The Communication Department of the Presidency of the Republic was the subject of a collective dismissal, having left the agents concerned perplexed as to the reasons given in the letter of dismissal. The latter, after observing the absence of valid official reasons prescribed, raised concerns in their various aspects such as the administrative, the social and political as well as the budgetary which would in no way justify the decision to reduce the staff.
At the administrative level, the letter does not mention any valid reason or real circumstance, leaving the employees in complete incomprehension as to the real reasons for their dismissal. This may suggest a flagrant injustice.
On the social and political level, the presidency of the Republic being the first institution of the country, its management of employment must conform to the rules and the challenges of the market, knowing that an agent who leaves such an institution has little chance to quickly find another job without suffering the consequences of the political color he wears. The presidential party, Udps, advocating social progress in its name and in its social project, any unjustified dismissal can only affect it directly or indirectly, because it would contravene certain rules of decorum. Dismissing employees abruptly and without notice, even with the assurances given by the firm’s management, seems in itself unfair.
At the budgetary level, this collective dismissal, which was based on budgetary restrictions, seems unjustified. Because, in fact, for only 23 agents with a monthly average of USD 1,250, the budgetary issue that justified the decision to lay them off only represents an amount of USD 28,750, not to mention the exit indemnities to which they are entitled corresponding to six months’ salary, implying a total budget stake of USD 172,500. These six months correspond to the time separating the date of dismissal from the date of the launch of the campaign for an election scheduled for December 20, 2023. However, keeping the agents until then would not have affected the budget of the Directorate in any way. of the Communication Unit or Cabinet. The agents could therefore have benefited from a new recruitment to minimize the repercussions of their dismissal.
In short, the observations relating to the administrative aspect, the social and political as well as the budgetary corroborated by the various arguments, annihilation any relevant argument which would justify the budgetary restrictions and/or the new recruitment. The dismissed agents are therefore right to claim their rights and to assert their observations with the Very High Hierarchy, because it would not be justified to recruit new collaborators to carry out the same work as their predecessors who were dismissed.