THE recent decision to provide dearness allowance for government employees has sparked debates among economists, politicians and policymakers. Many arguments seem disconnected from reality and fail to consider the broader socio-economic context. Critics have presented views that do not always align with the financial struggles faced by most government employees.
Former World Bank lead economist Dr Zahid Hossain argues that dearness allowance is unnecessary for government employees as they get enough salary and deputy secretaries and higher officials receive car loans, maintenance allowances and higher salaries. While this may be true for a small group, lumping all government employees into the same category is misleading. In Bangladesh, the number of deputy secretaries and above is around 3,000 while the total number of government employees exceeds 1.55 million. Among them, 90 per cent earn between T 13,000 and Tk 25,000 a month. For these employees, an extra Tk 4,000鈥�5,000 in dearness allowance is not a luxury but a necessity to meet basic needs. Ignoring their financial struggles just because a small group of ranking officials may not require additional support is unfair.
Zahid Hossain may have ignored how much a few thousand takas mean to low-income employees. The International Labour Organisation sets a minimum wage standard, yet many government employees do not receive salaries that meet this benchmark.
BNP leader Rumin Farhana in a recent talk show claimed that primary schoolteachers are excluded from dearness allowance while bureaucrats enjoy the benefit. This statement is factually incorrect as dearness allowance applies to all government employees under the national pay scale, including primary schoolteachers. She also argued that primary teachers earn only Tk 17,000 a month and that the government neglects them. In reality, if dearness allowance is implemented, they will also benefit. Her statements appear to be part of a populist political strategy, using the word 鈥榖ureaucrats鈥� to mislead the public and create unnecessary resentment.
The reality is that fewer than 10,000 government employees receive significant perks while more than 1.4 million struggle with low salary. It is unreasonable to deny 1.4 million workers additional financial support just because of the privileges enjoyed by a small fraction of the work force.
The situation is even worse for teaches enlisted with monthly pay order who lack medical allowances, housing support and full festival allowance. Unlike other government employees who receive festival allowance equal to their basic salary, teachers on the monthly pay order scheme receive only 25 per cent of their basic salary. Many such teachers earn between Tk 9,000 and Tk 15,000 a month, which is even lower than the Tk 12,000 minimum wage for apparel workers.
Looking at international standards, government spending on education in Bangladesh is significantly lower than in many other countries. Finland allocates 7 per cent of its gross domestic product to education while Bangladesh spends only 1.76 per cent, as is the case with the 2023鈥�24 financial year. In India, a primary schoolteacher earns Rs 40,000 (Tk 56,328) a month whereas in Bangladesh, the salary is only Tk 17,000. UNESCO recommends that countries should allocate 4鈥�6 per cent of gross domestic product and 15鈥�20 per cent of the national budget to education, but Bangladesh lags far behind the targets.
Some economists, particularly Dr Fahmida Khatun, executive director at the Centre for Policy Dialogue, argue that dearness allowance could increase government spending and inflation. However, this argument overlooks the fact that dearness allowance exists precisely to counteract inflation when salary revisions are delayed. Inflation in Bangladesh has risen by 300鈥�400 per cent over the past decade, yet the last national pay scale was introduced in 2015. A new pay scale was due in 2020 and another in 2025, but instead, the government has opted for a single dearness allowance adjustment. Now, even that is being contested and cancelled.
The debate over dearness allowance reflects a deep class divide. High-ranking officials and policymakers continue to secure significant financial benefits while mid- and low-level employees struggle to make ends meet. This situation aligns with the class struggle theories that describe how economic policies often serve the interests of the elite at the expense of the working class.
The dearness allowance controversy is not just about economics. It is about fairness and justice. Denying 1.55 million employees financial relief because of the privileges of a small elite group is fundamentally unjust. The real issue is whether national policies should continue to favour a privileged few or focus on ensuring fair treatment for the majority of government employees. If the government intends to serve its people, the focus should be on reducing inequality and ensuring financial security for all, not just for the powerful few.
听
Mahmudur Rahman Saidy is a lecturer in public administration in the University of Chittagong.