In recent years, with the rapid development of the economy and society, the work intensity of civil servants has been increasing, and it is understandable to a certain extent that overtime is a way of working in response to emergencies and major tasks.
However, many local government organs have formed a style of "formalistic overtime", that is, grassroots civil servants work a large number of ineffective overtime hours every day in order to fulfill various formal requirements, which not only brings great pressure to civil servants, but also affects the quality and efficiency of work. This issue has aroused widespread concern in society.
Relevant departments should properly handle the relationship between work intensity and the quality of work and the balance of life of civil servants, and gradually solve the problem of "formalistic overtime", so that civil servants can focus on substantive work instead of being burdened by various forms of creation.
Behind the "formalistic overtime" lies a serious bureaucratic management concept. Some leaders attach importance to the appearance and ignore the substance, only focus on the execution of orders from the top down but despise the quality of work, and often require subordinates to work overtime in order to complete various meeting reports, work plans and other formal needs. This has formed a vicious circle of "leaders who do not leave".
But the truth is that overtime itself does not equate to efficiency and quality. Civil servants should focus on the quality of work rather than the amount of time, and only by fulfilling and productive working hours can they truly improve their work efficiency.
"Formalistic overtime" also reflects certain problems in the evaluation and promotion mechanism. In some places, too much emphasis is placed on formal indicators such as the number of civil servants' participation in activities and meetings, the number of reports completed, and the neglect of substantive work achievements, which encourages some people to use formalism to win political achievements and promotion.
Ideally, the assessment should focus on the completion of substantive work and service effect, and abandon meaningless indicator requirements such as hourly workload. Only in this way will civil servants truly focus on substantive work rather than on formalistic competition.
The long-term "formalistic overtime" also affects the physical and mental health and work enthusiasm of grassroots workers. Three meals a day are irregular, and it is difficult to ensure the quality of work under long-term pressure, which affects family life.
Front-line civil servants are already under great pressure at work, and if they are accumulated by various formalisms, they will inevitably produce a lot of dissatisfaction and disappointment, which will affect their enthusiasm for work. As grassroots public servants, the work attitude of civil servants is directly related to the quality of people's livelihood, and they should be cared for and protected.
To solve these stubborn problems, the relevant departments must take comprehensive and systematic measures to solve the problem of "formalistic overtime".
The leadership team should set an example and establish a good work style of putting work efficiency first. Let subordinates know that leaders value work results rather than overtime, and encourage smooth work instead of ineffective overtime.
Streamline the reporting system for various meetings, limit the necessary meetings and reports, and reduce the burden of formalism on subordinates.
Improve the assessment system, cancel the timing tools and formalism indicators, and truly take the quality and effectiveness of the work as the guide.
Formulate a reasonable management plan for working hours and rest to ensure that civil servants have sufficient rest time.
Strengthen psychological counseling and public welfare care, and maintain the work-life balance of civil servants.
Punish those who show obvious signs of "formalism" in accordance with the law, so that they will retreat in the face of difficulties.
Only by comprehensively rectifying this deep-seated problem can civil servants truly emancipate their minds and plunge into substantive work, and at the same time, let the masses feel the new changes in government work. Only by truly solving the problem of "formalism" can the work of civil servants continue to improve its efficiency and quality, and can it also ensure the physical and mental health of grassroots public servants to the greatest extent.
This is an important part of comprehensively promoting the reform of "delegating power, delegating power, delegating power, and providing services" in government services. We need to explore more and work together to create a new paradigm for efficient public management.