Environmental health practitioners petition govt for grade structure review

Allexer Namundjembo

Environmental health practitioners and assistants across Namibia have petitioned the ministry of health and social services (MoHSS) to review and upgrade the profession’s grading structure, arguing that their qualifications and responsibilities are not adequately reflected in the current public service framework.

The petition, addressed to the health minister and copied to the Public Service Commission, the Office of the Prime Minister’s human resources management division, and the Namibia Public Workers Union, calls for a comprehensive review of environmental health positions within the public service.

According to the petitioners, environmental health practitioners, who hold honours degrees in Environmental Health Science, and assistants, who hold diploma qualifications, perform essential public health functions that are central to disease prevention and community well-being.

The petition states that the profession is responsible for critical services, including food safety, water quality monitoring, sanitation, waste management, vector control, pollution control, occupational health, disease surveillance, outbreak investigations, environmental risk assessments, port health services, and health promotion.

The practitioners further note that the Public and Environmental Health Act of 2015 provides the legal framework for environmental health services in Namibia and entrusts them with statutory duties requiring professional judgment, technical expertise, and accountability.

Despite these responsibilities, the petitioners argue that environmental health practitioners are appointed at Grade 9, while other professions requiring equivalent honours qualifications enter the public service at Grade 8.

They contend that the current grading structure does not adequately reflect the level of education, responsibility, and contribution of the profession to the national health system. 

According to the petition, the grading disparity affects professional recognition, career progression, recruitment, retention, and staff motivation.

The practitioners are calling for a review of the grading structure for all environmental health positions, the upgrading of environmental health practitioners from Grade 9 to Grade 8, a reassessment of grading levels for environmental health practitioner assistants, and a review of career progression pathways in consultation with environmental health representatives.

The petition describes environmental health as a cornerstone of preventive healthcare, emphasising its role in preventing disease outbreaks, ensuring healthy living environments, and supporting Namibia’s public health goals.

The practitioners argue that fair recognition would not only benefit employees but would also strengthen the profession and enhance service delivery.

They concluded the petition by requesting the ministry’s favourable consideration and expressing hope for constructive engagement on the matter.

Responding to questions from the Windhoek Observer on Monday, MoHSS spokesperson Walters Kamaya said matters relating to structural reforms and grading fall under the mandate of the Office of the Prime Minister.

“Issues of structural reforms and grading are handled by the Office of the Prime Minister, which oversees such processes across all government ministries,” he said.

Efforts to obtain comment from the Office of the Prime Minister were unsuccessful by the time of publication.

Meanwhile, Popular Democratic Movement (PDM) Member of Parliament Winnie Moongo said she had already raised the issue of environmental health practitioners’ grading in Parliament earlier this year and continues to advocate for reform.

“Environmental health practitioners are highly trained professionals with honours-level qualifications, yet they carry statutory responsibilities that are fundamental to protecting the health of our nation,” Moongo said.

“Their work is not secondary to healthcare; it is one of its foundations. As frontline guardians of public health, they prevent disease, protect communities from environmental health risks, and help ensure that countless health crises are avoided before they ever reach our hospitals and clinics. Despite this critical role, their grading does not adequately reflect their qualifications, responsibilities, and contribution to national health outcomes.”

Moongo described environmental health as frontline preventive healthcare whose value often goes unnoticed until systemic failures.

“When preventive healthcare succeeds, society rarely notices. When it fails, the consequences are immediate and national,” she said.

She argued that the current grading structure does not adequately reflect the weight of practitioners’ responsibilities or align consistently with comparable professions within the public service.

“This is not simply an administrative concern. It is a structural imbalance that affects dignity, morale, retention, and long-term capacity within a critical health cadre. A system that expects high levels of professional accountability must also reflect that responsibility through fair recognition and grading.”

Moongo called on the health ministry to initiate a transparent, evidence-based job evaluation process to ensure that qualifications, statutory responsibilities, and grading levels are properly aligned across the health sector. 

She said any inconsistencies should be corrected decisively and without unnecessary delay.

She further stressed that Parliament must continue exercising its oversight role to ensure fairness, consistency, and accountability in the design and implementation of public service structures.

“Equity in the public service is not optional; it is a governance requirement,” she said.

Moongo expressed confidence that the minister would provide a comprehensive response to the matter in Parliament but stressed that the concerns raised by environmental health practitioners warrant urgent attention.

“I therefore call on the ministry to engage this matter with urgency, clarity, and technical fairness, ensuring that the review process is not only administrative but corrective in nature, addressing long-standing disparities that affect both professional morale and service delivery,” she said.

Related Posts