Monday, April 21, 2014

Payment of Conveyance Allowance to Deaf and Dumb employees in Public Sector Bank, Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions & RBI

 Payment of Conveyance Allowance to Deaf and Dumb employees in Public Sector Bank, Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions & RBI

 File No. 3/5/2007-SCT(B)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Financial Services
New Delhi, dated 11th April, 2014.
1. The Chief Executives of all Public Sector Banks,
Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions
2. Executive Director, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.

Subject: Payment of Conveyance Allowance to Deaf and Dumb employees at par with Blind and Orthopeadically Handicapped employees.

I am directed to refer to the subject cited above and to say that as per this Department's letter of even number dated 18.2.2009, Conveyance Allowance is payable to Blind and Orthopeadically handicapped employees n Public Sector Banks, Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions and Reserve Bank of India, as per prescribed rates.

2. Department of Expenditure in the Ministry of Finance vide its Office Memorandum No. 21(2)/2011-Estt..II(B) dated 19th February, 2014(copy enclosed), has informed that in compliance with order dated 12th December, 2013 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in WP(Civil) No. 107 of 2011, titled Deaf Employees Welfare Association and Anothers Vs Union of India and Others, it has been decided to extend the benefit of Transport Allowance, as admissible to Blind and Orthopeadically Handicapped employees in terms of their OM No. 21(2)/2008-E.II(B) dated 29th August, 2008(copy enclosed), to deaf and dumb employees of the Central Government with immediate effect.

3. The matter was examined in this Department and it has been decided to extend these benefits to deaf and dumb employees of Public Sector Banks, Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions and Reserve Bank of India etc. subject to the condition that the recommendation of the Head of ENT Department of a Govt. Civil Hospital is received by the Head of Human Resources Department of the respective financial institution and fulfillment of other conditions mentioned in MoF, Deptt. of Expenditure OM No. 19029/1/78-E.IV(B) dated 31st August, 1978 (copy enclosed) read with OM dated 29.8.2008.

4. It is requested that a Board Note for paying Conveyance Allowance as prescribed in the letter referred above to Deaf and Dumb employees, at par with Blind and Orthopeadically handicapped employees in your organization, be placed before your Board of Directors for implementation, with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully,
(J.S. Phaugat)
Under Secretary(Welfare)

7th Pay Commission is seeking for suggestions on various issues

7th Pay Commission is seeking for suggestions on various issues

The 7th Pay Commission compiled a list of questions and sent it along with a circular to all the Ministries/Departments of Indian Government, inviting their suggestions. It has come to our knowledge that the circular was also sent to all the Central Government employee federations. This could be treated as a irrefutable proof of the fact that the 7th Pay Commission has already started its work!

Although this is part of the usual procedure, it is a well known fact that Central Government employees treat certain questions as an indication of the mindset of the 7th Pay Commission.

Let’s see the questions:

What kind of impact did the 6th Pay Commission’s reforms on the Pay Scale structure have, when they were implemented? Do you think such changes were required? The Pay Commission has included questions about the results and procedures of reducing Pay Scale and Pay Bands.

Has Grade Pay Concept been effective? If no, the Commission wants to know what could be done to get the desired results.

The questions regarding increments have triggered curiosity and interest. Has the purpose behind making July 1 the date of implementing the annual increment, served its purpose? Or, are there any changes required in it?

With annual increment fixed at 3%, what, according to you, would be a reasonable and acceptable level?

What are the pros and cons of the MACP Scheme?

House Rent Allowance is currently being given according to three categories, based on the population of the city. What criteria should be taken into account for the calculation of House Rent Allowance? This particular question assumes great significance.

Questions have been raised about the ratio of the salary of the lowest level employee and the top management. While debates on this issue have been on for a while now, it is worth pointing out that the question has also appeared on the 7th Pay Commission’s list.

The list also has questions and a number of sub-questions about raising Government salaries to match the payments given in private sectors.

Questions have been asked about the possibility of incorporating attributes like talent and performance in job evaluation.

The sub-list also has questions regarding bonus, variable increments, performance-based schemes, State Government employees’ pay scales, and pensions.

One thing is for sure – the circular and its questions have become the hottest topic of discussion and countless debates among government employees right now.



Comparison of 7th and 6th Pay Commission Questionnaire.

Comparison of 7th and 6th Pay Commission Questionnaire.

1. Comparison with public/private sectors
1.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites in Government and the public/private sector?
1.2 Is it possible to quantify all other benefits, excluding pay, derived by employees in Government and the public and private sectors from security of tenure, promotional avenues, retirement packages, housing and other invisibles? In view of these benefits, can there be any fair comparison between the salaries available in the government vis-à-vis the salaries in the private sector?
1.3 In order to ensure a fair comparison based on principles of equity and social justice, would it not also be appropriate to take into account the economic conditions of large sections of the community that are less privileged than Government employees and many of whom live below the poverty line?

2. International comparisons
2.1 Some countries have raised civil service pay scales almost to levels prevalent in the private sector on the hypothesis that a well-paid bureaucracy is likely to be honest and diligent. To what extent would such a hypothesis be valid and how far would such a course of action be desirable?

3. Impact on other organizations
3.1 Salary structure in the Central and State Governments is broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions
Their paying capacity is considerably limited. To what extent should this factor be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Government employees?

4. Salaries
4.1 How should we determine the salary to be paid to a Secretary in the Central Government? Please suggest an appropriate basic pay for a Secretary? Can appointment to this post be made on a contractual basis where salaries and tenure are linked to the performance in terms of achieving defined targets?
4.2 What should be the reasonable ratio between the minimum and the maximum of a pay scale?
4.3 Is it necessary to persist with a pre-determined minimum-maximum ratio on ideological considerations? Or is it more important to ensure efficient administration by preventing flight of outstanding talent from Government?

5. Relativities
5.1 Employees in the Secretariat and analogous establishments are entitled to higher pay scales than the corresponding field functionaries. This was supposed to compensate them for the loss of certain facilities available to them in field assignments and the extra effort required for decision-making at the policy level. Are these factors valid even today particularly in the context of decentralization and devolution of administrative powers? Is this discrimination between field and secretariat functionaries even justified today?

6. Group-A Services
6.1 Is there a case for a Unified Civil Service, merging therein all Central (both technical and non-technical) and All India Services, allowing vertical and horizontal movement? Or should there be two distinct streams, one embracing all the technical services and the other for non-technical services?
6.2 Do you feel that the pattern of pay scales for all Group A Services should be redesignated so as to attract candidates of the requisite caliber? Keeping in view some of the compensation packages being offered to fresh professionals by the private sector, what emoluments would you suggest for an entrant to a Group-A Service in Government?

7. Professional personnel
7.1 Should there be a higher compensation package for scientists in certain specialized streams/departments like Department of Space, Department of Atomic Energy? If so, what should be the reasonable package in their case?

8. Classification of posts
8.1 Presently, civilian posts in the Central Government are classified into four Groups (‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ & ‘D’) with reference to their scales of pay. The Fifth Central Pay Commission had recommended their reclassification into Executive, Supervisory, Supporting and Auxiliary Staff. Would you suggest any changes in the existing classification or should the classification recommended by Fifth Central Pay Commission be adopted with/without modifications?

9. Restructuring of Group ‘C’ & ‘D’ posts
9.1 Should all lower Group ‘C’ functionaries in the Secretariat be replaced by multi-functional Executive Assistants, who would be graduates and well versed in office work, secretarial skills and use of modern office equipment including computers? Should similar arrangements can be evolved for Group ‘C’ posts in other organisations of Government?
9.2 Should a similar regrouping of Group D staff into fewer categories capable of performing diverse functions also be carried out?

10. Pay Scales
10.1 How should a pay scale be structured? What is a reasonable ratio between the minimum and maximum of a pay scale?
10.2 The successive Pay Commissions have progressively reduced the number of distinct pay scales. The number of scales has therefore come down from more than 500 scales at the time of the Second Central Pay Commission to 51 scales before Fifth Central Pay Commission, which was brought down to 33 scales by the Fifth Central Pay Commission. The reduction in the number of pay scales brings in attendant problems like the promotion and the feeder grades coming to lie in the same pay scale, etc. Do you feel whether the existing number of pay scales should be retained or increased or decreased or whether the same should be replaced by a running pay scale?

11. Increments
11.1 What should be the criteria for determining the rates and frequency of increments in respect of different scales of pay? Should these bear a uniform or varying relationship with the minima and/or maxima of the scales?

12. Revision of pay scales
12.1 Is there any need to revise the pay scales periodically especially when 100% neutralization for inflation is available in form of dearness allowance?
12.2 How should pay be fixed in the revised pay scales? Should there be a point-to-point fixation? If not, please suggest a method by which it can be ensured that senior personnel are not placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis their juniors and due weightage is given for the longer service rendered by the former.

13. Compensatory Allowances
13.1 Is City Compensatory Allowance a sufficient compensation for the problems of a large city? If DA and HRA provide full neutralization, do you think CCA should continue? Is there a need for changing the basis of classification of cities and the rates of CCA? If so, please suggest the revised basis and rates.

14. Pay and perquisites for Armed Forces
14.1 What should be the basis for determination of pay scales for Armed Forces Personnel? What percentage weightage should be assigned to (i) parity with civil services, (ii) comparison with private sector, (iii) special and hazardous nature of duties, (iv) short career span and (v) restricted rights?
14.2 How should the pay of a soldier, sailor and airman be determined? How should it relate to the minimum wage in Government and the pay of a constable in paramilitary or internal security forces?

15. Abolition of feudalism
15.1 Should all vestiges of feudalism in the country like huge residential bungalows sprawling over several acres, large number of servants’ quarters, retinues of personal staff, bungalow peons, use of uniformed personnel as batmen or on unnecessary security or ceremonial duties etc. be abolished? Please make concrete suggestions.

16. Specific proposals
16.1 In what manner can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more professional, citizen-friendly and delivery oriented?
16.2 Please outline specific proposals, which could result in:
(i) Reduction and redeployment of staff,
(ii) Reduction of paper work,
(iii) Better work environment,
(iv) Economy in expenditure,
(v) Professionalisation of services,
(vi) Reduction in litigation on service matters,
(vii) Better delivery of service by government agencies to their users.

17. New concepts
17.1 Do you think the concepts of contractual appointment, part-time work, flexible job description, flexi time etc. need to be introduced in Government to change the environment, provide more jobs and impart flexibility to the working conditions of employees?
17.2 For improving punctuality/introducing new concepts like flexi time, should biometric entry/exit be introduced?
17.3 What steps should be taken to ensure that scientists, doctors, engineers and other professionals with sophisticated education and skills are retained in their specialized fields in Government? Should they be appointed on contract with a higher status and initial pay, advance increments, better service conditions, etc.?
17.4 Should there be lateral movement from Government to non-Government jobs and vice versa? If so, in which sphere(s) and to what extent?
17.5 It has been suggested that existing Government employees should be encouraged to shift to employment on contract for specified periods in return for a substantially higher remuneration package. Would you agree?

18. Performance Appraisal
18.1 In what way should be present system of performance appraisal be changed? Should be ACR be an open document?
18.2 How far has the introduction of self-assessment helped in the process of appraisal?
18.3 Should appraisal be done for an entire team instead of for individuals?
18.4 In what manner can Government employees be made personally accountable for their acts of omission or commission, without any special safeguards? Would you recommend any amendments to Article 311 of the Constitution, Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 17 and 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and various rules relating to conduct of Government servants and disciplinary proceedings?

19. Holidays
19.1 Kindly comment on the appropriateness of adopting a five-day week in Government offices when other sectors follow a six day week. Please also state whether the number of Gazetted holidays in Government offices should be reduced? Please also comment on the appropriateness of declaring Gazetted holidays for all major religious festivals.
19.2 What do you think is the state of work ethics and punctuality in Government offices? Kindly suggest ways of improving these.
1. Salaries
1.1 The considerations on which the minimum salary in case of the lowest Group ‘C’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a Secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the reasonable ratio between the two.
1.2 What should be the considerations for determining salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?

2. Comparisons
2.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector? If so, why? If not, why not?
2.2 Should there at all be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the public sector? If so, why? If not, why not?
2.3 The concept of variable pay has been introduced in Central Public Sector Enterprises by the Second Pay Revision Committee. In the case of the Government is there merit in introducing a variable component of pay? Can such variable pay be linked to performance?

3. Attracting Talent
3.1 Does the present compensation package attract suitable talent in the All India Services & Group A Services? What are your observations and suggestions in this regard?
3.2 To what extent should government compensation be structured to attract special talent?

4. Pay Scales
4.1 The 6th Central Pay Commission introduced the system of Pay Bands and Grade Pay as against the system of specific pay scales attached to various posts. What has been the impact of running pay bands post implementation of 6th CPC recommendations?
4.2 Is there any need to bring about any change?
4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?
4.4 Successive Pay Commissions have reduced the number of pay scales by merging one or two pay scales together. Is there a case for the number of pay scales/ pay band to be rationalized and if so in what manner?
4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If not, what are your alternative suggestions?

5. Increment
5.1 Whether the present system of annual increment on 1st July of every year uniformly in case of all employees has served its purpose or not? Whether any changes are required?
5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?
5.3 Whether there should be a provision of variable increments at a rate higher than the normal annual increment in case of high achievers? If so, what should be transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement, which could be uniformly applied across Central Government?
5.4 Under the MACP scheme three financial up-gradations are allowed on completion of 10, 20, 30 years of regular service, counted from the direct entry grade. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the scheme? Is there a perception that a scheme of this nature, in some Departments, actually incentivizes people who do not wish to take the more arduous route of qualifying departmental examinations/ or those obtaining professional degrees?

6. Performance
What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?

7. Impact on other organizations
Salary structures in the Central and State Governments are broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions. To what extent should their paying capacity be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Govt. employees?

8. Defence Forces
8.1 What should be the considerations for fixing salary in case of Defence personnel and in what manner does the parity with civil services need to be evolved, keeping in view their respective job profiles?
8.2 In what manner should the concessions and facilities, both in cash and kind, be taken into account for determining salary structure in case of Defence Forces personnel.
8.3 As per the November 2008 orders of the Ministry of Defence, there are a total of 45 types of allowances for Personnel Below Officer Rank and 39 types of allowances for Officers. Does a case exist for rationalization/ streamlining of the current variety of allowances?
8.4 What are the options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence pensions?
8.5 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to war widows?
8.6 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to disabled soldiers, commensurate to the nature of their disability?

9. Allowances
9.1 Whether the existing allowances need to be retained or rationalized in such a manner as to ensure that salary structure takes care not only of the job profile but the situational factors as well, so that the number of allowances could be at a realistic level?
9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?

10. Pension
10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 a re covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?
10.2 As far as pre-1.1.2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and other retirement benefits?

11. Strengthening the public governance system
11.1 The 6th CPC recommended upgrading the skills of the Group D employees and placing them in Group C over a period of time. What has been the experience in this regard?
11.2 In what way can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more efficient, accountable and responsible? Please give specific suggestions with respect to:
a) Rationalisation of staff strength and more productive deployment of available staff;
b) Rationalisation of processes and reduction of paper work; and
c) Economy in expenditure.

12. Training/ building competence
12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?
12.2 One of the terms of reference suggests that the Commission recommend appropriate training and capacity building through a competency based framework.
a) Is the present level of training at various stages of a person’s career considered adequate? Are there gaps that need to be filled, and if so, where?
b) Should it be made compulsory that each civil service officer should in his career span acquire a professional qualification? If so, can the nature of the study, time intervals and the Institution(s) whose qualification are acceptable, all be stipulated?
c) What other indicators can best measure training and capacity building for personnel in your organization? Please suggest ways through which capacity building can be further strengthened?

13. Outsourcing
13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?
13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be outsourced?

14. Regulatory Bodies
14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set up unde r Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/ Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members + support personnel) may be indicated.
14.2 Regulators that may not qualify in terms of being set up under Acts of Parliament but perform regulatory functions may also be listed. The scale of pay for Chairperson /Members and other personnel of such bodies may be indicated.
14.3 Across the Government there are a host of Regulatory bodies set up for various purposes. What are your suggestions regarding emoluments structure for Regulatory bodies?

15. Payment of Bonus
One of the terms of reference of the 7th Pay Commission is to examine the existing schemes of payment of bonus. What are your suggestions and observations in this regard?


7th CPC ToR, DA Merger and Stepping up...9 Points to be discussed in the Standing Committee of National Council(JCM) - AIRF

7th CPC ToR, DA Merger and Stepping up...9 Points to be discussed in the Standing Committee of National Council(JCM) - AIRF

AIRF published the 09 Point Agenda for discussion in the Standing Committee of National Council(JCM) having burining issues of Centrail Government Staff of India on its official website today, the same is reproduced and given below for your information...


Dated: April 9, 2014
The Chairman,
Standing Committee
National Council(JCM),
South Block,
New Delhi

Dear Sir,
Sub: Agenda for discussion in the Standing  Committee of National Council(JCM)

An agenda, comprising of 09 items, to be discussed in the Standing Committee of the National Council(JCM), is being enclosed herewith for necessary action.

Yours faithfully,
(Shiva Gopal Mishra)
Secretary, Staff Side
National Council(JCM)
DA/As above

Copy to: All Constituent Organisations of the National Council(JCM) – for information.


The Government of India have finalized the Terms of Reference of the 7th CPC and circulated the same vide Ministry of Finance’s Resolution No1/1/2013-E.III (A) dated 28th February, 2014. It is a matter of concern that and disappointment that the Terms of Reference have been finalised unilaterally without having thorough discussion with the Staff Side and their views have also not been taken care of while doing so.

It may be recalled that a meeting was convened by the Secretary (Personnel) with the Staff Side members on 24th October, 2013 to discuss the possible Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC being appointed. In that meeting the Staff side had specifically requested that a copy of Terms of Reference for 7th CPC, as proposed by the Ministry of Finance may be circulated to all concerned and thereafter another meeting with Secretary, Department of Expenditure and Department of Personnel & Training be arranged with the Staff Side to discuss and finalise the same, which is clearly mentioned in para 11 of the Record Note of Discussion of that meeting. Subsequently, the Staff Side again requested for an urgent meeting with the Secretary(Expenditure) and Secretary DoPT for finalization of the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Seventh Central Pay Commission vide its letter dated 23rd January, 2014. However, no such meeting was convened and Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC have been finalised by the Government on 28th February, 2014.

While going through the ToR, as finalized by the Government, it is observed that many of the suggestions of the Staff Side, in regard to date of effect of Pay Commission, Merger of D.A., Interim Relief, representation of labour representative in the Commission itself, parity issues in regard to pensioners, settlement of the pending Anomaly items etc., have not been duly considered, which is a matter of dissatisfaction.

The Staff Side, therefore, demands that the Government must discuss the Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC with them and make necessary amendments/revisions to the Terms of Reference.

1. Revision of Wage with effect from 01.01.2011
The present wage structure of the Central Government employees is in vogue on the basis of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission, which took effect from 01.01.2006 in the case of Pay, and in the case of Allowances from 01.09. 2008.

The wage revision of the Central Government employees is done every 10 years, which was recommended by the 5th CPC, however, in the case of Central PUSs, the wage revision normally takes place after every five years. In the past, wage revision has been linked to the extent of erosion of real wages. The degree of inflation in the economy determines the pace of erosion of the real value of wages. The retail prices of those commodities which are computed for determining the minimum wages have risen by about 160% from 01.01.2006 to 01.01. 2011, whereas the D.A. compensation, in the case of Central Government employees, on that date had been just 51%.

Since wage revision in all the Central Public Sector Undertakings takes places every five years through collective bargaining, revision of wages of the Central Government employees in 10 years gives rise to serious disparity in wages and allowances of the Central Government employees, vis-a-vis those in Public Sector Undertakings, which is a major cause of discontentment among them. The Staff Side, therefore, demands that the wage revision of the Central Government employees must also take place after every 5 years on the analogy of CPUSs and therefore, Government must specify the date of effect of the recommendations of the 7th CPC accordingly, i.e. to take effect from 01.01.2011 in place of 01.01.2016.

2. Merger of DA with Pay 
The wage revision of the Central Government employees takes place only through setting up of Central Pay Commissions, which has many a times proved to be a time consuming process. The 6th CPC submitted its report in the time frame provided to it, i.e. 18 months. Since the earlier Commissions had covered many aspects of the principles of wage determination and the periodicity of such revision had come down, the exercise might not now require a longer period of time as was the case earlier, still the 7th CPC shall require a reasonable time frame to go into the matter judiciously because the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC have given rise to large number of anomalies and cadre related grievances.

The methodology adopted for compensating the erosion in the real value of wages in the interregnum period had always been though the mechanism of merger of a portion of DA. The 5th CPC had recommended that the DA must be merged with pay and treated as pay for computing all allowances as and when the percentage of Dearness compensation exceeds 50%. Accordingly even before the setting up of the 6th CPC the DA to the extent of 50% was merged with pay.

As on 1.1.2014, the Dearness compensation is 100%. The suggestion for merger of DA to partially compensate the erosion in the real wages was first mooted by the Gadgil Committee in the post 2nd Pay Commission period. The 3rd CPC had recommended such merger when the Cost of Living index crossed over 272 points i.e. 72 points over and above the base index adopted for the pay revision. In other words, the recommendation of the 3rd CPC was to merge the DA when it crossed 36%. The Government in the National Council JCM at the time of negotiation initially agreed to merge 60% DA and later the whole of the DA before the 4th CPC was set up. The 5th CPC merged 98% of DA with pay. It is, therefore, necessary that the Government takes steps to merge atleast 50% of DA with pay to compensate the erosion of the real value of wages immediately.

3. Appointment on compassionate grounds under the Central Government
Under the pretext of Hon’ble Supreme Court directives, the Central Government introduced a 5% ceiling on compassionate ground appointment. On account of this ceiling limit of 5%, a large number of cases of appointment on compassionate grounds of the dependents of the deceased Central Government employees have been pending in different departments, with the result that, the bereaved families of the late employees are constraints to face undue hardship due to loss of bread winner. Some of such candidates, belonging to Department of Posts, approached the Hon’ble Court of Law and obtained favourable orders, however, these directives have not been acted upon. The Government has chosen to dillydally by filing SLP in the Supreme Court.

It may be recalled that, the Central Administrative Tribunals were established with the intention of expeditious settlement of disputes on service matters. Even recently the Prime Minister's office ordered that it would not be open for various Ministries to appeal against the orders of the Tribunal as a matter of course and efforts must be to explore the ways of acceptances of the judgements of the Tribunal. In the light of these directives, the SLP ought to have been withdrawn.

It is pertinent to further mention here that, the standing Committee on Department of Personnel in one of their reports has termed the scheme of compassionate ground appointments as a sacred assurance to a fresh entrant that if he dies in harness, his family shall not be left in lurch. Such an assurance is being breached by the provisions of limiting such appointments to 5% of vacancies.

The Staff Side is, therefore, of the firm view that this condition of 5% ceiling must be done away with to provide relief to the bereaved families of the deceased Central Government employees.

4. Regularisation of Casual/Contingent/Daily Rate workers 
Due to ban on creation of posts and recruitment of personnel that continued for a very long period and the consequent strain on the existing workers, many departmental heads had to recruit personnel on daily rated basis or as casual workers. Thus, almost 25% of the present workforce in the Governmental organisations are casual workers deployed to do permanent and perennial nature of jobs, contrary to the prohibition of such unfair labour practices by the law of the land. In the fifties and sixties, even the casual workers who had been employed to do casual and non perennial jobs used to get priority for regular employment as and when vacancies for such permanent recruitment arise. It is, however, a matter of concern that thousands of persons are now recruited as casual workers and kept as such for years together and are paid pittance of a salary with no benefits, like Provident Fund, Dearness Allowance, other Compensatory Allowances etc. In order to ensure that they do not get the benefit of regularisation, these workers  are technically discharged for a few days to be employed afresh again. The modus operandi differs from one department to another. While in some organisations, they are recruited through Employment Exchanges, in others, the functions are contracted out. Not only the quality of work suffers, but it is also an inhuman exploitation of the workers given the serious situation of unemployment that exists in the country. While the permanent solution is to sanction the necessary posts and resort to regular recruitment, the Government should evolve a scheme by which these casual/contingent/daily rated workers are made regular workers with all the concomitant benefits available for regular Government employees. Pending finalisation of such a scheme for regularisation, the non regular employees recruited for meeting the exigencies of work must be paid pro-rata salary on par with similarly placed regular employees on the principle of equal pay for equal work.

5. Downsizing, Outsourcing, Contractorisation etc. 
To overcome the difficulties emanated from the total ban on recruitment and creation of posts and more specifically impacted by the 2001 executive fiat of the Government of India in the matter, many departments had to resort to outsourcing of its functions. Some were virtually closed down and a few others were privatised or contractorised. The large scale outsourcing and contractorisation of functions had a telling effect on the efficacy of the Government departments. The delivery system was adversely affected and the public at large suffered due to the inordinate delay it caused in getting the requisite service. The financial outlay for outsourcing of functions of each department increased enormously over the years, as a consequence of which, the quality of work suffered. In order to ensure that the people do get a better and efficient service from the Government departments and to raise the image of the Government employees in the eyes of the common people, it is necessary that the present scheme of outsourcing and contractorisation of essential functions of the Government must be abandoned. The practice of outsourcing and contractorisation is nothing but a cruel exploitation of the alarming situation of unemployment. The system of outsourcing of the functions seeks to informalise the workforce. The contract/casual workers get not even one third of the salary of the regular work force. They have no social security benefits like pension, provident fund gratuity etc. The Central Government employees fought against the temporary service rules which was in vogue in sixties and ensured that the recruitment to Government service is permanent and the civil servants are not allowed to be fired at the whim and fancy of their bosses. The outsourcing and contractorisation has paved way for large scale entry of casual workers and has resulted in the reversal of what all achieved in this direction through struggles in the past two decades.

The prevalent system of outsourcing and contractorisation, therefore, needs to be abandoned and all the regular and perennial nature works should be entrusted on regular Government employees only.

6. Revising Overtime Allowance(OTA) and Night Duty Allowance Rates 
It may be seen that the Overtime Allowance is seldom paid to the Government employees. It is only in case of emergency and in the contingency in which the work cannot be postponed, like that happens in the Railways in smooth running of trains round the clock, in the RMS Division of Postal Department, in the Atomic Energy Commission offices or when the Parliament is in session in other administrative offices, employees are asked to do work beyond the stipulated working hours. The Night Duty Allowance is, however, paid to Government employees who have to work in night shifts with certain stipulated conditions. The 4th CPC recommended that since there had been considerable misuse of the provisions relating to grant of OTA, the Government should find alternative methods to compensate the employees who are asked to work on over time and pending such a scheme being evolved recommended not to revise the rates. However, the Government did not bring in any new scheme but issued the directive that the OTA and Night duty allowance will be paid to the employees who are called upon to do overtime or night duty on the basis of the 4th CPC pay structure. This directive is still in vogue.

Owing to certain disagreements with the Government on these issues, this matter was referred to Board of Arbitration under the JCM Scheme, whereupon the Board of Arbitration, having found unreasonable position taken by the Government, gave out the award in favour of the staff and directed the Government to revise the order whereby the allowance will be linked to the actual pay of the Government employees. The Government did not accept this award and decided to approach the Parliament for rejection of the same. The matter has not yet been placed in the form of a resolution in the Parliament. Despite the fact that the employees had been abiding by the directive of their superiors to be on overtime/night duty, and despite having won the case before the Board of Arbitration they continue to be compensated on the basis of the Notional pay as in 1986. There cannot be a much bigger injustice meted out to the employees. The Government must accept the award of the Board and issue instructions linking the Allowance to the actual pay of the employee.

7. Stepping up of pay of seniors who are drawing less pay than the juniors consequent on fixation of pay due to implementation of 6th CPC recommendations between Direct Recruits and Promotees
Consequent upon implementation of the recommendations of the VI CPC, in respect of pay scales of various categories of staff, there are certain situations where the senior who were promoted before 01.01.2006 are getting lesser pay than their juniors promoted after 01.01.2006, on fixation of their pay w.e.f. 01.01.2006. This, being a serious anomaly, has been raised by different department in their Departmental Anomalies Committees for redressal thereof. While clarifications regarding stepping up of pay of senior who are drawing less pay than the juniors between Direct Recruitees and Promotees, i.e. the seniors and juniors placed in a pay scale, having some Direct Recruitment Quota, have already been issued, whereby seniors’ pay has been stepped up and equated to the juniors. However, in grades where there is no element of Direct Recruitment available, this provision has not been made till date, with the result that, the seniors are still drawing lesser pay than their juniors after fixation of their pay in new pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, which, being a serious anomaly, is resulting in discontentment prevailing among the seniors.

The main incongruity in this case is basically due to the fact that it is for the first time that the 6th CPC has recommended specific entry level pay for Direct Recruits (DRs). This has resulted in employees who were appointed in service prior to the DRs and got promoted earlier are getting less pay as compared to their counterparts recruited directly and who joined after 1.1.2006. It has always been the case that on promotion, the pay of a promoted employee is never fixed at less than the entry level of pay of that post as admissible to a direct recruit.

The Staff Side, therefore, is of the firm view that orders need to be issued to the effect that the pay on promotion w.e.f. 01.01.2006 would not be fixed less than at the prescribed minimum of the Entry Pay as provided for the Direct Entrants in the Revised Pay Rules, to eliminate this anomalous situation.

8. Stepping up of pay of senior employees at par with their juniors consequent upon implementation of MACPS  
The Modified Assured Progression Scheme(MACPS) came into effect on 01.09.2008, and prior to this, Assured Career Progression(ACP) was in vogue. There are number of cases where the seniors who were promoted before implementation of the MACPS and the juniors who could not get normal promotion due to non-availability of vacancy or otherwise, and were extended the benefit of financial upgradation under MACPS on fulfillment of conditions laid down therein, the seniors are drawing lesser pay than their juniors under this scheme.

The MACP Scheme does not stipulate the provision of stepping up of pay of the seniors at par with their juniors, in case the seniors getting lesser pay than their juniors, which is absolutely unjustified and discriminative.

The Staff Side has repeatedly raised this issue in the MACPS’s Anomaly Committee as well, however, this discrepancy has not been done away with till date, with the result that, the seniors are still drawing lesser pay than their juniors, having been extended the benefit of financial upgradation under MACPS and this is causing deep sense of frustration prevailing among the seniors.

Staff Side, therefore, is of the firm opinion that the above-mentioned discrepancy needs to be addressed at the earliest to provide relief to the seniors.

9. Granting of Additional Pay to Loco & Traffic Running Staff  
On the basis of recommendations of the 6th CPC, Additional Pay of Rs.1000 p.m. with appropriate Dearness Allowance has been granted in favour of Loco Pilot(Mail/Express)/Sr. Motorman(PB-II, GP Rs.4200)/(Rs.6000-9800)(5th CPC). Similarly, Rs.500 has been granted to Loco Pilot(Passenger II/ Motorman)(PB-II, GP Rs.4200)/(Rs.5500-9000)(5th CPC) and Guard(Mail/Exp.)(PB-II, GP Rs.4200) (Rs.5500-9000)(5th CPC). But the same Additional Pay has not been granted to rest of the Loco & Traffic Running Staff, causing great injustice to these set of Loco & Traffic Running Staff.

It would be quite appropriate that the Additional Pay should be granted in favour of all other categories of Loco & Traffic Running Staff.

Source: AIRF

Now Trending

Holidays to be observed in Central Government Offices during the year 2020

Holidays to be observed in Central Government Offices during the year 2020 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT HOLIDAY LISTS 2020 F.No.12/1/20...


All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. Our blog "Central Government Staff news" accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog.

Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only.

The blog "Central Government Staff news" is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Any suggestions write to us