|
|
|
|
National Federation of Atomic Energy
Employees
NFAEE
DEPARTMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY
Regn.No.17/9615
Recognised by DAE vide DAE OM No.
NFAEE OFFICE, Opp: NIYAMAK BHAVAN,
Anusaktinagar, Mumbai 400 094
Web site: www.nfaeehq.blogspot.com;
Email address: nfaee@yahoo.com
|
Ref.No: nfaee/sg/14/062 07.05.2014
To
The Secretary
7th Central Pay
Commission
New Delhi 110001
Sub:
Submission of Questionnaire to Seventh Central Pay Commission – Inviting of
comments from Units/Association – Reg
Madam,
Please
refer your letter No. 7CPC/15/Questionnaire dated 9th April 2014
regarding the above mentioned subject.
National
Federation of Atomic Energy Employees (NFAEE) prepared comments on the
questionnaire circulated by the Seventh Central Pay Commission in consultation
with the affiliated unions and associations of DAE employees of various units.
Copy
of the comments is attached along with this letter.
Please
acknowledge the same .
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(Jayaraj
K.V)
Secretary
General
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
7th CPC
Questionnaire
Comments
prepared by
National
Federation of Atomic Energy Employees
(NFAEE)
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.
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 unskilled 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
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 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.
Similarly there are few Aided Institutions under DAE carrying Research &
Development activities in advance science.
The employees of these units also having the pay structure as per the
recommendations of Pay Commissions. The
employees working in various sectors of the Department exposed to Radiation
filed and other chemical hazardous area and faces life long health hazardous. Thus
Special Pay package should be extended to the employees of DAE.
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 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 Units
and the Government employees more or less are shares 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.
Further
we would like mention here that various time-bound promotion schemes may be
necessary for scientific organizations as the morale of scientists,
technocrats, technical staff and other categories of employees 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 development activities.
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. 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 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.
The fixation benefit on promotion should not be
less than that of the junior got on
promotion.
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 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 a minimum of 5 financial upgradation extended to the
employees during the entire service period.
6.
Performance
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?
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.
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.
Prior
to Fifth Central Pay Commission, all non-gazetted employees in receipt of
monthly basic pay of upto Rs.2200 were entitled to Over Time Allowance for
performing duties beyond the designated working hours. The Fifth Pay Commission
had recommended abolition of Over Time Allowance for all categories except the
Staff Car Driver, operational staff and
industrial employees.
The
categories of operational staff
irrespective of working BARC, IGCAR or HWB who are governed by statutory
provisions will need to be paid this allowance in accordance with the extant
rules and instructions because payment of this allowance in their case is a
statutory requirement.
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.
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?
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
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 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.
Outsourcing
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?
No.
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.
Workers
employed in industrial establishments are entitled for bonus under the Payment
of Bonus Act, 1965. The Act originally provided for a minimum bonus of 4% of
pay including dearness allowance. The minimum limit of 4% was raised to 8.33%
from 1971-72 onwards. In 1966, the Government decided that the benefits
available under the Bonus Act will also be extended to other industries that
were hitherto outside the purview of the Act.
Subsequently,
the employees of Government industries run departmentally like Railways etc.
started demanding bonus as well. The Railway employees also went on strike on
this issue in 1974. The PLB scheme was implemented for the first time in
Railways in 1979 and the functioning of the scheme was reviewed in 1982-83 by
the Bazle Karim Committee. This Committee recommended the evolution of PLB for
all the Government employees as a whole. However, evolving a formula under which
such PLB could be extended to all the employees
Most
of the countries pay PRI in form of merit increments as well as bonuses. Rate
of merit increments normally varies from 3% to 20%. Rate of Bonus varies and
countries like South Korea pays bonus of upto 100% of the monthly base salary
The
IIM (A) case studies have also recommended bonuses between 5-20% of the basic
pay.(2.5.12)
it
is not found feasible to implement PRIS immediately, the existing productivity
linked bonus schemes may be continued in a modified manner where the formula
for computing the bonus has a direct nexus with the increased
profitability/productivity under well-defined financial parameters(4.4.5)
*****
Ref.No: nfaee/sg/14/062 07.05.2014
To
The Secretary
7th Central Pay
Commission
New Delhi 110001
Sub:
Submission of Questionnaire to Seventh Central Pay Commission – Inviting of
comments from Units/Association – Reg
Madam,
Please
refer your letter No. 7CPC/15/Questionnaire dated 9th April 2014
regarding the above mentioned subject.
National
Federation of Atomic Energy Employees (NFAEE) prepared comments on the
questionnaire circulated by the Seventh Central Pay Commission in consultation
with the affiliated unions and associations of DAE employees of various units.
Copy
of the comments is attached along with this letter.
Please
acknowledge the same .
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(Jayaraj
K.V)
Secretary
General
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
7th CPC
Questionnaire
Comments
prepared by
National
Federation of Atomic Energy Employees
(NFAEE)
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.
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 unskilled 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
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 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.
Similarly there are few Aided Institutions under DAE carrying Research &
Development activities in advance science.
The employees of these units also having the pay structure as per the
recommendations of Pay Commissions. The
employees working in various sectors of the Department exposed to Radiation
filed and other chemical hazardous area and faces life long health hazardous. Thus
Special Pay package should be extended to the employees of DAE.
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 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 Units
and the Government employees more or less are shares 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.
Further
we would like mention here that various time-bound promotion schemes may be
necessary for scientific organizations as the morale of scientists,
technocrats, technical staff and other categories of employees 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 development activities.
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. 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 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.
The fixation benefit on promotion should not be
less than that of the junior got on
promotion.
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 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 a minimum of 5 financial upgradation extended to the
employees during the entire service period.
6.
Performance
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?
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.
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.
Prior
to Fifth Central Pay Commission, all non-gazetted employees in receipt of
monthly basic pay of upto Rs.2200 were entitled to Over Time Allowance for
performing duties beyond the designated working hours. The Fifth Pay Commission
had recommended abolition of Over Time Allowance for all categories except the
Staff Car Driver, operational staff and
industrial employees.
The
categories of operational staff
irrespective of working BARC, IGCAR or HWB who are governed by statutory
provisions will need to be paid this allowance in accordance with the extant
rules and instructions because payment of this allowance in their case is a
statutory requirement.
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.
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?
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
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 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.
Outsourcing
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?
No.
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.
Workers
employed in industrial establishments are entitled for bonus under the Payment
of Bonus Act, 1965. The Act originally provided for a minimum bonus of 4% of
pay including dearness allowance. The minimum limit of 4% was raised to 8.33%
from 1971-72 onwards. In 1966, the Government decided that the benefits
available under the Bonus Act will also be extended to other industries that
were hitherto outside the purview of the Act.
Subsequently,
the employees of Government industries run departmentally like Railways etc.
started demanding bonus as well. The Railway employees also went on strike on
this issue in 1974. The PLB scheme was implemented for the first time in
Railways in 1979 and the functioning of the scheme was reviewed in 1982-83 by
the Bazle Karim Committee. This Committee recommended the evolution of PLB for
all the Government employees as a whole. However, evolving a formula under which
such PLB could be extended to all the employees
Most
of the countries pay PRI in form of merit increments as well as bonuses. Rate
of merit increments normally varies from 3% to 20%. Rate of Bonus varies and
countries like South Korea pays bonus of upto 100% of the monthly base salary
The
IIM (A) case studies have also recommended bonuses between 5-20% of the basic
pay.(2.5.12)
it
is not found feasible to implement PRIS immediately, the existing productivity
linked bonus schemes may be continued in a modified manner where the formula
for computing the bonus has a direct nexus with the increased
profitability/productivity under well-defined financial parameters(4.4.5)
*****
