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
|
CADRE
|
IV
PAY COMM
|
V
PAY
|
VI PAY
|
VII
PAY
|
|
POSTAL
ASST
|
975-25-1150-1330-1600 ( S—6)
|
4000-100-6000
( S-7)
|
5200-20200 GP 2400
|
LEVEL 4 = GP
2400
|
|
LSG
|
1400-40-1800-50-2300 ( s-8)
|
4500-125-7000
( S-8)
|
5200-20200 GP 2800
|
LEVEL 5 = GP 2800
|
|
INSPECTOR
|
1400-40-1800-50-2300 ( S-8)
|
5000-150-8000
( S-9)
|
9300-34800 GP 4200
|
LEVEL 7 = GP
4600
|
|
HSG
II
|
1600-50-2300-60-2660 ( S-9)
|
5000-150-8000
( S-9)
|
9300-34800 GP 4200
|
LEVEL 6 = GP
4200
|
|
ASST
SUPDT
|
1600-50-2300-60-2660 ( S-9)
|
5500-175-9000
(S-10)
|
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 / B.tech 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.
ALL ALLOWANCES RATIONALIZED OR ABOLISHED BY THE 7TH PAY
COMMISSION SHOULD BE RESTORED
D.Krishan Rao GENERAL SECRETARY,
NAPE
GROUP C
No comments:
Post a Comment