Gangnam-gu Office's One-Day Director Emerges... What Is the Story Behind It?

Gangnam-gu Announces a Section Chief Starting Immediate Merit Leave from January 1, 2022, as a Director Promotion Candidate, Sparking Controversy Over 'One-Day Director' and Criticism from the Unified Labor Union

[Asia Economy Reporter Jong-il Park] A one-day director has emerged in Gangnam-gu, Seoul’s representative wealthy district, drawing attention.

Gangnam-gu held a personnel committee meeting on the 17th and announced that Manager K would be promoted to director effective January 1, 2022. This is interpreted as meaning that the director in question would receive the appointment certificate on January 1, 2022, and immediately enter retirement for meritorious service.

Gangnam-gu, which has faced criticism from the labor union at every personnel appointment, is once again drawing attention for similar criticism.

On the 20th, Lim Seong-cheol, head of the Seoul branch of the Integrated Public Officials Union, posted on the union bulletin board a message titled “Disappointment with the last personnel appointment of the 7th elected term.”

Head Lim began by saying, “You have produced a one-day director? The issue is not the position of a one-day director but the qualifications and procedural violations related to that position. I declare that I have no personal grudges or private feelings.”

Although even a one-day promotion to director can lead to a chain of promotion benefits for employees below grade 5, which the labor union welcomes as a desirable personnel move, he said he would like to discuss the qualifications for a director who can be inducted into the hall of fame from the employees’ perspective.

Head Lim said, “I believe that maintaining dignity as a public official, having proper values, personal capabilities to establish and implement district policies, leadership and management skills to lead department heads and employees, and the respect of employees should be the foundation. I am disappointed that respected and admired senior employees were excluded from the candidates for director promotion and that someone was promoted despite this, raising serious doubts about the morality of the 7th elected term.”

He left a peculiar impression by saying, “Especially since the Gangnam-gu office is not a friendly organization, previously abusing personnel authority by violating the order of appointments, and now blatantly giving the director position without considering employees’ sentiments.”

Head Lim stated, “According to the investigation by our district’s audit officer in June, although it was not sexual harassment, there was presumed physical contact with another female employee, which can be perceived as inappropriate behavior in terms of maintaining the dignity of a public official. Separately, the person in question, who filed a complaint claiming damage to their honor, is now the ‘suspect’ in a case under investigation and is excluded from promotion by the personnel committee.”

He argued that procedural defects in this promotion personnel committee are not matters to be taken lightly.

He also said, “Looking at how strictly the district’s General Affairs Department enforces these regulations, last month on the 15th, the personnel committee excluded someone from commendation for an ongoing investigation of a matter that was not even notified to the person involved, and among the candidates for promotion to grade 5 administrative officer, there were those who suffered disadvantages.”

This was introduced as having been officially submitted on the 13th under the name of the Integrated Union to the General Affairs Department and the Audit Officer.

Head Lim claimed, “If the personnel committee proceeded without informing this despite knowing it, the meeting should be reconvened, and if the reporting was concealed, disciplinary action against the personnel team leader and investigation team leader seems inevitable.”

He emphasized that if someone knowingly overlooks wrongdoing in exchange for their own promotion and that of others by one rank, appropriate disciplinary action should be taken equally by demotion. This would make people realize that participating in personnel corruption will result in equal punishment, thus discouraging such behavior.

He also argued, “Although the personnel team assistant and team leader were directly notified of this incident, they are not figures who would omit the reporting process, so the General Affairs Department head and Administrative Director who ignored this should also be dismissed or disciplined.”

He said that only then will personnel principles be properly established.

Head Lim concluded, “There is a blemish in the last personnel appointment of the 7th elected term. I hope it can be corrected while there is still time.”