Suggestions - Indian Railways Technical Supervisors Association
by: Guest
Total views: 592
Word Count: 7293
Sixth Central Pay Commission:Suggestions
User Name: Indian Railways Technical Supervisors Association Chandigarh
Comparison with public/private sectors
Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites in Government and the public/private sector?
Yes, it is necessary or rather essential to have a fair comparison of wages in Government, Public, Private & Corporate Sector in the country. The comparison (and demand for parity) in pay scales and perquisites in Government and Public Sector are not only valid but absolutely justified on the basis of principles of natural justice and law of equity and fair play enshrined in Articles 14, 16 and 39 of the Constitution of India, and which has been repeatedly upheld by various courts including the Supreme Court of India in numerous cases.
Is it possible to quantify all other benefits, excluding pay, derived by employees in Government and the public and private sectors from security of tenure, promotional avenues, retirement packages, housing and other invisibles? In view of these benefits, can there be any fair comparison between the salaries available in the government vis-à-vis the salaries in the private sector?
While it may not be directly possible to quantify all the benefits and perks derived by the employees of either of the sectors, but a relative position can surely be derived through a fair comparison. Employees in the Public, Private and Corporate Sectors are not only getting much higher pay than those in the Government sector but also better perks and allowances. Security of service is a myth and a hypothetical preposition. In any case, the so called, security of job (or tenure) cannot be given such a high weightage so as to justify the vast disparity of wages existing today. Especially after Globalization and resulting brain drain from Government to Private and Corporate Sectors for greener pastures, better avenues of promotion and better perks etc takes place.
In order to ensure a fair comparison based on principles of equity and social justice, would it not also be appropriate to take into account the economic conditions of large sections of the community that are less privileged than Government employees and many of whom live below the poverty line?
Though the economic condition of the less privileged sections of society particularly those living below the poverty line, does need to be substantially improved but this should not be at the cost of the Government employees by denying to the latter the parity of wages with their counterparts in Private and Public Sectors on the principles of equity and social justice. The upliftment of the less privileged section of the community requires overall development, eradication of unemployment and effective check on the price-rise, which requires expansion of the role of Government and Public Sector and redefining the role of Private and Corporate Sectors to include there in social obligations towards the weaker section etc. In this context, it may be mentioned that- (a) Pay structure of the Members of Parliament have been revised 27 times in 62 years; (b) The pay structure of PSUs is revised every 5 years, on an average; (c) The overall improvement of economy has provided substantial additional resources to the Government especially after globalization and these additional resources can very well be utilized for upliftment of the poor instead of axing and compromising the interests of the Government employees in respect to granting of fair wages.
International comparisons
Some countries have raised civil service pay scales almost to levels prevalent in the private sector on the hypothesis that a well-paid bureaucracy is likely to be honest and diligent. To what extent would such a hypothesis be valid and how far would such a course of action be desirable?
A wage pattern having a fair comparison of parity between Government and Private/ Corporate Sectors is essential for ensuring honesty and diligence amongst the Government employees, not only because some other countries have rightly adopted this so called hypothesis but, also because this fair comparison and parity is essentially required under the directive principles of the Constitution of India, as well as on the basis of principles of equity and natural justice.
Impact on other organizations
Salary structure in the Central and State Governments is broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions Their paying capacity is considerably limited. To what extent should this factor be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Government employees?
a. While revising the pay scales of PSUs, Corporate sectors, and Peoples Representatives no body bothers to consider the above issues. The liberalization of economy is bound to, and has, resulted in greater resource(s) mobilization at each level including the Central Government, State Government, Municipal Bodies and Panchayati Raj institutions etc. b. According to Govt. of India’s own admission, the Sixth pay commission will not affect the states as they are sitting on a cash surplus close to Rs.400 million. Moreover, the strength of employees in the states has decreased by 0.47 million from 1996 to 2003 (as per DGE&T). In any case, there is absolutely no justification for denial of a fair wage to Central Government employees at par with their counterparts in Public and Private Sectors. Requisite resources for the State (and the Centre) can be adequately raised through the numerous methods. In any case, the %age of Pay and Allowances to the total Revenue & Expenditure of Centre & State Government is comparatively small and has fallen over the years. It can well be adjusted through appropriate resource mobilization through better tax realization, stopping tax evasion, cutting down subsidy to rich farmers & Industrial Houses, better utilization of resources and taxing of affluent farmers & large orchard owners etc.
Salaries
How should we determine the salary to be paid to a Secretary in the Central Government? Please suggest an appropriate basic pay for a Secretary? Can appointment to this post be made on a contractual basis where salaries and tenure are linked to the performance in terms of achieving defined targets?
a) Salary of all Government employees, including the highest salary of a Secretary etc. to the Central Government, should bear relativity with the prevailing wages in the Public, Private and Corporate Sector, to prevent the flight of talent from Government jobs and to induct meritorious candidates at all levels. b) Secretary of the Government should be paid broadly at par with prevailing pay package of Vice-President in Corporate Sector.
What should be the reasonable ratio between the minimum and the maximum of a pay scale?
The span of each pay scale should be such so as to avoid stagnation. It should be appropriately linked to a master scale with at least 3 slabs of increments of 5 years each.
Is it necessary to persist with a pre-determined minimum-maximum ratio on ideological considerations? Or is it more important to ensure efficient administration by preventing flight of outstanding talent from Government?
While it may be necessary to maintain “Vertical Relativity”, it is equally important to ensure efficiency at all levels through adequate motivation and Fair Wage structure, to ensure efficiency and prevent flight of talent. While determining the pay structures, scientific job evaluation should also be done
Relativities
Employees in the Secretariat and analogous establishments are entitled to higher pay scales than the corresponding field functionaries. This was supposed to compensate them for the loss of certain facilities available to them in field assignments and the extra effort required for decision-making at the policy level. Are these factors valid even today particularly in the context of decentralization and devolution of administrative powers? Is this discrimination between field and secretariat functionaries even justified today?
Field functionaries should positively be entitled to the same or rather higher wage compensations than the Secretariat and analogous establishments, in view of higher job requirements including ‘on-the-spot’ decision making, as would be apparent from a job evaluation. Additional facilities to field staff are fully justified for additional efforts and as compensation for the hazards of the field work. This is rather more justified in view of decentralization and devolution of powers.
Group-A Services
Is there a case for a Unified Civil Service, merging therein all Central (both technical and non-technical) and All India Services, allowing vertical and horizontal movement ? Or should there be two distinct streams, one embracing all the technical services and the other for non-technical services?
There should be two separate cadres or streams viz. Technical and Non-Technical. According to nature of work both can be further divided into as many branches as required. However, the Pay should be determined based on Job Evaluation, whether for Technical or Non-Technical Cadres.
Do you feel that the pattern of pay scales for all Group A Services should be redesignated so as to attract candidates of the requisite caliber? Keeping in view some of the compensation packages being offered to fresh professionals by the private sector, what emoluments would you suggest for an entrant to a Group-A Service in Government?
Yes, pay scales and compensation packages should be substantially improved (not only for Group ‘A’ services, but even for Group ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ employees) at induction as well as at intermediate and higher levels to attract suitable talents and to retain them with adequate motivation.
Professional personnel
Should there be a higher compensation package for scientists in certain specialized streams/departments like Department of Space, Department of Atomic Energy? If so, what should be the reasonable package in their case?
No comments.
Classification of posts
Presently, civilian posts in the Central Government are classified into four Groups (A, B, C and D) with reference to their scales of pay. The Fifth Central Pay Commission had recommended their reclassification into Executive, Supervisory, Supporting and Auxiliary Staff. Would you suggest any changes in the existing classification or should the classification recommended by Fifth Central Pay Commission be adopted with/without modifications?
Classification should be job oriented instead of being linked with “Pay” or “Pay Scales”. The proposals of Fifth Pay Commission should be modified and Central Government posts should be classified as “Top Management”, “Middle Management”, “Lower Management” and “Supporting”.
Restructuring of Group C & D posts
Should all lower Group C functionaries in the Secretariat be replaced by multi-functional Executive Assistants, who would be graduates and well versed in office work, secretarial skills and use of modern office equipment including computers? Should Similar arrangements can be evolved for Group C posts in other organisations of Government?
No comments.
Should a similar regrouping of Group D staff into fewer categories capable of performing diverse functions also be carried out?
There should be no Group ‘D’ staff on Technical side and the same should be classified as “Supporting” or Group ‘C’ along with other supporting staff in Group ‘C’ keeping in view the present day job content and job requirement on the Technical side.
Pay Scales
How should a pay scale be structured? What is a reasonable ratio between the minimum and maximum of a pay scale?
One “Master Scale” or “Running Scale” should be adopted from bottom to top level (as already adopted in many States such as Punjab & Kerala State Governments) ,maintaining a span of 5 years for each level of increment and a relativity between maximum and minimum of scale being suitable enough to avoid stagnation and over lapping.
The successive Pay Commissions have progressively reduced the number of distinct pay scales. The number of scales has therefore come down from more than 500 scales at the time of the Second Central Pay Commission to 51 scales before Fifth Central Pay Commission, which was brought down to 33 scales by the Fifth Central Pay Commission. The reduction in the number of pay scales brings in attendant problems like the promotion and the feeder grades coming to lie in the same pay scale, etc. Do you feel whether the existing number of pay scales should be retained or increased or decreased or whether the same should be replaced by a running pay scale?
Number of Pay Scales should be as per distinct job requirement and adequate to provide requisite avenues of promotion as well as motivation.
Increments
What should be the criteria for determining the rates and frequency of increments in respect of different scales of pay? Should these bear a uniform or varying relationship with the minima and/or maxima of the scales?
Rate of Annual Increment should be 5% of Pay for each span of 5 years on Master Scale (or Running Scale) to bear at least a Fair Comparison with annual rise which the Corporate or Private Sector and to be broadly at par with Public Sector.
Revision of pay scales
Is there any need to revise the pay scales periodically especially when 100% neutralization for inflation is available in form of dearness allowance?
a) The Pay Scales should be revised annually – as in Corporate Sector or in other countries (as recommended by 5th CPC in Chapter 171 of its Report or Para 99 of Summary of its report). b) At worst it should be revised every 4 to 5 years to keep pace with the wage revisions elsewhere in the country and to maintain a Fair Comparison. c) 100% Neutralization through D.A is never effected due to erroneous formula used for compiling the price index and wrong weightage given to the various items in compiling the index.
How should pay be fixed in the revised pay scales? Should there be a point-to-point fixation? If not, please suggest a method by which it can be ensured that senior personnel are not placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis their juniors and due weightage is given for the longer service rendered by the former
a) Point-to-point or stage-to-stage fixation should be given in the revised pay scales on the basis of number of increments earned by an employee in the pre-revised scale of pay. This is the only method to ensure adequate protection of interest of all employees for years of service put in by them – especially the seniors. b) Same formula should be adopted for revision of pension of existing pension on “Point to Point” basis on revised Pay Scale of post from which they retired – instead of on the minimum of the revised Pay Scale done after the 5th Pay Commission.
Compensatory Allowances
Is City Compensatory Allowance a sufficient compensation for the problems of a large city? If DA and HRA provide full neutralization, do you think CCA should continue? Is there a need for changing the basis of classification of cities and the rates of CCA? If so, please suggest the revised basis and rates.
The existing CCA is not sufficient compensation for the high cost of living in the cities because of the low rates of compensation as well as irrational and wrong criteria for classification of cities. DA and HRA are no substitute for the CCA as all the three are granted to compensate for separate elements like impact of inflation, cost of housing and higher cost of living in cities, respectively, and, as such, grant of CCA is quite justified and the same should continue. The limits of population which form the basis of classification of cities and rates of CCA should be revised as per details given in the following table:- Class of city Population criteria for Classification of cities Proposed rates of C.C.A. Existing Proposed A Over 16 Lakhs Over 10 Lakhs 15% of pay B-1 8 to 16 Lakhs 2 to 10 Lakhs 10% of pay B-2 4 to 8 Lakhs C 50,000 to 4 Lakhs 50,000 to 2 Lakhs 7.5% of pay D or Unclassified Below 50,000 Below 50,000 5% of pay
Pay and perquisites for Armed Forces
What should be the basis for determination of pay scales for Armed Forces Personnel? What percentage weightage should be assigned to (i) parity with civil services, (ii) comparison with private sector, (iii) special and hazardous nature of duties, (iv) short career span and (v) restricted rights?
No comments.
How should the pay of a soldier, sailor and airman be determined? How should it relate to the minimum wage in Government and the pay of a constable in paramilitary or internal security forces?
No comments. However, adequate free insurance cover should be provided to the Armed Forces as security against ever existing threat to their life.
Abolition of feudalism
Should all vestiges of feudalism in the country like huge residential bungalows sprawling over several acres, large number of servant quarters, retinues of personal staff, bungalow peons, use of uniformed personnel as batmen or on unnecessary security or ceremonial duties etc. be abolished? Please make concrete suggestions.
All feudalist vestiges including similar to those mentioned in above - should be abolished forthwith to effect economy and to bring a more socialistic pattern of society. Use of salons in Railways to be discontinued.
Specific proposals
In what manner can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more professional, citizen-friendly and delivery oriented?
Induction of talented, meritorious and outstanding personnel with suitable training at induction and at all intermediate levels (from bottom to top) is essential for professional and efficient working. However, suitable and fair wage structure and motivation packages including timely promotions etc. can only ensure professional, citizen friendly and result oriented work force at all levels.
Please outline specific proposals, which could result in: (i) Reduction and redeployment of staff, (ii) Reduction of paper work, (iii) Better work environment, (iv) Economy in expenditure, (v) Professionalisation of services, (vi) Reduction in litigation on service matters, (vii) Better delivery of service by government agencies to their users.
(i) No arbitrary reduction of staff should be done and the concerned staff should be redeployed after appropriate training on alternative job after a realistic review of cadre strength as per actual requirement for specified targets in each Department and through long-term realistic manpower planning. (ii) The modern management techniques including quick communication system (like computerization and e-governance should be effectively used to reduce paper-work, and the process should be continuously and scientifically reviewed periodically to eliminate duplicity/repetition as well as redundancy of the paper-work. (iii) The following methods are proposed for promoting better work environments; (a) Better filing and recording system. (b) Quick and scientific system for disposal of scrap and industrial refuse. (c) Better cleanliness, hygienic and sanitary environment and proper lightening and ventilation of work spots especially as per statutory requirements and recommendations of I.L.O. etc. (d) Scientific layout of machinery, plants and office equipments etc. (e) Better industrial relations and job satisfaction, and appropriate machinery for grievances redressal. (f) Appropriate motivation and incentives to Staff and Supervisors & Managers for promoting better work environments. (iv) Following norms should be adopted for economy in expenditure:- (a) Reducing feudalistic vestiges (as mentioned in Q.No.15.1 supra) (b) Disposal of outdated and condemned machinery, plant and equipments. (c) Reducing top heavy bureaucratic strength by decentralization and delegation of powers to lower level Officers and Senior Supervisors / Manager. (d) Adoption of modern and scientific techniques for management and production to- reduce production cost. (e) Recycling and effective utilization / disposal of scrap and industrial refuse. (f) Productive utilization of surplus Government land by offering it on lease or sale basis. (g) In house production of components instead of allowing profiteering by private Firms,Contractors, Traders and Middlemen etc. (h) Optimum utilization of resources including machinery and space through continuous scientific study and review. (i) Setting aside of false and lopsided economic measures which create serious imbalances and prove counter-productive in the long run. (j) Motivation and provision of incentives to staff for suggesting and effecting economy measures. (v) Reduction in litigation in service matters can be achieved through:- a) Quick and judicious consideration of staff grievances through unbiased and efficient HR functioning and Arbitration. b) Application of wisdom of settled law to all similar cases, without forcing the staff to litigation in each case. c) Government/Administration should avoid filing unnecessary appeals in higher courts. (vi) Better delivery of service through simplifying and rationalizing procedures introducing greater transparency and accountability.
New concepts
Do you think the concepts of contractual appointment, part-time work, flexible job description, flexi time etc. need to be introduced in Government to change the environment, provide more jobs and impart flexibility to the working conditions of employees?
There is no purpose or justification to provide contractual appointments, part time work, flexible job description or flexi time etc. in Government departments and it will reduce the avenues of promotion of existing staff and create frustration amongst them. Better alternative is to maintain the requisite strength to achieve the targets set forth and functional requirements.
For improving punctuality/introducing new concepts like flexi time, should biometric entry/exit be introduced?
No comments.
What steps should be taken to ensure that scientists, doctors, engineers and other professionals with sophisticated education and skills are retained in their specialized fields in Government? Should they be appointed on contract with a higher status and initial pay, advance increments, better service conditions, etc.?
Improving Pay Scales and service conditions as well as providing professionally congenial environments with proper de-centralization of power and independence of working are essential to induct and retain Professionals and Specialists.
Should there be lateral movement from Government to non-Government jobs and vice versa? If so, in which sphere(s) and to what extent ?
There should not be any lateral movement from Non-Government job to Government jobs especially in the intermediate grade. As for the lateral movement from Government to non-Government jobs is concerned, this may be permitted in professional fields like Doctors and Engineering etc. to meet with specialized requirements, but with adequate protection of pay, avenues of promotion and other service conditions, besides grant of deputation allowance and additional perquisites as existing in private sectors.
It has been suggested that existing Government employees should be encouraged to shift to employment on contract for specified periods in return for a substantially higher remuneration package. Would you agree?
Government employees may be allowed to opt for employment on contract basis for specified periods on appropriate remuneration package, in specified and specialized fields.
Performance Appraisal
In what way should be present system of performance appraisal be changed? Should be ACR be an open document?
a) 3600 Appraisal Method should be introduced - where in both employer and employee appraise each other b) Open documentation & transparency of appraisal system is a must for its efficiency and purposeful application.
How far has the introduction of self-assessment helped in the process of appraisal?
It has helped only marginally – as the final reporting is still done by the boss – without adequate checks against bias.
Should appraisal be done for an entire team instead of for individuals?
Individual appraisal with target oriented transparency shall be more effective. However, team appraisal can be introduced wherever feasible and necessary, keeping in view the operational requirements.
In what manner can Government employees be made personally accountable for their acts of omission or commission, without any special safeguards? Would you recommend any amendments to Article 311 of the Constitution, Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 17 and 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and various rules relating to conduct of Government servants and disciplinary proceedings?
The Service Conduct Rules already provide enough safeguards for personal accountability of Government employees for their acts of omission and commission, and Discipline and Appeal Rules provide for the procedure for taking the necessary action against the employees for such omission or commission. It is, therefore, suggested that:- (i) Sub-section or proviso 2b of Articles 311 (2) of the Constitution of India should be deleted so as to make it mandatory to hold an enquiry in every case, as the right to represent and to be heard, is a Fundamental Right under the law of natural justice. (ii) Consequently, the Discipline and Appeal Rules etc. should be appropriately amended so to make it mandatory to hold an enquiry and to be heard in person before removal or dismissal of an employee, as being a fundamental right under the law of natural justice. (iii) a) Service conduct Rules of Government employees should be amended so as to delete the restriction on the right to speak and express the views through newspapers and other medias of communication on the working of the Government and other aspects of public interest. b) The restriction should also be removed on the right to contest elections for the Parliament, Assembly, Municipal Corporations and Panchayats etc.
Holidays
Kindly comment on the appropriateness of adopting a five-day week in Government offices when other sectors follow a six day week. Please also state whether the number of Gazetted holidays in Government offices should be reduced? Please also comment on the appropriateness of declaring Gazetted holidays for all major religious festivals.
(a) All employees including Industrial Workers and Technical Staff should be required to work for 5 days a week at par with the Secretarial Staff, to allow adequate rest, relaxation and attention to domestic and social obligations This will improve efficiency, reduce absenteeism and remove discrimination (b) (i) The number of Gazetted Holidays should not be reduced in the Government Offices, as any reduction therein will adversely affect in absenteeism and industrial peace (ii) The number of Gazetted Holidays of Industrial Workers should be brought at par with Secretarial Staff, including grant of Restricted Holidays to them at par with the Secretarial staff (c) Number of Casual Leave in a year should be restored to 12 instead 8 – as these were arbitrarily and unjustly reduced after Fifth CPC
What do you think is the state of work ethics and punctuality in Government offices? Kindly suggest ways of improving these.
(a) The, so called, dilution of work ethics and punctuality if any, is due to inadequate motivation, excess working hours, inadequate wages, lack of proper environments and lack of requisite facilities like transport from home to office and back and lack of residential accommodation near the place of work. (b) Following proposals are given for improving work ethics in Government offices and Industrial establishments etc.: (i) Improvement of working environments. (ii) Requisite motivation through improvement of wage structure, promotional avenues and awards for better performance and punctuality. (iii) Reduction of working hours to 40 hours a week and extension 5 day working for all Industrial Workers to enable them to attend to their family and social obligations. (iv) Provision of requisite transport facilities from home to office and back. (v) Provision of residential accommodation near the place of work. (vi) Provision of better medical facilities and hygienic conditions of service.
