Moratorium on Civil Service Recruitment Moratorium Belanja Pegawai

The policy to impose a 16-month moratorium on civil service recruitment (up to 31 Dec 2012) came into force on 1 September 2011. The policy was put in place jointly by the Ministers of Finance, Home Affairs and Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform.

The beginnings of this policy go back to concern expressed by the Finance Minister about increasing burdens civil service costs were imposing on the public purse, both nationally and in regions. The Minister’s point was well received by those charged with bureaucratic reform who then proposed a freeze on public sector recruitment.  That sais, it was the Finance Minster himself who, just a few months previously, had staunchly supported civil service pay increases after a complaint from the President that his salary never went up.

There is no denying that public service costs are weighing more and more heavily on State budgets.  Thus, in the draft 2012 State budget, civil service funding is the biggest single item of expenditure (Rp 215.7 trillion), set to eclipse “subsidies” (the previous No. 1 expenditure item). Analysis by FITRA of regional budgets for 2011has found that 124 regional governments spent more than 60% of their 2011 budgets on civil service costs.  Indeed, the percentage in 16 regions was as much as 70% and in one—the kabupaten of Depok, according to Finance Ministry analysis—it was as high as 89%.

This time bomb of civil service costs is bound up with policies that do not factor in funding when decisions are made.  Thos decisions include: recruitment of additional civil servants; payment of end-of-year bonuses; increases in civil service salaries by between 5-20% (several times since 2006); and hikes in civil service allowances for such items as food.  These decisions automatically place extra burdens on State budgets, but there’s more: Since 2009 State budgets have had to meet 100% of pension costs previously co-funded by Taspen pension offices (Government Financial Statement accompanying draft 2012 State Budget, IV-80).

One component of increasing civil service costs has been payment of extra remuneration to civil servants.  Such payments were first introduced—as part of civil service reform— in 3 ministries/agencies in 2007 and extended to 14 in 2011. In 2010 Rp 13.4 trillion was allocated for extra remuneration payments.

Another issue has been mushrooming of off-line government agencies with potentially overlapping responsibilities. The government’s 2007 end-of-year financial report recorded the existence of 76 such agencies that cost the public purse Rp 483.3 billion. By 2010 the number had jumped to 101 and the cost to Rp 1.87 trillion.

The dismal condition of regional local government budgets (APBDs) is also bound up with central government policies—that are out of step with what is needed—on budgeting and civil service staffing. As is well known, regions depend on central government fiscal transfers for around 80% of their budgetary resources. But 68% of fiscal transfers to regions—in the form of General Allocation Fund (DAU) transfers and supplementary allowances for teachers—are spent almost exclusively on civil service costs. An added factor here is that the DAU’s main component is precisely designed to cover bureaucratic costs. The result is that no incentive exists for regions that streamline their bureaucracies or increase levels of local revenue.

The DAU is also doing nothing to dampen the pace with which regions are splitting up to form new autonomous regions. And, of course, a new local civil service is a must for each new autonomous region; and, in that process, locals are recruited ahead of professionals.  Given that the DAU finances the formation of these new autonomous regions, it follows that the creation of additional regions indirectly reduces the average DAU allocation per region.  For example, in 2008 Indonesia had 477 regions that received an average DAU allocation of Rp 358 billion; in 2009 the number of regions had risen to 281 and the average DAU allocation had fallen to Rp 351.7 billion (Government Financial Statement, 2011).

This is a zero sum game: Ballooning regional civil service costs automatically reduce funding available for spending in other areas such as capital expenditure. Another factor contributing to ever higher “service charges” in regions is lack of clear policies on payment of additional entitlements to regional government officials.  Take the government of the Special District of Jakarta as an example: It is a rich area and benefits from being the nation’s capital; so it has paid additional allowances to its personnel ranging from Rp 2.9 million to Rp 4.7 million for less senior staff to Rp 50 million for top-level officials.

All this goes to show that the moratorium on recruitment will be ineffective so long as bureaucratic reform is piecemeal and amounts to no more than political window dressing. Thus, despite the moratorium, civil service costs have received the highest single level of additional funding in the draft 2012 State budget: as much as Rp 32.8 trillion, including allocations for new teachers (Government Financial Statement accompanying draft 2012 State Budget, IV-205).

The moratorium alone will also not significantly reduce the budgetary burden of civil service costs.  FITRA’s research shows that, over the past 5 years, the number of civil servants has grown by 2%, but civil service costs have jumped by 20%.  That means that the size of the civil service bill depends not so much on civil service numbers but on ever increasing costs of employing them.

The moratorium’s ineffectiveness and continuing high civil service costs are proof enough that bureaucratic reform strategies have failed because they have not factored in implementation costs. Self-interested policy making is clearly impacting on civil service staffing and placing extra demands on budgets. An increasingly oversized bureaucracy, mushrooming of off-line agencies and budgetary wastage in the form of extra remuneration and allowances for bureaucrats are all clearly inconsistent with the meaning of bureaucratic reform as the general public understands it.

 Additional income and extra remuneration for civil servants should result in increased productivity. Unproductive and incompetent civil servants recruited by processes tainted with collusion, corruption or nepotism should be sacked; as should those who have built up unwarranted amounts of personal wealth.  Savings achieved from such sackings could be used to fund payments of extra salary to others.  This approach would lead to a streamlined and expenditure-efficient public sector.

 A recruitment moratorium cannot be the flagship of bureaucratic reform.  It can only be a starting point.  It must be backed up with an appropriate mix of integrated policies: for example, revamping off-line agencies; shedding unproductive staff; putting in place appropriate staff ratios; having performance indicators for officials; setting clear standards of services to be delivered; reforming regional fiscal balance transfer mechanisms; and putting curbs on formation of new autonomous regions.

 On its own the moratorium policy will only serve to lead us where we do not want to go: in the direction of a civil service costs time-bomb.  And, in the process, resources for funding development will contract.

Yuna Farhan


Indonesian Forum for Budget Transparency (FITRA)

7 September 2011

English Translator: Denis Fisher


Tepat tanggal 1 September 2011 kebijakan moratorium Pegawai Negeri Sipil (PNS) resmi diberlakukan selama 16 bulan. Kebijakan yang berlaku sampai 31 Desember 2012 ini, ditetapkan melalui Surat Keputusan Bersama (SKB) yang ditandatangani tiga menteri; Menteri Keuangan, Menteri Pendayaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi, dan Menteri Dalam Negeri. Asal muasal kebijakan ini, dilontarkan oleh Menteri Keuangan, yang mengeluhkan semakin tingginya beban belanja Negara untuk membiayai pegawai, di tingkat pusat maupun daerah. Disambut tim reformasi birokrasi, menawarkan moratorium pengangkatan PNS. Padahal, beberapa bulan yang lalu, Menkeu sendiri yang paling ngotot mengusulkan kenaikan gaji pejabat, pasca Presiden mengeluhkan gajinya yang tidak pernah naik.

Beban belanja pegawai pada APBN memang semakin berat. Pada RAPBN 2012, belanja pegawai merupakan alokasi belanja tertinggi, sebesar Rp. 215,7 triliun. Bahkan mengalahkan belanja subsidi yang selama ini mendominasi. Potret yang sama terjadi di daerah. Hasil analisa FITRA pada APBD 2011, terdapat 124 daerah yang beban belanja pegawainya melebihi 60% dan 16 daerah diantaranya mencapai 70%. Analisis Kemenkeu juga menunjukan, belanja pegawai terbesar di Kabupaten Demak dengan mencapai 89%.  Bom waktu belanja pegawai tidak terlepas dari kebijakan kepegawaian yang tidak memperhatikan implikasinya terhadap anggaran Negara. Selain rekrutment pegawai baru, kebijakan seperti, pemberian gaji ke-13, kenaikan gaji pokok antara 5-20% sejak tahun 2006, dan kenaikan berbagai tunjangan serta pemberian tambahan uang makan, secara otomatis tidak hanya menambah beban belanja gaji pokok. APBN juga harus menanggung beban pembayaran pensiun, yang sebelumnya sharing pembiayaan dengan Taspen, sejak tahun 2009, seratus persen menjadi beban APBN (Nota Keuangan RAPBN 2012, IV-80).

Kebijakan pemberian remunerasi sebagai salah satu agenda reformasi birokasi,  yang dimulai sejak tahun 2007 pada 3 Kementerian/Lembaga (K/L) dan terakhir pada tahun 2011 pada 14 K/L juga menambah beban belanja pegawai. Tercatat pada tahun 2010 dialokasikan 13,4 triliun untuk pemberian remunerasi ini. Begitu pula dengan semakin menjamurnya Lembaga Non Struktural (LNS) yang berpotensi memiliki peran tumpang tindih. Berdasarkan Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Pusat (LKPP) tahun 2007, tercatat terdapat 76 LNS dengan memakan beban belanja pegawai Rp. 483,3 miliar. Kemudian  membengkak menjadi 101 LNS dengan belanja pegawai Rp. 1,87 triliun pada tahun 2010. Buruknya potret anggaran daerah, juga tidak terlepas dari kebijakan anggaran dan kepegawaian yang tidak selaras di tingkat pusat. Seperti diketahui, rata-rata 80% sumber pendapatan daerah tergantung dari dana perimbangan. Disisi lain, 68% belanja transfer yang dialokasikan ke daerah, sebagian besar diperuntukan belanja pegawai, seperti Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) dan tambahan tunjangan Guru. Ditambah lagi dengan formula DAU yang memperhitungkan belanja pegawai sebagai alokasi dana dasar. Sehingga tidak memberikan insentif bagi daerah yang melakukan perampingan birokrasi atau meningkatkan pendapatannya.

Kebijakan DAU ini juga tidak memberikan disisentif bagi laju pemekaran daerah. Sebagai konsekuensi daerah baru, kebutuhan akan pegawai merupakan keharusan, ditambah rekrutmen yang masih mengutamakan putra daerah dibandingkan profesionalitas. DAU yang menjadi tumpuan membiayayai pegawai daerah, secara tidak langsung berkurang . Sebagai contoh, pada tahun 2008 terdapat 481 daerah dan tahun 2009 naik menjadi 477 daerah, karena terjadinya pemekaran, rata-rata penerimaan DAU berkurang, dari Rp. 358 milyar pada tahun 2008 menjadi Rp. 351,7 miliar pada tahun 2009 (Nota Keuangan, 2011). Sebagai arena zero sum game, belanja pegawai yang membengkak di daerah, otomatis mengorbankan alokasi belanja lain seperti belanja modal. Semakin mahalnya “ongkos tukang” di daerah, juga disebabkan tidak jelasnya pengaturan mengenai  tambahan tunjangan pegawai daerah. DKI Jakarta sebagai daerah kaya yang beruntung sebagai Ibu Kota, memberikan tambahan tunjangan pegawai setingkat staff sebesar Rp. 2,9 – Rp. 4,7 juta dan pejabat eselon I sebesar Rp. 50 juta.

Kebijakan moratorium saja tidak cukup, sepanjang kebijakan reformasi birokrasi masih bersifat parsial dan sebatas “kosmetik politik”. Buktinya, meski-pun kebijakan moratorium PNS diberlakukan, belanja pegawai pada RAPBN 2012 justru meningkat paling tinggi sebesar Rp. 32,8 triliun. Didalamnya juga dialokasikan gaji bagi tambahan pegawai baru (Nota Keuangan RAPBN 2012, IV-205). Moratorium juga tidak akan signifikan mengurangi beban belanja pegawai. Dari kajian FITRA, rata-rata kenaikan jumlah pegawai dalam 5 tahun terakhir  adalah 2 persen, sementara kenaikan belanja pegawai jauh lebih signifikan yakni 20%. Artinya, beratnya belanja pegawai lebih disebabkan semakin meningkatnya ongkos pegawai dibandingkan pertumbuhan jumlah Pegawai. Kebijakan moratorium PNS dan beratnya beban belanja pegawai, merupakan penanda kegagalan disain reformasi birokrasi,  karena tidak mempertimbangkan konsekuensinya terhadap beban anggaran. Kebijakan yang masih bersifat ego sektoral, berimplikasi terhadap kepegawaian dan beban anggaran. Struktur birokrasi yang semakin gemuk, dengan menjamurnya LNS dan belanja birokrasi yang semakin boros dengan tambahan remunerasi dan tunjangan, justru bertentangan dengan semangat reformasi birokrasi yang dipahami publik selama ini.

Perbaikan penghasilan dan pemberian remunerasi, seharusnya diikuti dengan peningkatan produktivitas pegawai. Sementara, pegawai yang tidak produktif dan tidak kompeten, akibat rekruitment yang masih sarat KKN, serta pejabat yang memiliki harta tidak wajar,  harus dipangkas. Dengan demikian, hasil pemangkasan dapat dikonversi untuk menutupi tambahan penghasilan. Sehingga dapat menghasilkan birokrasi yang ramping dan efisien dari sisi biaya. Moratorium bukanlah kebijakan utama reformasi birokrasi. Moratarium harus dipandang sebagai pintu masuk untuk membenahi disain reformasi birokrasi. Selama moratorium dilakukan, harus disertai dengan kebijakan  dari sektor lain yang terintegrasi dan sejalan. Seperti; pembenahan LNS, perampingan pegawai tidak produktif, rasio pegawai, indikator kinerja pegawai, standar pelayanan, perbaikan skema dana perimbangan, dan pemekaran daerah.  Kebijakan moratorium saja, justru akan menghadapkan Negara ini pada “bom waktu” belanja pegawai, yang semakin mempersempit ruang fiskal untuk membiayai pembangunan.

Photo credit :


No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Tinggalkan Balasan

Alamat email Anda tidak akan dipublikasikan.