ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF PAY & ACCOUNTS OFFICERS
(CIVIL)
(Recognised by Govt. of India)
Central Headquarter:2/10 Jamnagar House, New Delhi 110011
Address for communication: C/o. Regional Pay &
Accounts Office, Ministry of Textile,
Prathistha Bhavan, 3rd floor, 101 M.K. Road,
Mumbai – 400020
SECRETARY GENERAL:
A.B.SUNILKUMAR
PRESIDENT: S.S. CHAUHAN M 09869253062 M 09013207971
AIAPAO(C)/CHQ/2014-15 Dt. 03-05- 014
Dear
Friends/Comrades
Please find enclosed herewith
the draft reply to the Questionnaire issued by 7 CPC., received from the
Confederation of Central Government Gazetted Officers’ Organisations , Please
go through it and opinion and suggestions if any on this regard may please be forwarded to the
association headquarter so as to give our final opinion on the basis of
feedback from each state/station/zonal branches of our association. A
detailed draft memorandum / points may be prepared and sent to HQR Association
for finalisation taking into consideration of all suggestions and draft replies
to the questionnaire from our association, which shall be submitted to the Confederation of Central Govt Gazetted
Officers Organization for consideration and submission to 7th CPC .
As per the one day convention of CCGGOO a consensus and fair unanimity of
opinion need to be arrived at taking into account different
opinions/suggestions from constituent organisations. The replies may be drafted
as brief as possible covering common
issues.
The issues specific to Civil Accounts Organisaion and our own members
need to be covered in the memorandum to be submitted by the AIAPAO (C) . The
time available for submission of memorandum is very short taking into account
the time frame of 18 months. It there for
suggested to have general body meeting/branch meeting of our branches
immediately and give separate
suggestions : (a) for inclusion in the replies to draft questionnaire and (b)
The draft memorandum to be submitted by the AIAPAO(C) to the 7th CPC . The draft replies
to questionnaire and draft memorandum may be sent to the association
headquarter through email within two to three weeks of receipt of this email
Yours
fraternally,
(A.B.
Sunilkumar)
Secretary
General
CONFEDERATION
OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT GAZETTED OFFICERS’ ORGANIZATIONS
7th CPC Questionnaire
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.
Any Commission
which considers the question of emoluments for employees/workers should first
be inspired by the implication flowing from the amendment to the preamble of
our Constitution where-by the words “socialist & secular” were prefixed to
the word “Republic”, as also the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined
in Article 43 i.e. the State should endeavour to secure living wage for
its employees/Officers/workers.
Wage structure
in civil service is to be determined on the basis of the computation of the
minimum wage, fair comparison of wages elsewhere etc. The living wage, which is
guaranteed by the Constitution, has not been defined. The 15th Indian Labour Conference
held in 1957 brought in the concept of “Need Based Minimum wage” on the basis
of Dr. Aykroid formula. The need based
minimum wage is required to be provided for an unskilled worker whenever one is
employed. The definition underwent minor
changes, when the Supreme Court revised the norms later. Presently there is no unskilled regular
employees’ cadre in Government of India services. The Commission is required to first determine
the need based minimum wage as per the Dr. Aykroid formula and make necessary
adjustment to determine the wages of MTS which is the lowest category in
Government of India services.
Group C is a
skilled worker. MTS is the lowest category
of Group C. The 6th CPC evolved the MTS by amalgamating some of the
unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled functions without any scientific basis or
logic. From the standpoint of the
stipulation in the recruitment rules, eligibility criteria etc, MTS deserves to
be categorized as a skilled worker.
The
co-relation of the wages of the unskilled and skilled worker at the lowest
grade had always been of the order of 130% for the skilled worker. The minimum of the pay of the MTS has
therefore to be determined at 130% of the need based minimum wage of the
Unskilled. Unskilled workers engaged in hazardous activities like scavenging,
maintenance of rail track, in Laboratories, Hospitals etc may also be granted
wages of skilled workers
4th CPC
had determined the ratio between minimum & maximum of salary to be 10.7
(Chapter 41 & 43) Vth CPC maintained it to be 10.97 (Appendix ‘I’ summary
of recommendations Para 19) So far as maximum salary
is concerned the 6th Central pay commission was of the view that
minimum and maximum ratio salary in the vicinity of 1: 12 would be justified. After
implementation of 6th CPC this ratio stand raised to 1: 12.85 both for salaried employees & Pensioners which is
much more than even the advanced capitalist countries like America &
Britain. This negative and socially regressive decision of the 6th Central Pay
Commission has resulted in worsening wealth and income inequality not only
between pre-and post-2006 retirees, but even within pre-2006 retirees. Hence the ratio between the lowest and
highest scale be brought down to at least 1:10
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?
Salary for
various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest
level functionaries should be determined by applying the existing vertical and
horizontal relativities which have been evolved over a time through various Pay
Commissions. The wages given in Private / Public sector undertakings to
functionaries having similar job profiles as obtaining in Government Sector
could also be considered for this purpose.
Another factor
which should be taken into account is in respect of special functionaries like
Doctors, Engineers, Scientists and other technocrats like Accountants/Auditors
who normally prefer to work in the Private Sector and therefore either do not
offer themselves for Government service or tend to leave it and go over to the
Private Sector. Instead of giving them the salary structure of Group A
administrative post they should be granted higher wages and perquisite as are obtaining
in the Private sector.
The pay scales are not uniform in the Group
B Gazetted category across all the departments. We are
of the opinion that categorising the officers as Group A and Group
B Gazetted should be abandoned as there is a need for only two categories in
the Central Government, viz. Gazetted
Officer and Non Gazetted Staff. Alternatively, every Group B Officer should be
upgraded to Group A status after a minimum residency period of 3 years. There
is an immediate need to fix a decent pay for the Group B Gazetted Officers. In
view of the lack of uniformity in the pay scales of Group B Gazetted Officers
it is imperative that uniform and distinct Scales are prescribed
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?
There should
be no comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government
and the private sector for their functions and objectives are
incomparable. While the private sector
is motivated by the concept of maximization of profit, the requirement of
service to public without any fear or favor is the cardinal principle of
governance. A civil servant is supposed
to possess the qualities of being fearless but appreciative of inherent
individual difficulties, non discriminatory between one citizen and the other;
sense of equality; adherence to the rules and regulations etc.
However a
“fair comparison with outside wages” is a principle which has been adopted
world over for determination of wages of Civil (Government) servants and
therefore at least at the level of unskilled work, the average minimum wage
obtaining in selected Private/Public sector undertakings is a must subject to
the condition that it should not be less than the Need Based Minimum wage
determined and quantified on the basis of norms adopted by the 15 ILC.
So far as perquisites
are concerned no comparison with those obtaining in Private sector is possible
except in the case of House Rent/Travelling Allowances because of following facts:
(A)The Central Government employees are
more responsible and accountable than private services. (B) The Scientific
& Technical services and other of the Central Government services much more
advanced and have more technical knowledge than private counterparts. (C)The motto of the various Government
agencies such as Railways, Postal, Agriculture,
Water, Research Departments etc. is “service” to the public. Government is a
model employer; hence the wages should be paid as per requirement not
considering profit. (D) At Gazetted Group “B” and promote cadre level the
salaries of the Government are lower than Private sector. (E)Many of the
allowances are net of taxes whereas in Central Government allowances are taxed.
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?
Yes. Public Sector employees and Officers and the
Government employees and Officer are more or less perform the same functions
and are required to have similar perception and objective
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?
The concept of
performance related pay structure was actually imported by the 6th
CPC through the Pay Band and Grade Pay system.
In the absence of an objective measurement criterion to evaluate the
performance of individual officials and groups, the innovation was flawed right
at the outset. The 6th CPC failed to
recognize the fact that in Governmental set up, segmentation of functions into
tiny units is next to impossible. In
order to make the concept workable, the organization must be capable of
finalizing clear cut targets both at the individual and group levels. This
being difficult in most of the Governmental organizations, it is not desirable
either to continue with the existing system or import or replicate what is done
in the Public Sector Undertakings. In most of the Government functions the
contribution of any single individual cannot be measured and consequently no
acceptable parameters to measure an individual’s performance can be devised. It
is also pertinent to point out that most of the west European countries, which
adopted the Performance pay related scheme in civil service in the hay-days of
Thatcher-Reagan era subsequently discarded it as infeasible.
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?
Generally the
pay package in Government service at all levels is low compared to the
exorbitant pay packets provided by some of the Transnational Corporation in the
private Sector. This has no doubt a
deleterious impact on the quality of personnel recruited to Civil service,
especially at lower levels. Since the
Group A Service officers in Civil Service enjoy enormous power, perks and
privileges and an incomparable job security it has continued to attract
talents. As mentioned elsewhere, while
parity with the pay and perquisites with the private sector is neither
desirable nor feasible, the Commission must ensure that the widening gap in this
regard is taken into account as an important factor to be addressed. The
element of statutory Pension is one very important and significant factor
attracting persons for Government service. Therefore, the NPS and PFRDA Act
need to be scrapped and statutory pension as a service condition may be
restored.
3.2 To what extent should government
compensation be structured to attract special talent?
Government may
be required to requisition the service of personnel with special talents like
Doctors, Engineers, Scientists & other technocrats like Auditor for
specific functional jobs. The Government
must draw out a plan to recruit them for a higher compensation outside the
realm of the All India services or organized Group A services. The Commission may evolve a scheme for the
recruitment and retention of technocrats with better
pay scales, better promotional avenues and higher incentives, higher allowances
and tax free allowances, introduction of pension scheme for all, the persons
with higher qualification should be provided with additional increments.
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?
The Pay Band
and Grade Pay system evolved by the 6th CPC in implementation of the
concept of performance related pay structure in civil service, as mentioned
elsewhere, proved to be a disaster. Having introduced without proper consultation
with the stake holders, it did not serve the requisite purpose. The system
brought about innumerable anomalies of varied nature, which could not be
addressed by the National or Departmental Anomaly committees within the
parameters stipulated by the Government.
The failure of these committees to address the issues which were
appreciated by all concerned as genuine stand testimony of the incorrigible
character of the scheme leaving no alternative except to discard it to be
replaced by the Pay scale structure.
It is not out of the way to add here that the
Government, departments have not come forward to address the issues related to
anomaly in the case of Gazetted Group ‘B’ Officers. The issue is aggravated by
the fact that the 6th CPC had provided for only three Grade Pay to
Group B Gazetted officers rendering it impossible for getting any leverage in
rectifying the anomalies. The Group B Gazetted
officers have thus been let to suffer injustices by the 6th
CPC .The Central Government also has not provided the Group B Gazetted officer
any forum to voice their grievances and to seek redressal of their grievances.
4.2 Is there any need to bring about
any change?
Yes. This has
to be changed.
There is a
need to revert to Time Scale pattern of wage structure abandoning the Pay Band
Grade Pay Structure, The time scale of pay should have a minimum pay band and
annual increment @ 5% of basic pay as in the Banking industry but without any
maximum so that it is a running pay scale. This will eliminate the phenomena of
stagnation.
The promotion to
Group “B” should be uniform in all departments. There should not be
differential treatment between central Secretariat Grade pay and other
departments. The concept of subordinate department should be abandoned with.
All Gazetted Group
B Officers should start with same time scale. For all Supervisors
cadre there should a uniform policy as supervisory cadre should have uniform
pay scale. At present they have different pay scales in different departments. For the same post which include similar duties and responsibility there
are different grade pay’s/ pay scales in different departments,
4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the
Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the
Government?
There is no evidence that the pay bands of the 6th CPC achieved this.
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?
It must be
noted that the successive Pay commissions had reduced the pay scales only at
the Group B, and C levels. It has now
reached a saturation point. There is no scope
to have further exercise in this direction except where clear overlapping
exists. The Commission must however
attempt to bring about uniform hierarchical set up at all levels in all
departments. The 33 pay scales recommended by the V CPC may be restored and
revised by the VII CPC by multiplying the existing wages by a common
multiplication factor. V CPC revised the pay structure by multiplying the IV
CPC wages by a factor of 3.25.
4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working?
If not, what are your alternative suggestions?
It is not working and must be replaced with the
pay scale structure
The Grade Pay
has been provided by the VI CPC to purportedly serve as a fitment benefit. The
fitment benefit is the difference between existing pay and the revised pay and
is expressed in terms of certain percentage of pre revised pay. Sum of existing
emoluments and the fitment benefit would be the revised pay in the revised
structure. As for example the pre-revised basic minimum pay of Rs 750/- had
been revised to Rs 2400/- by V CPC. The minimum emolument as on 1.1.1996 was Rs
750/- + 148% DA + Rs 100/- + 2nd IT amounting to Rs 2075 and
therefore 50% of Rs 750/- was demanded as fitment benefit which when added to
2075 would result in Revised minimum wage of Rs 2400/-. As a result of
negotiation 40% of pre-revised basic pay was granted as fitment benefit. The
Grade Pay which is 40% of pre-revised maximum has in no way brought the wages
to the level of the revised wage as no such revised wage structure had at all
been recommended by the VI CPC. The Grade Pay cannot therefore be termed as
fitment benefit and the purpose for which it had been devised is not specified
by the VI CPC. This concept of Grade Pay has therefore not served any purpose
and it is certainly not a fitment benefit. At best is adhoc increase which has
been allowed over the existing basic pay and DA as on 1.1.2006. This increase
has also been subsumed as result of lower rate of DA and at present the
existing Pay (Pay Band + Grade Pay) plus DA is lower than the pre-revised Pay +
DA as would be admissible in terms of V CPC recommendations. That is why the
employees have demanded fresh revision of wages through VII CPC.
The grade pay
which was considered to determine the hierarchy structure has failed in this
regard also. The MACP Schemes permit higher Grade pay without actual assent in
the hierarchy. Thus the concept of Grade pay does not work and has not served
any purpose.
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?
No. In fact
the single date increment system has brought in anomalies, which were discussed
at length at the National Anomaly Committee, though no solution was found. In our Opinion, the commission must
recommend, for administrative expediency, two specific dates as increment
dates. Viz. Ist January and Ist July.
Those recruited/appointed/promoted during the period between 1st
Jan and 30th June, will have their increment date on 1st
January and those recruited/appointed/promoted between Ist July and 31st
December will have it on Ist July next.
The present system of annual increment on 1st
July every year uniformly did not cover the employees who were serving 12
months and retiring on 30th June. The present condition of drawing
increment is that the concerned employee should serve to the government at
least six months in the previous year. Hence the rules may slightly be amended
in such a way that the retiring employees are rewarded with one increment on
the date of retirement.
5.2 What should be the reasonable
quantum of annual increment?
The reasonable
quantum of increment should be 5% of the basic pay as is provided for in the
Banking industry.
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?
In the absence
of a definition for the term “high achiever” and in the absence of transparent
and objective parameters to assess high achievement the system of variable
increments at a rate higher than normal annual increments can possibly be
misused on subjective assessment of high achievements in respect of person who
are favourites of Authority vested with the authority to grant increment at the
rate higher than the normal increment. Presently, the magnitude of higher
achievements is being judged based on the strength of APRs which itself suffers
from personal bias of the reporting/reviewing officers. For these reasons the
provision of variable increment may not be prescribed. Further the Officers and Staff in the Central
Government implement the Schemes of the Government. The implementation involves
many and varied teams working for a common objective. Most of the time the
individual functions and authority varies with reference to many factors. It
will therefore be impossible to exactly define and individual achievement and
to prescribe flawless parameters for such measurement.
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?
The most of the Central Government
Employees are deprived of the regular promotions. They may hardly get one or
two promotions in entire service of 33 years, even in some cases they are
posted from one State to another State disturbing their family life.
The present MACP scheme which was introduced from
the year 2008, which assures three promotions, but falls short of the
aspirations of Central Government Employees. The
MACP, introduced by the Government in replacement of the ACP Scheme already in
vogue has not been applicable to Gazetted
Group B Officers considering the direct recruitment point as an entry point for
the departmental promotee Officers. It is our submission that such a scheme
must be devised for Group B Gazetted Officers also in the event of not
upgrading them to Group A on completion of residency period as already
mentioned elsewhere. In such an event they should be granted at least five
up gradations under the scheme.
In our view the scheme per se cannot be viewed as acting as
disincentive for taking more arduous route of qualifying in departmental
examinations.
The Government has introduced Flexible
complementary scheme for scientific officers of various departments. The Sixth Central Pay Commission (6th CPC)
has examined these schemes in detail and observed that various time-bound
promotion schemes may be necessary for scientific organizations as the morale of the scientists has to be
kept high in order to keep them motivated and to stop the flight of talent from
Government organizations involved in research and scientific activities. In
this context, the 6th CPC has recommended that the existing scheme of FCS with
necessary modifications has to be continued for R&D professionals in all
SBT organizations, and the merit based promotion scheme in the Departments of
Atomic Energy, Space and DRDO would also need to be persisted with. This scheme
is extended to many other departments such as GSI, CGWB etc. These schemes are only for scientists,
whereas Gazetted Group B Officers in these departments and other Central
Government departments are deprived of such FCS promotions.
The scientific officers are having promotions every
three or four or five years by this they get five promotions or more are so,
which other Government servants get promotions every 10 years that too in next
grade pay.
Hence suitable promotion schemes should be
introduced to Gazetted Group B Officers in Central Government services with
hierarchal grade pay should be given rather than next grade pay. This plea has
the support of Judicial pronouncements namely; The
Principal CAT [OA 904/2012 dt. 26-11-2012], Delhi and the Punjab & Haryana
High Court [CWP No. 19387 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.10.2011] have
held that MACP is to be granted on promotional hierarchy and not on next higher
Grade Pay as per the 6th Pay Commission Recommendation. The SLP filed by Union
of India against the P&H decision was dismissed by the Supreme Court [CC
7467/2013].
6. Performance
What kind of incentives would you
suggest to recognize and reward good performance?
As has already been explained there is no
transparent parameters for measuring performance.
We are against
a system of incentives to reward good performance as this would only encourage
favoritism and nepotism.
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?
We submit that
the capacity of a Government to pay need not be gauged only from the available
resources without reckoning its potential to raise resources. Wages cannot be determined on the single
factor of capacity of the employer to pay.
It may be noted that there are various State Governments in the country
which pay better pay packets, perquisites and allowances to its employees than
what is provided to the Central Government employees. Panchayati Raj institution, Municipalities,
normally follow the salary structure of the respective State Governments. It is also submitted that various State
Governments do revise the wages of their employees once in five years. In any case the incapacity of an employer to
pay alone cannot be a justification to deny the minimum wage to workers and the
salary structure.such capacity cannot be an excuse for denial of fair wages
existing in the society which is evolved as a product of collective bargaining
of the workers. This does not however mean
that the Commission must totally ignore the capacity of Government to bear the
burden of additional financial outflow on account of wage revision.
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?
The existing
allowances need to be retained. They are
at a realistic level having been evolved by successive Pay Commission over
detailed deliberations. The present Travelling Allowances and Daily allowance
need to be enhanced to ensure that the element of cost of accommodation, cost
of food expenses and cost of local travelling expenses are realistic and do not
put the Government Servant to a loss. These in our opinion, should be treated
as entitlements and not as ‘reimbursement of expenses based on production of
bills.
9.2 What should be the principles to
determine payment of House Rent Allowance?
The basis of
cost of living index and should be taken into account and determined the A-I
cities should be paid higher HRA than A class cities.
The IIIrd CPC
had recommended that Government should lay down appropriate HRA rates in
different cities and town based not on population criteria, but on an actual
assessment of prevailing level of rent in different cities and Towns.
Alternatively, certain notional rents for different types of accommodation
meant for officers and personnel of specified pay groups should be laid down
for particular cities after studying the actual condition in that city. The
notional rent determined should be paid
as HRA . Further the HRA should be linked with DA increase.
10. Pension
10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on
or after 1.1.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been
the experience of the NPS in the last decade?
We are of the
considered opinion that the new pension scheme which came into existence for
the employees recruited after 1.1.2004 must be scrapped. The old statutory pension scheme as was in
vogue prior to 1.1.2004 must be made applicable to all Government employees
irrespective of the date of their entry into Government service.
Since this New
Pension Scheme has been introduced with effect from 01.01.2004, it will come
into operation only after 30 years in year 2034 or so when present new entrants
retire and get pension from annuities purchased from 40% of total accumulated
pension fund. It cannot, therefore, be said now whether the Pension would be
more than the Statutory Pension i.e. 50% of last Pay drawn or less than that.
However at present those who entered service on or after 01.01.2004 but have
retired or died are getting pension as per CCS (Pension) Rules 1965.
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?
The concept of
modified parity introduced by the 5th CPC as a measure to reduce the
financial implication must be replaced with the full parity concept as was applicable
for the personnel retired prior to 1.1.1986. In other words, the pay of every
retired person must be re-determined notionally as if he is not retired and
then his pension to be computed under the revised rules. This alone will
protect the real value of pension of a retired person.
5th CPC in their Para 127.6 has observed, “It needs to be
averred emphatically that pension is not in the nature of alms being doled out
to beggars. Senior Citizens (Retired Government employees) need to be treated
with dignity & courtesy benefitting their age. Pension is their statutory,
inalienable, enforceable right & it has been earned by the sweat of their
brow” Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its landmark Judge Constitutional Bench
judgement dated 17.12.1982 in the case of DS. Nakara Vs Union of India ruled –
“A Pension
scheme consistent with available resources must provide (adequate pension) so
that the Pensioner would be able to live
i) free from want,
with decency, independence and self respect and
ii) At a standard equivalent at
pre-retirement level.
iii) Pensioners from payment of pension form a
homogenous class. Different formulae affording unequal treatment cannot be
adopted to compute their pension solely on the ground that some retired earlier
and some retired later.
In another Constitution Bench Supreme Court judgement in consumer
Education & Research Centre Vs UOI (AIR 1995 Supreme Court 922) it was held
that the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health as a
fundamental right of all workers in terms of Article 21 read with Article
39(c), 41, 43, 48A etc of the constitution and this right to health is an
integral fact of meaningful right to life. Therefore right to medical aid to protect
health and vigour of a worker while in service or post retirement is a
fundamental right to make their life meaningful and purposeful with dignity of
the person.
Accordingly we
suggest –
I) Bring down the Ratio between maximum and minimum pension to 10:1
ensuring complete equality by adopting uniformly common multiplication factor
for revision of pension.
ii) Just as Gratuity is computed on Pay + DA, Pension should also be
computed on Pay + DA and it should not be less than 65% and family pension 45%
of last emolument (Pay + DA). This was recommended by Tata Economic Consultancy
Services (vide Para 127.9 Vol.III of 5th CPC report).
iii) Grant 5% upward enhancement in pension every 5 years after the age of
60 years and upto 80 years and thereafter as per existing dispensation.
iv) Pension should be net of Income
Tax (vide Para 167.11 V CPC Report Vol.III).
v) Automatic Merger of Dearness Relief with pension whenever it goes
beyond 50% (as recommended by 5 CPC).
vi) Restoration of commuted value
of pension after 12 years.
vii) Benefit of full pension after 20 years of service may also be
extended to pre 2006 retirees.
viii) Medical facilities, hospitalisation facilities
need to be extended to all Pensioners from all Department (including Postal
Pensioners) and their dependents for cashless medical facilities across the
country in all Government hospitals, all NABH accredited Multi Super Specialty
Hospitals.
ix) Hospital Regulatory Authority should be set up
to ensure that the hospitals provide reasonable care to smart card holders CGHS
Rates may be revised keeping in view the market conditions.
x) Fixed Medical Allowance should be Rs.2000/- and
as in the case of Transport Allowance D.R. should be granted on this FMA as
well and it should be exempted from Income Tax.
xi) The Parity in Pension between existing and future pensioners should
be ensured as recommended by Vth CPC.
xii) SCOVA may be upgraded to function as a National Council of
JCM/National Anomaly Committee.
xii) New Pension Scheme & PFRDA Act may be scrapped and employees
entering service on or after 01.01.04 may be covered under statutory Pension
Scheme i.e. CCS (Pension) Rules 1965 as amended from time to time.
xiii) Settle all the anomalies which had arisen on
implementation of 6 CPC recommendations.
xiv) To enable the persioners to live a dignified and decent life they
need to be compensated for house rent/house maintenance. An element of House
rent allowance may be added to pension.
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?
Our experience has been good. We suggest more up
gradation with adequate training.
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.
Whatever
rationalization effected so far by the Government had been through an
unscientific and arbitrary like the one of 2001 and which was kept operative
till 2009. The said exercise only reduced the staff strength drastically. It, in effect, made most of the departments
of the Govt. of India either non functional or dysfunctional. In our considered opinion, the 7th
CPC must recommend to the Government to
set up a Committee in each department with experts from outside the
organization, the officials from within the organization and representative of
the Unions of the respective department to study the functional changes over the years, the new challenges and the
best way to meet those challenges’ reduction in paper work, customer
satisfaction and economy in expenditure and make suggestions to the Government
for their acceptance and implementation.
There are many rules and regulations prescribed by
a Central Government servant than in private or public sector organisations. In
complying with them paper work is inevitable. The present RTI act is also making Central
Government employee more accountable. Hence reduction of paper work has to be
attempted scientifically to ensure relevance and other needs.
12. Training/ building competence
12.1 How would you interpret the concept
of “competency based framework”?
No comments.
This needs to be examined by the Administrative Reforms Commission and not the
Pay Commission.
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?
No comments. The reply can be given Government
Departments
13. Outsourcing
13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing
at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?
Outsourcing of Governmental functions per se is
undesirable and must be stopped. The experience has been sheer duplication of
work by existing regular employees
13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be
outsourced?
No. for
reasons stated in reply to question No. 13.
14. Regulatory Bodies
14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set
up under 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?
The 7th
CPC must make note of the recommendations in the matter of the 5th
and 6th CPC & Bazle Karim Committee Report which are yet to be
acted upon by the Government. The
present system of Productivity linked bonus is the product of bilateral
agreements and cannot be changed through unilateral decisions. What is needed is that the Government must
issue necessary guidelines to enable all departments to enter into such
bilateral agreements with their staff unions so that the adhoc bonus system
presently in vogue in many departments is abolished. Until this is done the
average (weighted) of existing Productivity Linked Bonus may substitute 30
days’ adhoc bonus to employees not so far covered under scheme of Productivity
Linked Bonus.
The Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 provides for the payment
of bonus to persons employed in certain establishments, employing 20 or more
persons, on the basis of profits or on the basis of production or productivity
and matters connected therewith.
The minimum bonus of 8.33% is payable by every
industry and establishment under section 10 of the Act. The maximum bonus
including productivity linked bonus that can be paid in any accounting year
shall not exceed 20% of the salary/wage of an employee under the section 31 A
of the Act. In many private company’s including
IT and BT the bonus is paid as one month salary, whereas for Central Government
employees it is Rs 3500/- per year. The Central Government employees/Officers
irrespective whether they are Gazetted or Gazetted should also be provided 8.33
% of total salary of the year (Basic pay + GP +DA) as Bonus.
There is no reason
whatsoever, as to why this Gazetted Group B Officers are denied even this adhoc
Bonus applicable to other employees working in the Central Government. Even
though Bonus Act is said to have no application or relevance to the
Productivity linked Bonus or adhoc bonus, the provisions of the said Act are
employed to deny bonus to the Government Gazetted Officers on the basis of
their emoluments. By artificially
linking the restriction of emoluments stipulated by the Bonus Act, the Gazetted
Officers are denied their legitimate entitlement to Bonus. It is, therefore,
urged that the Bonus entitlement be considered for Gazetted Group ‘B’ Officers
also.
NB: The draft replies to questionnaire
prepared by the Confederation of Central Government Employees and Workers is
also given below for your information
and perusal.
7th CPC
Questionnaire
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. Any Commission which considers
the question of emoluments for employees/workers should first be inspired by
the implication flowing from the amendment to the preamble of our Constitution
where-by the words “socialist & secular” were prefixed to the word “Republic”,
as also the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in Article 43 i.e.
the state should endeavour to secure living wage for its employees/workers.
Group C is a skilled worker. MTS is the lowest category of Group C. The 6th CPC
evolved the MTS by amalgamating some of the unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled
functions without any scientific basis or logic. From the standpoint of the
stipulation in the recruitment rules, eligibility criteria etc, MTS deserves to
be categorized as a skilled worker. In practice, most of the departments have
outsourced or contractorised the unskilled or semi skilled jobs leaving the MTS
to cater to the requirements of the skilled functions. Wage structure in civil
service is to be determined on the basis of the computation of the minimum
wage; fair comparison of wages elsewhere etc. The living wage, which is a constitutional
guarantee, has not been defined. The 15th Indian Labour Conference held in 1957
brought in the concept of “Need Based Minimum wage” on the basis of Dr.
Aykhroid formula. The need based minimum wage is required to be provided for an
unskilled worker whenever one is employed. The definition underwent minor
changes, when the Supreme Court revised the norms later. Presently there are no
unskilled regular employees’ cadre in Government of India services. The
Commission is required to first determine the need based minimum wage as per
the Dr. Aykhroid formula and make necessary adjustment to determine the wages
of MTS which is the lowest category in Government of India services. The
co-relation of the wages of the skilled and skilled worker at the lowest grade
had always been of the order of 130% for the skilled worker. The minimum of the
pay of the MTS has therefore to be determined at 130% of the need based minimum
wage. The minimum maximum ratio obtaining in different countries as per
information gathered by V CPC was as under:
Malaysia - 1:3
Sweden - 1:4
USA -
1:4
Britain - 1:6
France - 1:6.6
Indonesia - 1:6.9
Australia - 1:7.7
Thailand - 1:9
Hong Kong - 1:40
However, the earlier
Pay Commissions had adopted a ratio of 1:10. Since the minimum wage in the
Central Government sector is no more related to an unskilled worker, this ratio
must be proportionately changed to 1:9. If one is to take into account the fact
that the Pay of Cabinet secretary, being the topmost Civil Servant I, for no
valid justification,is excluded by the 6th CPC, the ratio in reality between
the minimum and maximum will be more than 1:9. Therefore, so far as maximum
salary in the case of a Secretary level officer is concerned the reasonable
ratio between minimum and maximum salary may be taken as 1:9 and salary of
Secretary level officer may be fixed by multiplying the minimum wage by a
factor of 9. 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? Salary for various levels of functions falling between the
highest and the lowest level functionaries should be determined by applying the
existing vertical and horizontal relativities which have been evolved over a
time through various Pay Commissions. In respect of special functionaries like
Professionals and technocrats who normally prefer to work in the Private Sector
and therefore either do not offer themselves for Government service or tend to
leave it and go over to the Private Sector, Instead of providing them the
salary structure of Group A administrative post they may be granted a special
Pay package. Similarly unskilled workers engaged in hazardous activities like
scavenging, maintenance of rail track, in Laboratories, Hospitals may also be
considered for a special treatment.
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?
There should be no
comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the
private sector for their functions and objectives are incomparable. While the
private sector is motivated by the concept of maximization of profit, the
requirement of service to public without any favour is the cardinal principle
of governance. A civil servant is supposed to possess the qualities of being
fearless but appreciative of inherent individual difficulties, non
discriminatory between one citizen and the other; sense of equality; adherence
to the rules and regulations etc. However a “fair comparison with outside
wages” is a principle which has been adopted world over for determination of
wages of Civil (Government) servants and therefore atleast at the level of unskilled
work, the average minimum wage obtaining in selected Private/Public sector
undertakings is a must, subject to the condition that it should not be less
than the Need Based Minimum wage determined and quantified on the basis of
norms adopted by the 15 ILC. So far as perquisites are concerned no comparison
with those obtaining in Private sector is possible except in the case of House
Rent/Travelling Allowances. Other perquisites in the Private sector have been
granted on altogether different considerations.
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?
Yes. For the sake of a fair comparison of
wages.
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?
The concept of performance related pay
structure was actually imported by the 6th CPC through the Pay Band and Grade
Pay system. In the absence of an objective measurement criterion to evaluate
the performance of individual officials and groups, the innovation was flawed
right at the outset. The 6th CPC failed to recognize the fact that in
Governmental set up, segmentalisation of functions into tiny units is next to
impossible. In order to make the concept workable, the organization must be
capable of finalizing clear cut targets both at the individual and group
levels. This being difficult in most of the Governmental organizations, it is
not desirable either to continue with the existing system or import or
replicate what is done in the Public Sector Undertakings. This apart, it is
pertinent to point out that most the west European countries, which adopted the
Performance pay related scheme in civil service in the hay-days of
Thatcher-Reagan era subsequently discarded it as infeasible.
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?
Generally the pay
package in Government service at all levels is at a low level compared to the
exorbitant pay packets provided by some of the Transnational Corporation in the
private Sector. This has no doubt a deleterious impact on the quality of
personnel recruited to Civil service, especially at lower levels. Since the
Group A Service officers in Civil Service enjoy enormous power, perks
privileges and an incomparable job security it has continued to attract
talents. As mentioned elsewhere, while parity with the pay and perquisites with
the private sector is neither desirable nor feasible, the Commission must
ensure thin at the widening gap in this regard is taken into account as an
important factor to be addressed. The element of statutory Pension is one very
important and significant factor in attracting persons for Government service.
Therefore, the NPS and PFRDA Act may be scrapped and statutory pension as a
service condition may be restored.
3.2 To what extent should government
compensation be structured to attract special talent?
Government may be required to requisition the
service of personnel with special talents of professionals and technocrats for
specific jobs. The Commission may evolve a scheme for the recruitment and
retention of such professionals and technocrats with special pay packets and
flexible service conditions.
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?
The Pay Band and Grade Pay system evolved by
the 6th CPC in implementation of the concept of performance related pay
structure in civil service, as mentioned elsewhere, was a disaster. Having
introduced without proper consultation with the stake holders, It did not serve
the requisite purpose. The system brought about innumerable anomalies of varied
nature, which could not be addressed by the National or Departmental Anomaly
committees within the parameters stipulated by the Government. The failure of
these committees to address the issues which were appreciated by all concerned
as genuine stand testimony of the incorrigible character of the scheme leaving
no alternative except to discard it to be replaced by the Pay scale structure.
4.2 Is there any need to
bring about any change?
Yes. This has to be changed lock, stock and
barrel. There is a need to revert to
Time Scale pattern of wage structure abandoning the Pay Band Grade Pay
Structure. The time scale of pay should have a minimum pay and annual increment
at the rate mentioned in answer to question No. 5.2 but without any maximum so
that it is a running pay scale. This will eliminate the phenomena of
stagnation.
4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth
CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?
No. Not at all. The Pay Band & Grade Pay
structure has not prevented the highly qualified technocrats and professions to
leave the Government in search of better career avenues in public and private
sectors.
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?
It must be noted that
the successive Pay commissions had reduced the pay scales only at the Group C
and D levels. It has now reached a saturation point. There is no much scope to
have further exercise in this direction except where clear overlapping exists.
The Commission must however attempt to bring about uniform hierarchical set up
at all levels in all departments. The pay scales are to be constructed by a
common multiplication factor as was done by the 5th CPC.
4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If
not, what are your alternative suggestions?
It is not working and
must be replaced with the pay scale structure which was in vogue prior to the
implementation of the 6th CPC. . The purpose for which it had been devised is
not specified by the VI CPC. It also did not serve as a fitment benefit. At best
the grade pay can only be termed as an adhoc increase which has been allowed
over the existing basic pay and DA as on 1.1.2006.
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?
No. In fact the single
date increment system has brought in anomalies, which were discussed at length
at the National Anomaly Committee, without reaching an agreement. In our
Opinion, the commission must recommend, for administrative expediency, two
specific dates as increment dates. Viz. Ist January and Ist July. Those
recruited/appointed/promoted during the period between 1st Jan and 30th June,
will have their increment date on 1st January and those
recruited/appointed/promoted between Ist July and 31st December will have it on
Ist July next. This apart the Commission is required to specifically recommend
that those who retire on 30th June and 31st December are granted one increment
on the last day of their service.
5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of
annual increment?
The reasonable quantum
of increment should not be less than 5% of the basic pay or the rate of
increment agreed upon through bilateral discussion in the Banking industry,
whichever is higher.
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?
Without defining the
term “high achiever” and prescribing transparent and objective parameters to
assess high achievement the system of variable increments at a rate higher than
normal annual increments will be misused on subjective assessment of high
achievements. For these reasons and for what we have stated in reply to
question No. 2.3 the scheme of variable increment is not desirable.
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?
There should be 5
financial upgradation in the departmental promotional hierarchy. MACP is a time
bound promotional scheme. The scheme is required to be continued to motivate
personnel at all levels and at all departments especially in those
organizations, where normal promotional avenues are few and far between. Normal
promotions are dependent upon the availability of vacancies at higher levels.
The job requirement of certain organizations may not be capable of creating
requisite number of higher level positions whereas it might need large number
of personnel at lower levels. MACP alone can take care of that specific situation.
The arduous route of career progression through examination and professional
qualification, no doubt will be preferred if and if only such promotions are
made available for the eligible candidates within a reasonable period of
residency in the feeder cadre. Say three years.
6. Performance
What kind of
incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?
We are against the
system of incentives to reward good performance as this would only encourage
favouritism and nepotism for the reasons stated to our reply to question No.2.3
an d 5.2
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?
Capacity of a
Governmental organization to pay cannot be gauged only from the available
resources but also its potential to raise resources. Wages cannot be determined
on the single factor of capacity of the Government to pay. It must be noted
that there are various State Governments in the country which pay better pay
packets, perquisites and allowances to its employees than what is provided to
the Central Government employees. Panchayati Raj institution, Municipalities,
normally follow the salary structure of the respective State Governments. It is
also to be noted that various State Governments do revise the wages of their
employees once in five years. In any case the incapacity of the government to
pay cannot be a justification to deny the minimum wage to workers and the
salary structure based upon that concept, especially in the background that the
government is to function as a model employer. It also cannot be an excuse for
denial of wages on a fair comparison of the wages existing in the society which
is evolved as a product of collective bargaining of the workers.
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?
No comments
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.
No comments
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?
No comments
8.4 What are the
options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence
pensions?
No comments
8.5 As a measure of
special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to
war widows?
No comments
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?
No comments.
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?
The existing
allowances need to be retained. They are at a realistic level having been
evolved by successive Pay Commission over detailed deliberations.
9.2 What should be the
principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?
The IIIrd CPC had
recommended that Government should lay down appropriate HRA rates in different
cities and town based not on population criteria, but on an actual assessment
of prevailing level of rent in different cities and Towns. Alternatively,
certain notional rents for different types of accommodation meant for officers
and personnel of specified pay groups should be laid down for particular cities
after studying the actual market rent in that city. The house rent allowance
will have to be the actual rent payable by an employee in a particular location
as reduced by 10% of basic pay being the amount factored in the computation of
minimum wage.
10. Pension
10.1 The retirement
benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 are
covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the
NPS in the last decade?
We are of the
considered opinion that the new pension scheme which came into existence for
the employees recruited after 1.1.2004 must be scrapped. The old statutory
pension scheme as was in vogue prior to 1.1.2004 must be made applicable to all
Government employees irrespective of the date of their entry into Government
service. The New pension scheme has in fact created a class within class
amongst the Central Government employees which is discriminatory and
impermissible. It is clearly in contravention of the dictum pronounced by the
Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Nakara Vs Union of India and
therefore deserves to be rescinded. Since this New Pension Scheme has been
introduced with effect from 01.01.2004, it will come into operation only after
30 years in the year 2034 or so when present new entrants retire and get
pension from annuities purchased from 40% of total accumulated pension fund.
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?
The concept of
modified parity introduced by the 5th CPC as a measure to reduce the financial
implication must be replaced with the full parity concept as was made
applicable for the personnel retired prior to 1.1.1986. In other words, the pay
of every retired person must be re-determined notionally as if he is not
retired and then his pension to be computed under the revised rules. This alone
will protect the value of pension of a retired person. 5th CPC in their Para
127.6 has observed, “It needs to be averred emphatically that pension is not in
the nature of alms being doled out to beggars. Senior Citizens (Retired
Government employees) need to be treated with dignity & courtesy
benefitting their age. Pension is their statutory, inalienable, enforceable
right & it has been earned by the sweat of their brow” Hon’ble Supreme
Court, in its landmark 5 Judge Constitutional Bench judgement dated 17.12.1982
in the case of D.S. Nakara Vs Union of India ruled – “A Pension scheme
consistent with available resources must provide (adequate pension) so that the
Pensioner would be able to live i) free from want, with decency, independence
and self respect and ii) At a standard equivalent at pre-retirement level. iii)
Pensioners from payment of pension form a homogenous class. Different formulae
affording unequal treatment cannot be adopted to compute their pension solely
on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later. A comprehensive
scheme of retirement benefit has been suggested by the stake holders both as an
agenda in the National Council meeting of JCM and the meetings of SCOVA. The
Commission is requested to consider the well thought out scheme formulated in
those agenda and make recommendations to the Government, so that the pension
and retirement benefits will really become meaningful for the retired
employees. We shall elucidate the points in detail when we submit the
memorandum to the Commission on 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?
The then existing
Group D employees, to the best of our understanding have all been trained,
upgraded or promoted to function as skilled group C employees.
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.
Whatever
rationalization effected so far by the Government had been through an
unscientific and arbitrary executive fiat like the one issued in 2001 and which
was kept operative till 2009. The said exercise only reduced the staff strength
drastically. We are not aware of any rationalization or reduction in Group A
cadres through this exercise even though the executive instruction covered all
grades and cadres in the Government service. It in effect made most of the
departments of the Govt. of India either non functional or dysfunctional. In
our considered opinion, the 7thCPC must recommend to the Government to set up a
Committee in each department with experts from outside the organization, the
officials from within the organization and representative of the Unions of the
respective department to study the functional changes taken place over the
years, especially due to the induction of modern technology the new challenges
and the best way to meet those challenges’ reduction in paper work, customer
satisfaction and economy in expenditure and make suggestions to the Government
for their acceptance and implementation in toto.
12. Training/ building
competence To ensure that periodical professional training is imparted to all
personnel to update the skills.
12.1 How would you
interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?
No comments. This in
fact is a matter which must be considered by an Administrative Reforms
Commission rather than a Pay Commission.
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?
In our opinion in- service training is the
best course for skill development.
Outsourcing of Governmental functions per se is undesirable and must be
stopped.
13.1 What has been the
experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case
for streamlining it?
The experience has
been sheer duplication of work by existing regular employees and deterioration
of efficiency in pubic service.
13.2 Is there a clear
identification of jobs that can be outsourced?
No. for reasons stated in reply to question
No. 13.
14. Regulatory Bodies
No comments.
14.1 Kindly list out
the Regulators set up under Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/
Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members +
support personnel) may be indicated.
No comments. The reply has to be given
Government Departments.
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.
No comments. The reply has to be given
Government Departments.
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?
No comments.
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.
The 7th CPC must make
note of the recommendations of the 5th CPC & Bazle Karim Committee Report
which are yet to be acted upon by the Government. The present system of
Productivity linked bonus is the product of bilateral agreements and cannot be
changed through unilateral decisions. What is needed is that the Government
must issue necessary guidelines to enable all departments to enter into such
bilateral agreements with their staff unions so that the adhoc bonus system
presently in vogue in many departments could be abolished.
