I agree such shitty matters exist...sometimes inferior regulars
are retained or even promoted on their ability to bootlick their
bosses rather than based on their performance, ability and inherant
potential.
This is one inherant problem found within any uniform organisations
let alone ours. Unlike commercial companies, a uniform outfit
cannot hire and fire as it wishes and still retain the same
operating capacity. Its has to painstakingly groom and nuture its
pool of regulars to staff the various manpower demands within the
organisation. For example, a armed forces simply cannot head-hunt a
service chief whilst a commercial company can simply look for
suitable external candidates to fill their CEO position, such
candidates may have never worked in the company and even at times
have no prior experience in the industry . A uniformed personnel
would have to be groomed and trained through various appts in the
organisation to equip him with the right experience and skill sets
to assume senior appts. On the same note, the same applies to most
if not all uniform appts. in the military service.
The problem is a tricky one, as contracts serve as a double-edged
sword.
On one side, it is nessasary to tie people to contracts due to the
nature of national defence coupled with the inherent long training
and grooming process.
On the other side, contracts breeds complacency and in some cases
even redundancy as the regular may not be performing and imposes
his work on others. There is this infamous hokkien quote: (Whether
i work, or i do not work, i just have to wait for the 10th of each
calender month to collect the same pay cheque) 
In a perfect world, every orgianisation would want to only retain
capable staff and purge the incapable ones from the system.
Sad to say in reality, sometimes the incapable and inept are
retained and even promoted due to factors such as manpower
shortages, organisational restructuring and force transformation
etc
Thats my 2 cents worth of opinion on the matter....what do the rest
of u think 
