THE Bangladesh Public Service Commission has recently announced the recommended list for the 44th batch of Bangladesh Civil Service. This time, more than 2.7 lakh people applied for 1,710 positions across several cadres. Once notified, nearly 2,000 individuals will join the public service, arguably the most competitive recruitment process. Since the announcement, social media platforms have been flooded with congratulatory posts for the successful candidates.
The Bangladesh Civil Service holds a deep appeal for recent graduates. It remains the most-sought-after employment route, drawing in a massive number of candidates every time. Yet, despite years of effort and repeated attempts, a large number of students are left disappointed because of the enormous gap between applicants and available positions. Even so, many students still choose the civil service over other career options, a tendency that raises both curiosity and concern.
When I was a student at the University of Dhaka, I met numerous candidates who had been preparing for the civil service for years. Driven by curiosity, I spoke with many of them to understand their perspectives and what they believed the civil service would offer to justify such a competitive and emotionally demanding pursuit. Most responses that I received revolved around three expectations: financial stability, job security and the prospect of holding power. However, these expectations, from my point of view, often clash with the actual responsibilities and realities of public service.
First, the idea of holding power is inherently problematic. A civil service officer is officially designated as a servant of the republic, operating within the framework of the constitution and accountable to the people. According to the constitution, all authorities of the republic lie with the people. Thus, pursuing civil service for the sake of personal power contradicts the core principles of public service. When individuals seek civil service with the intent of exercising dominance or authority over others, it undermines the foundational ideal of accountability.
Second, the concept of job security, appealing though, is also questionable, depending on one鈥檚 intentions. In government offices, once people secure positions, they are rarely dismissed, often continuing until retirement at the age of 65. However, if certain people are confident in their own skills and abilities, this guaranteed stability should not be the main attraction. In any sector, dismissal typically follows serious misconduct, persistent inefficiency, or gross violation of duty. If one鈥檚 primary concern is ensuring the job cannot be taken away, more than performing the job well, it may reflect a lack of self-confidence or motivation. Prioritising safety in a system that often protects mediocrity over merit could explain why job security is viewed as a top benefit.
Third, the idea that civil service offers financial solvency is largely illusory. Under the current pay structure introduced in 2015, newly recruited cadre officers in Grade IX earn between Tk 30,000 and Tk 35,000 a month. In today鈥檚 economy, this amount is barely enough to meet personal expenses, let alone support a family. And yet, many civil service officers appear to have a lavish way of life. This discrepancy naturally raises uncomfortable questions about the sources of their income. If the financial comfort associated with these roles cannot be maintained through legal means, the idea of solvency itself becomes morally suspect.
Civil service should ideally be seen as one among many regular civil jobs. It may suit those who want a structured and service-oriented professional life. But in an objective comparison, public service does not offer substantial advantages over many private sector positions. Still, year after year, millions of students devote their time, energy and resources to preparing for the examinations. Notably, a nationwide movement has recently emerged demanding civil service-style employment, even contributing to the fall of a regime. This points to a deeper desperation among graduates to secure government jobs.
Another aspect that reveals the distorted perception of civil service is the hierarchy of prestige among different cadres. Administrative and police cadres often receive disproportionate public admiration while teaching or specialised technical cadres are overlooked. A foreign service officer may draw more praise than someone with a doctorate degree. Even in professional circles, private-sector employees are sometimes regarded as inferior to customs officers or magistrates. Once again, the root of this inflated status lies in perceived advantages 鈥� power, security and prosperity 鈥� none of which are guaranteed by the job鈥檚 actual terms or nature.
To those newly recommended for the various cadres of the 44th BCS, congratulations are in order. Their success is the result of years of dedication and hard work. But, it is crucial that they should approach this role not with a sense of entitlement but with humility and responsibility. They must recognise that the salary scale will not provide a comfortable standard of living. They will be answerable to citizens from all walks of life. A rickshaw-puller has every right to challenge a magistrate鈥檚 decision and the magistrate must respond not with arrogance but with patience and professionalism.
Civil service is a modest, yet immensely responsible profession. Those who are unwilling or unable to uphold this standard of public duty should reconsider their reasons for joining. It is not a space for personal privilege but one for civic accountability. That distinction must be remembered and preserved.
听
ASM Kamrul Islam is a lecturer at Green University of Bangladesh.
