raise doubts on the integrity of the recruitment practices.

In response to the Commission’s urgent call, the Department has done a comprehensive review on its recruitment process. It has identified various inadequacies and implemented a series of measures to prevent recurrence of similar problems in future so as to safeguard the integrity of the recruitment process.

Facing the challenges of recruiting fully-qualified professionals to the Civil Service in recent years, a Department had proactively resumed the conduct of recruitment exercises at the assistant professional level, targeting at graduates or semi-professionals who were still undergoing training or pursuing the relevant professional qualification. Besides, noting that it may take four to five years for a graduate to gain sufficient practical experience and obtain the requisite professional qualification for appointment to the permanent establishment, the Department sought to vary the entry system by allowing newly appointed assistant professionals to serve a longer probationary period, i.e. up to a maximum of five years, where necessary to enable sufficient time for them to acquire the necessary qualification. Any appointee who fails to do so may have his probationary service terminated.

The resumption of recruitment at the assistant professional level with a revised entry system allows the Department to tap a wider array of talents, addressing manpower gaps while fostering long-term development of the grade concerned. Early engagement of the “to-be-qualified” professionals also facilitates mentoring the next generation of leaders at an earlier stage by equipping them with the necessary Government experience as well as professional and management skill-sets to meet the succession needs in the long run.

The Commission appreciates the diligent efforts of the relevant Department in addressing its persistent manpower concerns, while maintaining the professional standards, as well as upholding objectivity and impartiality in recruitment and appointment processes.