National Federation of Atomic Energy Employees
Department of Atomic Energy
Recognised by DAE vide DAE OM No.
8/1/2007 – IR&W/95 dated
13th June 2007
NFAEE OFFICE, Opp: NIYAMAK BHAVAN, Anusaktinagar, Mumbai 400 094
Government of India vide their OM fated 28th February 2014 constituted 7th CPC to recommend Pay structure and other perks
A questionnaire seeking the considered view of all concerned was issued by the Pay Commission and asked to submit comments before 10th May 2014.
A delegation of NFAEE met the Chairman Atomic Energy Commission and requested the Department to consider the views of the employees before submitting the comments by the Department to the Pay Commission.
Subsequently Department issued letter seeking comments by the unions and associations to submit their comment by 7th May 2014.
A draft proposal has been prepared by the Federation in tune with the policy adopted by the Confederation of Central Government Employees.
Al employees are requested to go through the same and send their comments if any by 7th May morning, so that the corrected version can be forwarded to the Department
With fraternally Greetings
Address for Correspondence: Jayaraj. KV, Secretary General, NFAEE
PESS/UED; BARC, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085
Tel. No: (O): 022 – 2559 6519; (Res): 022 – 25554179; (Mobile): 9869501189
Email Address: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Comments on 7th CPC Questionnaire
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.
After the implementation the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission (SCPC) MTS is the lowest category of Group C. The SCPC evolved the Multi Task Staff (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.
To catering the need of the establishments should think of redefine the job specification of purely un skilled in nature and for which should consider non metric or 8th passed youngsters for the job and that should be considered as the lowest paid employees.
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. 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 to that of the non metric qualified worker recruited for unskilled job in Government service 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 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.
The minimum maximum ratio obtaining in different countries as per information gathered by V CPC was as under:
Malaysia - 1:3
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 4th & 5th Pay Commissions had adopted a ratio of the minimum and maximum pay at the level of Secretary Level is 1:10.6 & 1:10.2 respectively. If considering the same at the level of Cabinet Secretary the ratio has been changed into1:12 and 1: 11.7 respectively during 4th CPC and 5th CPC. Whereas the ratio has been drastically increase to 11.4 and 12.8 in the case of Secretary and Cabinet Secretary respectively. 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. By taking into account, the fact that the Pay of Cabinet secretary, being the topmost Civil Servant, the ratio of the lowest to highest pay should be 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 1:8 and salary of Secretary level officer may be fixed by multiplying the minimum wage by a factor of 8.
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 Professionals, technocrats, technicians who normally prefer to work in the Private Sector as their wages and perks are attractive 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 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.
The activities of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) are entirely different from the other conventional departments. The scientists, technocrats and the technical staff of the Department are involved in the Research and Development activities as well as the generation of power, isotopes for medical purpose and development in agricultural growth. Two Public Sector undertaking under Department of Atomic Energy– Nuclear Power Corporation of India & BHAVINI - follows the pay structures recommended by the pay Commissions. Both PSUs are the pioneer establishments in the Energy sector. The employees working in the Department exposed to Radiation filed and othe chemical hazardous area and faces life long health hazardous. Thus Special Pay package should be extended to the employees of DAE.
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 basic 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 a comparison at the level of the average minimum wage obtaining in selected Private sector is a must. But such comparison should be carried out with firms which defined their minimum pay based on 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. Even what should be wages are given in the Private Sector in the form of a perquisite to evade the taxation.
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. The employees/workers in the Public Sector and the Government employees more or less share same functions, 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, 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.
Attracting the talent is not just required in the All India Services & Group A Services. It is to ensure talented Technocrats and Technicians also necessary for the growth of the establishments like Department of Atomic Energy, department of Space, Defence, etc.
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 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 in para 2.3, was a disaster. Having introduced without proper consultation with the stake holders, it did not serve the requisite purpose. Bringing irrational Pay band and the Grade Pay the discontentment among the employees were increased. 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 reverting back.
There is a need to re introduce the 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 without any maximum so that it is a running pay scale. This will eliminate the phenomena of stagnation. Such pattern is successfully operating in the Banking Sector.
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 from 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 the 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. The Grade Pay was formulated based on the maximum of the pay scale and there is no rational approach on selecting grade pay and thus the benefit extended based on the Grade pay was not consisting. The jump recommended in the grade for the employees having higher responsibility was meager in certain cases. 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.
5.1 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 1st July and 31st December will have it on 1st July next.
5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?
The reasonable quantum of increment should be 5% of the basic pay. In banking and certain other Public Sector the annual increment rate is 5%of the basic pay.
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 the provision of variable increment may not be prescribed.
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?
MACP is time bound financial upgradations to the employees who are eligible for promotion but denied the same due to lack of promotional avenues. 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 care. Say three years. There should be 5 financial upgradations in the departmental promotional hierarchy.
Upgradation under MACP shall be extended in the next grade hierarchy and not to the next pay scale. There should be minimum of 5 financial upgradation during the entire service period.
What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?
Already exists in the Department of Atomic Energy & Department of Space Performance Relative Incentive Scheme. There is need of fine tuning of the PRIS since it has been subsumed all sort of Bonus including PLB. As the Bonus was entitled to all PRIS also should be ensured to all employees. Based on the criteria evolved to grant PRIS quantum may be changed.
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 it’s potential to raise resources. Wages cannot be determined on the single factor of capacity of the employer 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 an employer to pay cannot be a justification to deny the minimum wage to workers and the salary structure based upon that concept. 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?
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?
9.1 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.
Sixth Central Pay Commission subsumed the City Compensatory Allowance while enhancing the Transport Allowance. It should be revert back and the CCA should re introduce.
The classification for Transport Allowance should be revisited. Since the transportation charges for Public Transport System is uniform at large in the cities as well as the rural area reduction in Transport Allowance is not logical.
The recommendation of the earlier Pay Commissions on Over Time Allowance, Night Duty Allowance, etc was vague and misconceive. Net result is that the employees are forced to perform Overtime for negligible pay which is less than the minimum pay for the unskilled workers. There are certain area other that the staff car drivers has to perform Overtime where the Round the Clock shift pattern works are going in Research Plant, etc. Wherever the employees are asked to perform the Overtime they should ensure the OTA and NDA based on the revised pay as per the Overtime Rules.
The Dearness Allowance has been revising twice in a year based on the changes in the Price Index. The Price Index changes as per the market fluctuation. But the uniform DA benefited the higher income group to overcome the price rise where as the lower income group still to fight with the uncontrolled price rice. To overcome the phenomena DA should be given on slab wise.
9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?
The 3rd 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 difference between actual rent paid and 10% of Pay should be reimbursed. This recommendation should be examined and attempt to implement it to all classified towns may be made.
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?
As per the Article 366 (17) of India Constitution explain what the pension is: Pension means a pension, whether contributory or not, of any kind whatsoever payable to or in respect of any person, and includes retired pay so payable, a gratuity so payable and any sum or sums so payable by way of the return, with or without interest thereon or any other addition thereto, of subscriptions to a provident fund.
After the introduction of the NPS, there is no Provident Fund or even nothing mention about the gratuity.
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.
Without prejudice to the above submission to scrap the NPS and PFRDA Act the employees of Department of Atomic Energy Should be exempted from NPS.
It is pertinent to note here that a few organizations/categories of Government employees were specifically exempted from the purview of NPS on consideration of special, riskier and more tedious nature of duties. Most of the activities of the Department are operational organization which required to be run round the clock through the year. The employees of the Department have to work on various uncongenial conditions, in radioactive surroundings, and inherent risks associated with hazardous chemicals and other situations.
Besides the critical and complex nature of duties of DAE employees, the hazards involved are also high as their activities involved radio activity as we well as handling of hazardous chemicals. Despite best efforts for enhanced safety measures, as per the international standards and AERB and BARC safety Guidelines employees are exposed to these threats always.
The implications of the above mentioned situations warranted the employees working in nuclear field need of protection after the retirement also.
Hence we request for exemption from NPS to be considered for DAE employees and a favorable decision may be taken in this regard Department level and the same may be pursue with the Ministry concerned.
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 judgements 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.
Now the Government came out for one rank one pension for the Defence employees.
Considering the above 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. To remove all discrepancies and the anomalies in the fixation of pension one rank – one pension should be ideal.
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 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 taken place 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 in toto.
12. Training/ building competence
12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?
No comments. This is the job of Administrative Reforms Commission and not of any 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.
13.1 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. The activities in core sector such as Department of Atomic Energy, Railways, Depart of Space, Defence, etc the entire programme depends the availability of trained man power to complete the programmes in time. The outsourcing jeopardizes the entire programme by delay in completion, compromising the safety security of the activities, etc.
Outsourcing of Governmental functions per se is undesirable and must be stopped.
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 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. The reply has to be given Government Departments.
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 in 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. 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.