Wednesday, 9 December 2015

ASP DPC order

Today SGFNPO along with GS NAPE-C meet Member (P),Member (Tech),DDG(vig)& DR MV.

Outcome of the meeting:

1)PA/SA cadre restructuring is under consideration of DOP&T . Department of Personal called some information from the Department of Posts in turn Directorate send all the details sought by DOP&T 2days before.

2)MMS cadre restructuring proposal divided as 2parts.
1. Approval required from DOP&T 2.Approval required from Postal board both are under processing.
3)Flood advance for Tamilnadu&Puduchery : Instructions has been issued to CPMG Tamilnadu Circle to grant Flood advance to the affected staff of Tamilnadu&Puduchery.

4)CBS GO LIVE: Member (Tech) assured that instruction will be issued to Tamilnadu Circle that CBS go live will be stopped for time being in flood affected areas.



Monday, 7 December 2015


The 7th pay commission have now given its recommendation detailing the modus operand as to how the same was arrived at., The general dictum claimed to have been adapted are not uniformly applied in all cases and only some isolated cases have been benefitted that too on extraneous reasons like court observations and parity among recruiters from the one and the same examination regardless of nature of the work and department to which they are appointed.
The job evaluation has been totally treated as a non entity and the evidence tendered by the stake holders are meted with like- warm response. The observation of V and VI pay commission have been bluntly cited to ignore the up gradation sought for and thereby failed to contemplate the   justification  under lying  the existing  work  pattern and schedules in the changed scenario.
While the past pay commissions relied justifiably on fair comparison among the work of homogenous nature, the 7 the pay commission had decided to ward off such approach on the plea that historical parity is longer a moot point under its consideration for the present. Most of the up gradation sought for under this agenda has been turned down by the 7th commissions on this reason ( right from pay of Postal Board members to that of Postal asst.) ; Likewise equal pay for equal work is also prime victim of this pay commission ( e.g. Artisan in MMS ).
Even this logic and the resultant adjudication is not consistently applied for. The conspicuous exemption to this is the one level up gradation recommended to the inspectorial cadre of postal department without extending the same treatment to the basic feeder cadre on functional justification clubbed with hierarchical placement.
The pay commission had agreed to the pay hike of inspectorial cadre from the present 4200/- to 4600/- with the cascading effect to its further promotional post of ASP and Superintendent by one level above the due replacing level corresponding to the existing grade pay.
The commission had substantiated that the inspector  of posts have a share of direct recruits to the tune 33.33% and recruited through ‘combined graduate level exam’ conducted by Staff Selection commission. Without any deliberation of the job evaluation in the respective  , the pay commission had simply consented to treat them on par with inspector of CBDT & CBES who are recruited through the same exam  and granted the Pay band of 4600/- .
Thus the promotes  to IP cade from among the PAs ,   (66% ) are destined   to have the  benefit  not because of any job evaluation or functional  homogeneity  but by an extraneous consideration of direct recruit component of the care is  equated with the other recruits of the other departments.
 A new kind of approach is therefore realized in the annals of pay commission where in the nature of examination with the common educational qualification has been taken moot point for consideration of pay hike. But the same commission rejected, citing the historical parity cannot be the criterion, for upgradation Postal board members pay on par with the member of CBDT and CBES even though the ingress in the all India service remain one and the same.
While there cannot be any objection to this up gradation given to inspectorial cadre, for what so ever reason, its impact should not be confined to the IP cadre alone but to extended to the Postal assistant also because in the past the pay level of IP are determined with reference to the PA cadre and this balance has to kept intact.
  The IP cadre  were treated equal with the LSG of PA cadre  to begin with and in the ascendancy the ASP with that  of HSG II prior to V pay commission  .The status of PA and its off shoot LSG, HSG II with that of IP and ASP  can be elucidated with the following tell -tale tabulation ;
Postal assistant vis-à-vis Inspectors prior to V pay commission
975-25-1150-1330-1600 ( S—6)
( S-7)
5200-20200 GP 2400
LEVEL  4 = GP 2400
1400-40-1800-50-2300 ( s-8)
( S-8)
5200-20200 GP 2800
LEVEL  5 =  GP 2800
1400-40-1800-50-2300 ( S-8)
( S-9)
9300-34800 GP 4200
LEVEL  7 = GP 4600
1600-50-2300-60-2660 ( S-9)
( S-9)
9300-34800 GP 4200
LEVEL  6 = GP 4200
1600-50-2300-60-2660 ( S-9)
9300-34800 GP 4600
LEVEL  8 = GP 4800

The Postal Assistant remained the sole feeder cadre for both LSG and Inspector cadre through promotion, with the same year of service (i.e. 5 year of minimum service), for becoming eligible for promotion up to IV pay commission.
The pay scale of both the LSG and Inspector were, therefore, remained the same i.e.  S-8  ( 1400-40-1800-50-2300) and the  next level of promotion as HSGII and ASP in the respective line  were placed in the next immediate higher scale namely S-9 (1600-50-2300-60-2660 ). This parity was maintained from all along even prior to IV pay commission. The operative hierarchy in postal were thus treated in tandem with the inspectorial administrative functions.
But during V pay commission , headed by  the Hon.Justice Rathnavel Pandiyan have made thread bare analysis  and paid  heed to the representation from various quarter about the job nature of the postal assistants and postman . The meticulous job evaluation of the basic cadre of the department have convinced the V pay commission to infer that PAs  are unique in the job profile and are performing multifarious functions  like mail , banking , insurance etc  and therefore have placed them  one scale higher at S-7 (4000-100-6000)  to the due S-6 (3200-85-4900 )the replacement scale  for the existing  scale  975-25-1150-1330-1600 ( S—6).
At the same stretch and nuance of  justice , the V pay commission had accorded the same one scale jump  for the inspectorial cadres  and placed them in S-9 (5000-150-8000)  instead of the due S-8  4500-125-7000( S-8) the replacement scale for the existing scale   (1400-40-1800-50-2300)   S 8
It is needless to say that the pay hike to IP s have become necessary and rendered possible for the simple fact that the V pay commission felt that the one level jump given to PA cadre should be allowed to the IP cadre also  and  thereby enabling the gap in remuneration to represent  establish the hierarchical identity and distinction .
The replacement scale of S-8  meant for the LSG/ IP   cadres was allowed as such for LSG alone  and confined to these cadre,  thereby  the IP cadre ( admin) is distinguished from that of  the PA cadre (operative line )
It is this distinction borne out of the functional compulsion and level of execution  that made  the VI  pay commission to  contemplated  and concur  the same extent of  gap with one level  jump and accordingly  placed them (.PA ;2400,  LSG ; 2800 ,IP 4200).
The up gradation given to PA and IP cadre (with inert logic and justification) has been broken once and for all with no valid and tenable reason by the VII pay commission.
The functional  justification of Postal Assistant  with multifarious work of complex nature that  warranted a  a special scale  in v pay commission  and its fall out  on the  pay  of IP cadre with the extent of hike  have been shattered in the VII pay commission .The gap is widened with no intra departmental  justification to do so,
 It is further, an irony that the job evaluation of PA cadre for present day work demand is entirely different from that of those that existed at the inception of V Pay and VI pay commission has been conveniently forgotten and the time tested concepts have been ignored.
 Instead the component of the eligibility of direct recruitment in a cadre and their selection process through the one and the same recruiting agency have been taken into consideration as valid point to upgrade the pay. The Inspector have been given another gradation to get equated with the inspectors of the other departments  for the one only reason that they have been  recruited through the same combined graduation level  examination of staff selection commission .
Thus an new concept of taking agency and nomenclature of recruiting process has been adapted by  the VII  pay commission (there by deviating from concepts of inclusiveness, comprehensibility and the parameters of job evaluation , fair comparison, equanimity   among the cadres of basic level.)
The intrusion of the new concept may go a long way to end in a clamor for all to get them equated with those drawing higher pay with a similar the minimum educational qualification as the deciding factor. Even the IAS/IPS officers are recruited among the candidates with minimum qualification of graduation and through a recruiting agency of UPSC, the next level entity SSC.
 The33.3 % of direct recruits of IP cadre have become the reason for the pay hike for rest of 66% of IPs promoted from PA cadre—the feeder cadre. The cascading effect of elevating the pay level of the ASP, SP in the line of ascendancy is also considered by the Pay commission.
No sort of things in the intra departmental functional justification, as decided in the previous pay commission, is considered for pay hike to IP cadre. It is only the direct recruits who have decided the pay hike
ON Other Hand;
The job evaluation submitted in respect of PA cadre to the VII pay commission by the Federation are self-speaking and in volumes. The present state of affairs in the Post offices And RMs demands only candidates of graduate level aptitude and skill. In reality  also almost the new recruits in the recent years  are not  only  graduates but are also ,considerably, the professional  degree holders like BE / etc. Therefore the need for enhancement of educational qualification and equating them with their counter parts in recruiting ting process is requested to be considered
Against the back drop of  the seventh pay commission’s  intention to cite  recommendations of V and VI pay commission to discard the request of various demands before them ,  the same intention may kindly  be invoked  to adhere to  the spirit of V and VI pay commission deliberations on PA vis-a vis IP
Accordingly   the pay of the PA should be raised   to level  5 ( with GP 2800) and there by remain just two  levels below the IP level of pay and further giving the intermediary level 6 ( GP 4200) to LSG and level 7 (GP 4600) to  HSG II   in order to   keep the extant of  gap as ever before that was inherited for the past 20 years ,the tenure of  V and VI pay commission dispensation .         
      It is a well known fact that the nature of work of a Post Office is unique and incomparable with other Government Departments.  It has no constant working hours.  A major portion of employees is working in split hours. Unlike other Government Departments, Postal employees are working for six days in a week. The services provided by Postal staff are multifarious.  They are trained to work on about 50 kinds of software’s.  The number of branches in a Post Office is an open evidence.  In most of the Government Offices, preparation and submission of returns is a monthly process.  Whereas in PO it is a daily mandatory work in every branch.   Considering its uniqueness, the V-CPC differentiated us by placing Postal Assistants at Rs.4000/- scale and Postman at Rs.3200/- on par with LDC.  But VII-CPC does not seem to have looked into the just demands of Postal Unions and totally ignored us.  It has simply put all fishes into one pot.

     In addition it has abolished 52 allowances heartlessly. The reason attributed for the abolition is still wounding. Allowances are tools of management to encourage employees to put forth their extra efforts & calibre which will definitely improve the productivity.  Abolition of all the allowances in the name of ‘uniformity’ will make them too indifferent.    Denial of Handicapped allowance is the most inhuman recommendation which nobody can tolerate and it is against the policy of the Government.  Similarly, when Treasury allowance is sanctioned on the basis of the statistics of total amount of cash handled, abolishing it by citing the reason that handling of cash has fallen down due to electronic transfers is quite meaningless.  Similarly when Chennai, a State capital has become the worst victim of floods, abolition of Flood advance is highly merciless.   And denial of Scooter advance/motor car advance, Festival advance etc. will deprive Government servants of their chance to improve their standard of living and push them to private financiers to evade complex formalities in PSU Bank.  This will rob off a sizeable portion of their income towards high rated interest.  Being the largest and model Employer, the Govt. holds the responsibility of protecting the interest and welfare of its employees. The Commission should have analysed the genuine reasons why these allowances and advances were introduced earlier.  I request you to use your good offices to see that all allowances and advances are continued and increased proportionately. 

    Particularly, the Commission has humiliated the operative staff to the extent possible. Once upon a time, during British reign the status of a Head Postmaster was comparable to the highest Revenue authorities of a District.    I request you to recall the position of HSG-I cadre and Inspector-Posts cadre during pre IV-CPC period.  As you are aware HSG-I is the highest operative cadre and IP is the lowest administrative cadre.   By placing both at Rs.4600/- grade pay level, the VII-CPC has equated the lowest administrative cadre with the highest operative cadre.  It shows the colonial attitude of the Commission that even a Head Postmaster is not above an Inspector at entry level. It is a great insult and injustice to operative side Supervisors.  
    The Commission has merely justified that IP cadre has to be placed on par with Inspectors recruited for CBDT.  But it has failed to consider that the duties performed daily and responsibilities held by Selection Grade Supervisors and Postmasters. Though he is in charge of Operative office, his work nature is quasi administrative.     In a PO, the Postmaster has to man, supervise and administer even about 70-80 employees. He is a Sub Appointing Authority.   In the changed scenario of CBS, his role and responsibilities are very vital in the Department.  He has to manage and solve many network and software related issues at his level. Besides he handles crores of Rupees of cash every day.  All the new products of the Department are marketed through him and all new Schemes are ultimately implemented through him.  He is meeting the customers face to face every day which is the most important work of the Department.  Post Forum meeting is conducted by the Head Postmaster himself.  The Head Postmaster is supervising the work of about 10 LSG/HSG-II Supervisors including APM (Accounts).  He is provided with independent Field Officers like PRI (P) and Marketing Executives.  

     It is imperative to mention that on migration to McCamish, the work of Postal Life Insurance has been drastically decentralised to HPOs and the Head Postmaster is delegated with financial powers to sanction huge amounts of claim. The works of perusal & acceptance of proposals, sanctioning of loans & claims etc. are highly responsible and indeed an additional work attached to the Postmaster. 

     Further the Commission has found no justification to recommend separate pay scale to DSMs and MEs.  It is surprising that the Commission has justified an open exploitation in the name of ‘willingness’.  It is a wrong precedence which will lead to serious consequences if applied mutatis mutandis in all cadres.  This will collapse the seniority system followed in transfers and postings and will cause unfair practices.  I suggest that the posts of DSM and ME may be placed at Rs.4600/- level and filled through a LDCE.

     The VII-CPC has reintroduced compulsory retirement and EB crossing. It has ruled that failure to get required benchmark for promotion within the first 20 years of service will result in stoppage of increment. And such employees who have out lived their ability, their services need not be continued and the continuance of such persons in the service should be discouraged.  This is a theorem of corporate sector who use their employees like a chewing gum.   It is like pushing parents into orphanage at their dotage when they are in need of help and support.  And EB crossing is one of the lethal weapons applied against employees.  The Commission has failed to find out the reason for lifting Efficiency Bar earlier by the Govt.

Thus, the Postal Assistant Cadre is degraded further creating a recurring anomaly to the retirees as a retired postal assistant draws less pension than a retired postman. Further on perusal of 7th pay commission in fixation of pension to a postal assistant who retires on 31-12-2015 gets more pension (pre revised pay) than the postal assistant who retires after 01-01-2016, actually draws 15% less pension after revision of pay.  While perusing the table given by 7th pay commission it is noticed that the annual increment which is stated to be 3% is not exactly 3% but it is between 2.7% to 2.8% this anomaly arose due to rounding off fraction of amount to the nearest 100 for example 18000 x 3%=18540 but the next stage is 18500 therefore the anomaly should be rectified by rounding off to the next 100 in the above case to 18600.

                                                            D.Krishan Rao                                                                   GENERAL SECRETARY,

Embedded image permalink Embedded image permalink

Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi Saturday accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of having launched a “big assault” on workers by trying to weaken labour laws and attempting to “tear into pieces” their safety net.He said the Prime Minister is coming with new buzzwords like ‘Smart Cities’, ‘Make in India’ and ‘Digital India’ and is talking about growth and progress, but “only a handful” are benefiting and becoming billionaires.“Prime Minister thinks that the workers of India are dishonest, work shirkers and could be made to work only by wielding a lathi. He feels labour laws have to be weakened and workers disciplined so that they are forced to work. He wants to bring them on their knees. If you look at the new laws being made in Gujarat, Rajasthan and Haryana.Clickhere to see details.

Tuesday, 1 December 2015




7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales – highlights, more:

1. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Minimum Pay: 
Based on the Dr Wallace Aykroyd formula (nutrition) , the minimum pay (salary) in government is recommended to be set at Rs 18,000 per month; Maximum Pay: Rs 2,25,000 per month for Apex Scale and Rs 2,50,000 per month for Cabinet Secretary and others presently at the same pay level. If passed, the salary hikes this report is recommending are likely to boost demand for consumer goods across the spectrum, even though it could also be inflationary. (Reuters)
2. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Advances: 
a. All non-interest bearing Advances have been abolished; b. Regarding interest-bearing Advances, only Personal Computer Advance and House Building Advance (HBA) have been retained. HBA ceiling has been increased to Rs 25 lakhs from the present Rs 7.5 lakhs. (PTI)
3. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Pension: 
The Commission recommends a revised pension formulation for civil employees including CAPF personnel as well as for Defence personnel, who have retired before 01.01.2016. This formulation will bring about parity between past pensioners and current retirees for the same length of service in the pay scale at the time of retirement. The 7th Pay Commission received many grievances relating to New Pension System (NPS). It has recommended a number of steps to improve the functioning of NPS. It has also recommended establishment of a strong grievance redressal mechanism. (PTI)
4. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Performance Related Pay: 
The Commission has recommended introduction of the Performance Related Pay (PRP) for all categories of Central Government employees, based on quality Results Framework Documents, reformed Annual Performance Appraisal Reports and some other broad Guidelines. The Commission has also recommended that the PRP should subsume the existing Bonus schemes. (PTI)
5. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – New Pay Structure: 
Considering the issues raised regarding the Grade Pay structure and with a view to bring in greater transparency, the present system of pay bands and grade pay has been dispensed with and a new pay matrix has been designed. Grade Pay has been subsumed in the pay matrix. The status of the employee, hitherto determined by grade pay, will now be determined by the level in the pay matrix. The rate of Annual Increment is being retained at 3 percent. (PTI)
6. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP): 
a. Performance benchmarks for MACP have been made more stringent from “Good” to “Very Good”; b. The Commission has also proposed that annual increments not be granted in the case of those employees who are not able to meet the benchmark either for MACP or for a regular promotion in the first 20 years of their service; c. No other changes in MACP recommended. (Thinkstock)
7. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Military Service Pay (MSP): 
The Military Service Pay, which is a compensation for the various aspects of military service, will be admissible to the Defence forces personnel only. As before, Military Service Pay will be payable to all ranks up to and inclusive of Brigadiers and their equivalents. The current MSP per month and the revised rates recommended are as follows: (Reuters)
8. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Short Service Commissioned Officers: 
Short Service Commissioned Officers will be allowed to exit the Armed Forces at any point in time between 7 and 10 years of service, with a terminal gratuity equivalent of 10.5 months of reckonable emoluments. The Seventh Pay Commission also says they will further be entitled to a fully funded one year Executive Programme or a M.Tech. programme at a premier Institute to better their prospects in later life. (PTI)
9. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Allowances: 
The Commission has recommended abolishing 52 allowances altogether. Another 36 allowances have been abolished as separate identities, but subsumed either in an existing allowance or in newly proposed allowances. Allowances relating to Risk and Hardship will be governed by the proposed Risk and Hardship Matrix. a. Risk and Hardship Allowance: Allowances relating to Risk and Hardship will be governed by the newly proposed nine-cell Risk and Hardship Matrix, with one extra cell at the top, viz., RH-Max to include Siachen Allowance. (PTI)
10. 7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales, allowances – Financial Implications: 
The total financial impact in the FY 2016-17 is likely to be Rs 1,02,100 crore, over the expenditure as per the “Business As Usual” scenario. Of this, the increase in pay would be Rs 39,100 crore, increase in allowances would be Rs 29,300 crore and increase in pension would be Rs 33,700 crore. In percentage terms the overall increase in pay & allowances and pensions over the “Business As Usual” scenario will be 23.55 percent. Within this, the increase in pay will be 16 percent, increase in allowances will be 63 percent, and increase in pension would be 24 percent. (Image by PTI)

7th Pay Commission pension, pay scales – highlights, more: Click here to see in detail 

Process to examine the recommendations made in the report of the 7thCPC.Department of Posts called our views.
Our appeal to colleagues,
FNPO & NFPE submitted joint Memorandum to the 7th CPC, at this stage we cannot go back from our earlier demands, further 7th CPC rejected our demands out right.
Submitting different views to 7thCPC will helpful to Department & Government not to  staff , however we have to  submit our views according to the present scenario.
  FNPO therefore request our colleagues to send their view to our Federation before 3rdDecember. time line is very short, views received after 3rdwill not be considered.

Scheme for engagement of a dependent of deceased GDS on compassionate grounds - clarification