Suggestions - National Federation of Technical Railway Employees
by: Guest
Total views: 143
Word Count: 8428
Sixth Central Pay Commission:Suggestions
User Name: National Federation of Technical Railway Employees Ambala Cantt.
Comparison with public/private sectors
Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites in Government and the public/private sector?
Comparison can be drawn within similar category having some common feature and in this point of view it is quite impossible to draw a comparison between Govt. & Pvt. Sector as there are so many hidden perks and allowance given to the employees of Pvt. Sector to escape from the periphery of income tax. Moreover, there are no standard pay scales among different category of employees in Pvt. Sector. It is fact that salary & allowances/ perks are also different in various Pvt. Sector offices. Even one Pvt. Office can't be compared with another Pvt. Office. Moreover in Government, the organisations produce service in most cases and goods in few cases, which are non-marketable in nature though have immense value in keeping peace and harmony in the society, enabling distribution of goods to the deserving sections of the society and dispelling inequality in the society. We think, it is not possible to quantify these services in monetary terms. Standing on the fundamental right of equal pay for equal work as ensured in the constitution of India, we, the staff members of NSSO working under Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation demand for fair comparison/ parity between Pay scales and perquisites in Govt. Sector and the Public/ Pvt. Sector as an essential principle of pay fixation In the context of modernization, Globalisation, e-Governance & Right to Information Act, responsibility of Govt. staff is more than that of the employees of Pvt. Office. The employee of Pvt. sector is only accountable to their superior but Govt. employee is today accountable not only to their superior but also to the people of India. Comparison should be done in the light of this aspect.
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?
Regarding benefits like housing, medical, schooling, and other facilities we may follow the standard public/private sector units like ONGC, IOC, TISCO, TELCO, INFOSIS, etc..which are much better than that of the Government. Regarding salary we are optimistic of the opinion as mentioned in 1.1
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?
We have a deep concern for large sector of our country without having gainful employment even after so many years of independence. We think it is the policy makers of out free country who are responsible for their condition. Upliftment of salary of Central Govt. employees (negligible portion of total population) will not hamper equity & social justice. In order to ensure social equity different five year plans with different socio-economic upliftment programme should have to be completed successfully with close monitoring by concerned authority. The socio-economic condition of the down-trodden people specially in rural areas should be developed by self employment & assigning, tendering and involving them in various local development programmes rather than motto of equalizing/decreasing the others' (govt. employees) remuneration. Upliftment of backward community is necessary than equalizing of the downing the conditions of developed/urban community. In the present set up, the wages of the Govt. employees has to be based on the principle of fair comparison of the wages obtaining in the standard private/public sector only. In fact, lower pay package to the Government servants has been identified as a reason for poor performance and corruption resulting in the failure of many welfare measures.
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?
Though disparity in pay scales erodes the morale of Govt. servants rising up of civil service pay scales almost to levels prevalent in the private sector is not at all the only factor of ensuring honest and diligent bureaucracy. But it is true that if this disparity is removed crisis of talent in Govt. sector can be overcome especially at higher level. Honesty does not only depend on money and perquisites. It depends on psychological factor. The hypothesis is not valid particularly in this concept.
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?
It will be relevant to compare the pay structure of central govt. employees with other govt. and govt. undertakings. The nature of services of Municipal and Panchayati Raj institution are not alike other govt./public sector undertaking services. A national parity of scales will only be possible unless a national wage committee is set up for a nationalized and rationalized wage scale. It is not only irrelevant but also unjustified to put forth such question only on the event of setting up a Pay Commission for the central govt. employees to review the pay structure on the light of prevalent market price after a time span of ten years. Is this question not related with the frequent pay revision of other public sector undertakings like bank, petroleum industry, ONGC/SAIL/NTPC etc.? Is the central govt. employees are only responsible for all the miseries and shortcomings of the country? Whether every problem and shortcomings of the country will be solved if central govt. employees are debarred from justice in respect of pay revision? Salary structure in the Central and State Govt. is broadly similar in higher administrative levels but there is gross disparity in the case of class IV and class III Ministerial staff. Even there is no uniformity of pay scales across the states as the Revenue Receipts, Revenue Expenditure, State Domestic Product and budgetary provision vary across the states.
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?
Being the highest administrative post with enormous volume of work in the peak point of policy / decision making need special capabilities & such capable persons should get substantial pay with special allowances for achieving defined targets. Once the principle of comparison with the best in the market is accepted, this should not be difficult.
What should be the reasonable ratio between the minimum and the maximum of a pay scale?
Reasonable ratio between the minimum and the maximum of a pay scale should be 1:2 in case of Group C & D, 2:3.5 in case of Group B and so on. The rate of increment in a particular post should gradually be accelerated on every three years onwards with a minimum amount of initial increment of at least Rs. 350 at the lowest level of scale. Following the DA structure of 3rd and 4th CPC, we propose new annual increment should be 5% for Group C & D, 4% for Group B and 3% for Group A alongwith the same line of DA structure. As per 5th CPC, there are two ACPs in the first 24yrs. of service for the employees not getting regular promotion in time. In this regard, AIAMS proposes three ACPS in lieu of two at a service period of 8yrs ->16 yrs-> 24yrs.
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?
There should be an ideological concept on the point of determining the difference between a minimum and maximum pay scale which is also necessary towards the equality and harmony of a socialistic democratic country. Measures towards preventing flight of outstanding talents may be made by giving them additional perks/incentives and allowances & facilities likewise private sector offices
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?
On the changed scenario of modern multifunctional office management there is no differences between the type of job of a secretariat and analogous establishment on the concept of e-governance, presently implemented or going to be implemented in all the offices of Central Government. Highlighting on this aspect 5th Pay Commission has recommended to change the nomenclature of various government posts into four groups i.e. Executive, Supervisory, Supporting and Auxiliary, having no particular type of job at anylevel, rather should do every sought of work according to demand at a certain level. No, the discrimination between field staff or subordinate staff and secretarial functionaries is not at all justified today. Therefore we would suggest that pay scale of the field staff and subordinate staff may be upgraded to the level of corresponding secretariat staff.
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?
In our opinion there should be two distinct stream viz technical and non¬technical services because each service demands certain level of specialization.
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?
This questionnaire has a relevancy with that of 4.3. The pattern of pay scale to some of the Group 'A' services dealing with enormous responsibility & strain, such as IAS need special caliber and therefore may be redesignated so as to attract the candidates with requisite caliber. Like our view in respect of 4.3 we think special/additional perks/incentives or allowances & facilities, likewise private sector offices, may be offered for such special type of jobs with the condition to achieve some special targets. As every sorts of achieving target needs a team work, we think along with the redesignation of a higher cadre all the succeeding cadres should be redesignated accordingly for a better work culture. It is noteworthy, particularly in respect of NSSO, that though several cadre reviews have been implemented for the ISS cadre resulting a huge no. of upgraded post including creation of several SAG (Senior Administrative Grade) posts for the betterment of the Group A services but, inspite of several recommendations of 4th and 5th CPCs and National Statistical Commission for periodical cadre review of Ministerial staff (including an urgent implementation), Ministerial Staff of NSSO are deprived of this scope since the inception of this organisation.
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?
Yes, there should be a higher compensation package for scientists in certain specialized streams as mentioned in the question and that should be equal to the analogous posts prevailing in public sectors.
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?
We are in favour of the retention of existing classification of Group A, B, C & D, though nowadays it is seen that the supporting staff are well versed in office work and use of modern office equipment including computers which indicates that there has been a narrow gap between the supervisory and the supporting staff. So these things should be considered by the 6th CPC. Time has changed. Quantity & Quality nature of jobs done by the employees of Central Government has changed in the light of Globalization, e-governance and Right to Information Act. Responsibility has also increased. As a recognition of the job done by the supporting staff, it is right time to introduce a package of renaming the existing designation with proper pay scale.
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?
This is the need of an hour to give Gr.-C functionaries, a recognition of their work so far done by them. Practically in the changed situation, most of the Gr.C employees are graduate, well versed in computer and capable of performing higher skilful nature of job. So, it should have to be recognized irrespective of Secretariat and other sub-ordinate offices, as in the present scenario there is no basic difference in the nature of jobs done in Secretariat and sub-ordinate offices.In this respect, attention may be drawn to our office (National Sample Survey Organisation), under Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation. NSS(O) came into existence in the year 1950. In 1970, the same was placed under the full govt. control (vide resolution no. DS/STS/4-69 dt. 5.3.1970). Now NSSO has grown into one of the largest organisation of its kind in the world. The working condition in terms of the use of modern machinery and tools has brought a revolutionary change in this office. In view of this development, it is necessary to re-structure the staff pattern in order to uplift the quality of the supporting staff (Ministerial Staff). The 5th CPC has also suggested re¬structuring in all the offices to keep the efficiency level high and optimum. Before 1st June, 1972, NSS was under ISI (Indian Statistical Institute), being an autonomous, scientific & research institute, it was not considered by 1st & 2nd CPC for obvious reason. The pay scales of different categories were reviewed and fixed up by a committee of experts appointed by ISI council, where the representatives from the government were also included and recommendation of various CPCs were taken into consideration while fixing up the scales. The process of taking over of NSS work and employees from ISI was started during the course of 3 CPC. It was decided that the absorbed ISI categories with their corresponding scales of ISI together with their function and responsibility would be forwarded to 3rd CPC for its consideration. But the same reference was made after 30.06.72, whereas the commission stopped their consideration on the representation from different staff Association sometime in May 1972. The result was that the Gr.-C employees specially administrative/ministerial staff attached to such posts in different Ex-ISI categories were debarred from getting the recommendation of 3rd CPC. It was assured in government resolution that pre-revised (2nd CPC pay scale) equivalent Govt. pay scale would be fixed against ISI scales of pay on the basis of Govt. pay scales attached to similar categories having similar function and responsibilities including qualification attached to the posts available in Govt. deptt. But the scales of pay offered to Ministerial Staff (Gr.-'C) of ISI had no equivalency with their function and responsibility as existed in Govt. Deptt. It is also worth mentioning here that the functions, responsibilities & peculiar nature of job inherited from ISI did not get proper consideration and value to the Govt. as well as to the 3rd CPC. The underrated pay scale offered to Ex-ISI categories were fixed without following the principles of 3rd CPC. Since then Gr.'C ministerial staff have been depriving of the proper rated scale though they are performing higher nature of jobs. NSSO conducts nation wide sample survey in socio-economic parameters like Employment - Unemployment, Consumer Expenditure, 'Land-holding & livestock', 'Debt, Investment and capital formation'. Migration, Disability, Morbidity, service sector, Unorganised Trade/ Manufacturing etc. to facilitate socio-economic planning, development, policy framing, research & other economic / Administrative decision. NSSO is not like other Govt. deptt./ministries. It is under the over all direction of a Governing Council with requisite independence and autonomy in the matter of collection, processing of NSS data and publication of differenttables and reports and ministerial staff of NSSO have been engaged in some of these nature of jobs in addition to their normal functions as Ministerial staff. Now-a-days, quantity and quality of jobs done by these staff has changed in the light of Globalisation, e-Governance and Right to Information Act. Volume of such work has tremendously increased due to computerised GPF calculation sheets, pay package including pay-slips, income-tax calculation, house-building interest calculation etc., of administrative wing as well as Instruction manual to field staff, text part of reports, field auerrv of different RTCs. slide shows using MS-Power Point, primary maintenance of hardware, installation & updates of various softwares. Convention of old technical documents from Wordstar to MS-word format etc. of technical side. LDC & UDCs are additionally assigned with these job s. Recently, as a part of Golden Jubilee Celebration of the Organisation, these staff has loaded entire instructions to field staff volume-l from 1st round to 50th round in computer PDF files without any previous computer backup. This conversion in the nature of job from typing to computer orientation facilitates the office to develop in various ways namely for the purpose of better and scientific preservation of records, connecting to internet/ websites , sending e-mail etc. Moreover, these staff was engaged in scanning old reports for their proper preservation. In spite of performing a dual nature of job, ministerial staff is depriving of proper pay scale. They deserve an upgraded pay scale. With a view to value the type of jobs rendered by the UDCs, LDCc etc., the category of the Ministerial staff (Gr.C) may be redesignated with proper scale of pay as per proposal given below: Proposed structure of existing Ministerial Staff with proper scale as per 5th CPC. EXISTING PROPOSED POST SCALE POST SCALE 1. 2. LDC UDC 3050-4590 4000-6000 Statistical Assistant - II 4500 - 7000 3. 4. Accountant Assistant 4500 - 7000 5000-8000 Statistical Assistant -1 5500 - 9000 5. Office Superintendent (Group B, Gazetted) 5500 - 9000 Section Officer / Desk Officer 6500-10000 Justification for the proposal. On the line of recommendation of 4th & 5*" CPC towards Cadre Review, Deptt. of Income Tax and some other Deptts. have already converted the nomenclature of various Ministerial Cadre (LDC, UDC, Accountant, Office Superintendent) into a common cadre by designating Tax Assistant Gr. I, II, III & IV, upgrading the pay scales thereby.To scrutinize the above proposal we need to understand the present requirement of this office. The NSSO is involved in designing large scale nation¬wide sample surveys on various socio-economic aspects and preparing reports based on the data collected from the surveys. The NSS reports contain only few pages of running material and a number of pages containing tables, graphs, charts, formulae etc. Therefore, for the supporting work for designing the surveys and preparing the reports the old qualifications prescribed for LDCs/UDCs are not at all suitable. Fortunately, most of the Ministerial staff at present has an extra qualifications including the knowledge of use of computers and other modern equipments and therefore the office has been taking advantage of their expertise without compensating for the same. However, this arrangement is neither desirable nor justified. A justified regular proper channel should be implemented to get such experts for the supporting jobs . It will not be out of order to quote from the 5th Central Pay Commission Recommendation, para 46.19, page 501 which reads as follows: A demand has been made for promotion of UDCs and LDCs to Electronic Data Processing (EDP) posts. Computerisation is the call of the day as part of modernisation and automation. The existing ministerial staff at different levels should be trained in computers. LDCs trained in computer can therefore, be considered for promotion to Data Entry posts, as it will open one more channel of promotion to LDCs. However, in case of UDCs, such induction to EDP posts should not be encouraged, as it will result in stagnation in the EDP cadre." (copy enclosed). It is high time to think over the matter of Cadre Review of the Ministerial Staff on the enlighted view of the 5th CPC without any further delay.
Should a similar regrouping of Group D staff into fewer categories capable of performing diverse functions also be carried out?
Yes, similarly the Group 'D' staff should be given proper in-service training to make them capable of performing diverse functions.
Pay Scales
How should a pay scale be structured? What is a reasonable ratio between the minimum and maximum of a pay scale?
From 1.1.2006, B.P.+ D.P.+ D.A.+ IR (expected) + 50% of (B.P.+ D.P.+ D.A + IR ) should be the beginning of the pay scale with a minimum increment of 5% of minimum pay and a span of 12 years in case of Group C & D. For the second part of the question kindly see our reply to question no. 4.2.
The successive Pay Commissions have progressively reduced the number of distinct pay scales. The number of scales has therefore come down from more than 500 scales at the time of the Second Central Pay Commission to 51 scales before Fifth Central Pay Commission, which was brought down to 33 scales by the Fifth Central Pay Commission. The reduction in the number of pay scales brings in attendant problems like the promotion and the feeder grades coming to lie in the same pay scale, etc. Do you feel whether the existing number of pay scales should be retained or increased or decreased or whether the same should be replaced by a running pay scale?
In our opinion existing number of pay scales should be retained and be replaced by the scale of pay as attained by the procedure mentioned at 10.1 above. In case restructuring of supporting staff (Group C Ministerial) proposed at 9.1 above is accepted, number of pay scales can be reduced to some extent.
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?
Increment in Govt. is highly poor. Moreover, it does not take into account the changing demand. We suggest that the frequency of increment should continue to be annual as is at present and its relationship should be a predetermined uniform percentage of not less than 5% of the minimum pay in the new scale in case of Group C & D with a span of 12 years as is obtaining in the banking and other leading industries. We also propose that the rate of increment should be 4% and 3% in case of Group B & A respectively. With every increment the level of living should also be increased in real terms.
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?
Yes. The neutralization of inflation is based on the cost of living index which does not and cannot reflect the actual inflation that takes place. In the case of Central Government employees, unlike in the case of the other sections of the organized working class, the compensation is based on the all India annual average index figure, which has an inbuilt mechanism of suppressing the said compensation. This apart, the changes in the consumption pattern affected over a period of time have to be an important criterion for wage determination.
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
In our opinion it should be a point-to-point fixation formula, which only will ensure that the senior personnel are not placed at a disadvantage.
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.
Compensation given at the present rate of CCA cannot be said to be sufficient. As has been mentioned in our reply to Question No. 12.1, the clearness allowance, though technically termed as full neutralization, is not so in real sense. The annual all India average runs very much behind the actual increase and again suffers deficiencies due to the fact that the actual payment is made only once in six months. The cost of living index does not take into account various facts for which makes urban living costlier. The present rates of house rent allowance are far less compensative to the actual rates of house rents, especially in urban agglomerations. There is no full neutralization in respect of HRA anywhere in the country. This should be considered. Therefore, the system of CCA should continue. Besides, there should be a change in the classification of cities so also the rates of CCA. However, it is added that those cities and towns were seasonal influx of population takes place should have a special provision.
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?
Concerned Department will furnish their reply in this regard.
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?
Concerned Department will furnish their reply in this regard.
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 the vestiges of feudalism have become a wall between emancipation of the people and peoples democratic government. Therefore, we suggest abolition of these symbols.
Specific proposals
In what manner can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more professional, citizen-friendly and delivery oriented?
We think that there is a room for increasing professionalism and inculcating citizen friendly approach. Transparency in Governmental functioning is a pre¬requisite to achieve this. There should be constant and continuous in-service training to all personnel besides evolving a system of incentives to motivate the personnel in this direction. Number of channels for disposing a case should be reduced and, responsibility should be fixed individually. Measures like RTI are expected to change the efficiency in the Govt. for better.
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) Reduction and redeployment of staff. No Scope for Reduction in the Office. Existing staff may be properly trained to keep up with the modern system of office procedure. (ii) Reduction of paper work. LAN system with customized sharing may be used for the purpose for which even rule books need to be modified. 13 AIAMS GROUP-C, KOLKATA (iii) Better work environment. Ensure Transparency in an organisation with all over justice to all the sectors of cadres by periodical cadre review and thereby all out participation by the employees. (iv) Economy in expenditure. Should be ensured. (v) Professionaiisation of services Proper environment and recognition is needed. (vi) Reduction in litigation on service matters. Ensure Transparency. Have a system of settlement across the table under the chairmanship of an independent authority from retired judicial service. (vii) Better delivery of service by government agencies to their users. Measures like RTI will ensure it.
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?
Generally, these concepts have been employed to exploit labour. We, therefore, do not agree with these concepts. Not only that, we think it will create frustration in the mind of the govt. servants & demoralize them. Once professional attitude is accepted the condition will naturally improve.
For improving punctuality/introducing new concepts like flexi time, should biometric entry/exit be introduced?
We agree with the necessity of improving the punctuality. Honest, sincere and strict supervision can improve it. The respective organisations should formulate their approach in consultation with the employees associations.
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.?
We should produce enough scientists, doctors, engineers and other professionals with desired quality to take care of any shift from Govt. to outside because when thinks are scares private sector will always offer higher than the Govt.
Should there be lateral movement from Government to non-Government jobs and vice versa? If so, in which sphere(s) and to what extent ?
We think that the existing rules need not be changed as it may encourage lot of manipulation
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?
Need to be elaborated.
Performance Appraisal
In what way should be present system of performance appraisal be changed? Should be ACR be an open document?
It is better that the ACR is an open document. There should be an independent body to address the grievances.
How far has the introduction of self-assessment helped in the process of appraisal?
It has introduced a certain amount of objectivity in the assessment of performance of an individual employee.
Should appraisal be done for an entire team instead of for individuals?
It would be better if appraisal were done for an entire team.
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?
We do not recommend any amendments of Art. 311 of the Constitution except that the provisions of Clause (2) (b) and (c) of the said article be removed. In our opinion the service conditions of the Government employees should be regulated by an Act of Parliament as has been enshrined in Art. 309 of the Constitution.
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.
The five-day week was introduced by increasing daily and weekly working hours. It has resulted in a lot of savings of energy etc. It was therefore an appropriate step. On the question of Holidays it is necessary to arrive at a consensus before embarking upon any change.
What do you think is the state of work ethics and punctuality in Government offices? Kindly suggest ways of improving these.
We agree on the necessity of improving the punctuality.
