Reply to 7th CPC Archives - CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS

NC JCM Memorandum to 7th CPC on merger of DA with Pay and Interim Relief

admin — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:03:42 +0000

Memorandum to VII CPC on merger of DA with Pay and Interim Relief:-

National Council (Staff Side)

Joint Consultative Machinery

for Central Government Employees

13-C, Ferozshah Road, New Delhi – 110001

Shiva Gopal Mishra
General Secretary

No.NC4JCM/2O14/VII CPC

Dated: June 3, 2014

Justice Shri Ashok Kumar Mathur,
Chairman,
Seventh Central Pay Commission,
New Delhi

Dear Sir

Sub: Memorandum to VII CPC on merger of DA with Pay and Interim Relief

As was decided in the Preliminary Discussion Meeting, held on 28”‘ May, 2014, with the VII CPC, we submit herewith Memorandum on Merger of Dearness Allowance with Pay and Interim Relief, on behalf of Staff Side, National Council(JCM).

Yours faithfully,

sd/-

(Shiva Gopal Mishra)

Copy to: Ms Meena Agan/val, Secretary, Seventh Central Pay Commission (Government of India), New Delhi, along with a copy of above cited memorandum.

Encl: As above

Copy to: All Constituent Organizations of the NC/JCM(Staff Side), along with a copy of above cited memorandum.

Encl: As above

MEMORANDUM

ON MERGER OF DA WITH PAY AND INTERIM RELIEF.

We solicit the kind reference of the 7th Central Pay Commission to the discussion during the informal interaction the staff side of the National Council had with the Commission on 28.5.2014, when we inter alia raised the issue of merger of Dearness allowance and Interim Relief.

2. Before we dwell upon the issues, it may not be out of place to refer to the evolution of the JCM which later became the negotiating platform for the entirety of Central Government employees and workers It was conceived to bring about a conflict free industrial climate in Civil Service in the wake of the tumultuous experience of an industrial strike action in 1960. The National Council, the apex forum under the three tier system headed by the Cabinet Secretary was empowered to deliberate upon the common issues of the Central Government employees. The Staff Side, National Council, thus became the united voice of the entirety of the Central Government employees on fundamental issues like Wages, Pay Scales, Rate of increment, Dearness compensation and other general allowances.

3. However, over the years, JCM became an ineffective instrument to address the basic issues and demands of the employees. We shall detail the requirements to empower and streamline the functioning of the JCM as a negotiating forum in our Main Memorandum to the Commission.

4. The twin issues viz. Merger of DA and Interim relief had been the subject matter of discussion with the Government when the Staff side was called upon to present their views in the matter of finalization of the terms of reference for the 7th CPC by the Secretary, Personnel, (Department of Personnel and Training) in his capacity as Chairman, Standing Committee, National Council JCM. Though we pleaded for the specific reference of the above two issues, to the 7th CPC, the final 1 version of the terms of reference approved by the Government did not find a place for our views. We have, therefore, been constrained to take recourse to clause 5 in the terms of reference, which enables the Commission to send interim report to the Government.

MERGER OF DA WITH PAY:

5. Dearness allowance is considered as a device to protect, to a greater or lesser extent, the real income of wage earners and salaried employees from the effects of rise in prices. As per the vagaries of price fluctuation in the market, the allowances are bound to go up and down. Constant rise in the price level, might bring about a situation whereby the quantum of allowance shall go up. Such a phenomenon of constant increase of prices of commodities gave rise to the demand for merger of Dearness allowances with pay so as to make it pay, rather than an allowance, with all concomitant benefits. A committee to advice the Govt. on the portion of such DA to be treated as pay was appointed on 15th July, 1952 (Resolution No. F6(6)E-II/52). The terms of reference of the Committee was :

“Taking in to consideration the rates of dearness allowance that have been sanctioned to date for Central Govt. servents, and the level at which cost of living index are likely to stabilize in the foreseable future, to recommend the percentage of dearness allowance now given to the Central Govt. servents which should be allowed to be treated as pay for all purposes in future, provided that by doing so the present total pay and dearness allowance is not enhanced:”

6. The said committee was headed by Shri N.V. Gadgil, Member of Parliament. The Committee in its report concluded that

“We have recorded the various reasons which we have taken into account in arriving at the conclusion that the appropriate level below which the All India cost of living index is not likely to fall, should be taken as 265-284. We find that for the index figure of 265, the Central Pay Commission formula allows Govt. Employees in the lowest pay group a dearness allowance of Rs.20/- and this amount remain unchanged until the cost of living index go above the index of the next level i.e. 285. We, therefore, consider that the employees in this pay group, a sum of Rs. 20/- which represents 50% of the present dearness allowance of Rs. 40 per month should be treated as pay (page 22 chapter V Report of the Dearness allowance Committee).”

7. The Committee also enumerated in their report the purposes for which the DA shall be treated as pay as under:-

Retirement Benefits
Travelling allowance
Compensatory allowance
House rent allowance
Compensation of Leave Salary etc.

8. The 3rd CPC, whose recommendations were implemented with effect from 1.1.1973 had no reference from the Govt. on the question of merger of DA. Still while dealing with the issue of Dearness allowance (vol.IV – Page 1 Ch.55) the Commission noted that “no other country in the world (except Ceylon and Pakistan) seems to be following the practice of paying dearness allowance or cost of living allowance as a separate element of wage. In most of the countries compensation to Govt. employees for the increase in the price level is given by way of periodical salary revisions Prior to the setting up of the 3rd CPC, pursuant to the discussion in the National Council, JCM, the entire dearness allowance as on 1.8.1966 was treated as Dearness pay and the consequent increase in allowance was granted by the Government with effect from 1.12.1968. In para 16, the Commission recommended that should the price level rise above twelve monthly index of 272 ( 1960=100) the Government should review the position and decide whether the Dearness allowance Scheme should be extended further or the pay scale themselves should be revised. ( Page 4 Chapter 55. Vol. 4 3 rd CPC report). On crossing the index point of 272, the Government conceded the demand for merger of 36% of DA with pay. Later, based on an agreement reached at the National Council JCM the DA granted upto the index level of 320 points i.e. 60% of the Basic Pay was merged through executive instructions for purpose of allowances and pension. Before the 4th CPC was set up in 1983, the issue of further merger of DA with Pay was raised by the employees. Conceding the demand the Government decided that DA entitled to be drawn upto the index average of 568 points be treated as pay for all purposes.

9. Since the Pay Scales were to be constructed with reference to the consumer price index as on the date of revision, every Commission had to perforce merge the entire DA when the actual revision was made. The DA on such revised pay is to be computed on the basis of annual average rise of index after every six months interval. Therefore, the question of merger of DA again rose at the time of negotiation with the Government for setting up the 5th CPC. An agreement was reached on merger of certain percentage of DA and interim relief. (Rs. 100/-) in September, 1993. In April, 1994, the Government issued notification setting up the 5 th CPC (resolution No. 5(12)E-III/93 dated 9.4.1994).

10. The Staff Side placed before the 5th CPC the necessity to merge DA with Pay at an index level below which prices were not likely to move downwards. Pointing out that in the last two decades i.e. 1980s and 1990s there had been not a single occasion when the annual average index had fallen consequent upon which the DA rates were to be reduced, they requested the Commission to merge the entire DA which had been at 97% of the Basic pay as on 1.7. 1993. (The AICPI index being 1201.66). The Commission after deliberations on the memorandum and discussion with the staff Side, recommended that 97% of Basic Pay as DA admissible from. 1.7. 1993 be treated as Pay for all purposes. However, they suggested that the said merger might be given effect only from 1.4. 1995.

The 5th CPC submitted its final report to the Government on 19th January, 1997. Before the Commission, the Staff side had demanded that as and when the consumer price index exceeds 25% of the base index at which the pay is fixed that proportion of Dearness allowance should be treated as Pay for all purposes and the decision on this must not be left at the discretion of the Government. The Commission considering this demand observed that:

“From the past trend of CPI given in annexure 11’8.1 it is observed that 50% increase in prices generally takes around five years to materialise. A mid-term quinquennial revision of salaries of the Government employees is not something the Government should grudge. In view of the above, we recommend that DA should be converted into Dearness Pay each time the CPI increases by 50% over the base index used by the last Pay Commission. Such DA should be termed as Dearness Pay and be counted for all purposes including retirement benefits. (Chapter 105 page 157)”. The 5th CPC thus regularised the periodical merger of DA into a well thought 11. out scheme. They also established that wage revision is needed either when the DA exceeds 50% over the base index or after five years .

12. The Government, however, did not act upon this recommendation, when the percentage of DA exceeded 50( 52%) as on 1.7.2002, though it had accepted the recommendation in 1997. With the persistent persuasion, ultimately, the Government issued orders treating 50% DA as Dearness Pay for all purposes with effect from.1.4.2004.

13. Even though the 5th CPC had brought about a finality on the approach to the question of merger of DA with pay, the 6th CPC reopened the issue afresh. The Commission made the following observation-

“This conversion (merger of DA with Pay) is however not necessary in the revised structure being recommended where increments are payable as a percentage of Pay in the Pay Band and Grade Pay thereon and provision has been made for all allowances/benefits to be revised periodically, linked to the increase in the price index. The Commission is, therefore, not recommending merger of DA with Basic pay at any stage.”

14. The 3rd, 4th and 5th Central Pay Commissions had approvingly endorsed the recommendations made by Gadgil Committee in 1952. The practice of periodical merger had been followed as a device to protect the erosion in the real value of wages (including allowances) especially at the lowest level of employees. This erosion becomes unbearable when DA crosses over 50%. To say that the increment rate which is presently 3% of pay would take care of the erosion is to say the least, atrocious. Increment is granted as a legitimate reward for the service rendered by an employee for a year. It has nothing to do with the erosion in the real value of wages. No doubt, the 6th CPC has recommended that a few allowances should be revised by 25% as and when the DA crosses over the stipulated 50%. Such allowances are very in number. Moreover, 25% rise as a compensation when the DA itself rises to 50% is arbitrary and conceived to compensate the worker with lesser amount than what he is entitled to.

15. We, therefore, strongly plead before the Commission, for the reasons enumerated in the foregoing paras, that the Dearness allowance as on 1.1.2014 which stood at 100% may be recommended to be merged and treated as Dearness Pay for grant of all benefits, allowances, pension and other retirement entitlements.

16. We further submit that Merger of D.A. as on 1.1.2014 may also be recommended in respect of pensioners and Gramin Dak Sewaks of Postal Departments.

INTERIM RELIEF

Barring the 6th Central Pay Commission, all other Commissions had recommended grant of Interim Relief to the Central Government Employees. As per the 5thCPC, Interim relief represented a provisional arrangement during the period between setting up of a Pay Commission and submission of a report by the Commission and its acceptance by the Government. Most of the earlier Commissions with the exception of Ist and 6th Central Pay Commission had taken 2-3 years and sometimes more to finalise their recommendations. Despite the specific reference made to the 6th CPC, by the Government to consider grant of Interim Relief the Commission took the position that having decided to submit its recommendation within the stipulated period of eighteen months and having arrived at a view that its recommendations must be effective from 1.1.2006, it shall not waste time on the question of interim relief. What the 6th CPC failed to appreciate was the erosion in the real value of wages that had taken place over the years due to inflation and rise in prices of essential commodities and the inability especially of the employees at the lower level to make the both ends meet with the available wages. No doubt, the employees had been to some extent benefitted by the decision of the Government to merge 50% Dearness allowance and treat it as pay for all purposes including DA thereon.

2. Every Pay Commission which had recommended Interim Relief had made it amply clear that it was intended to provide some relief to the employees pending a comprehensive determination of their salary structure and other benefits. The relief granted was treated as sui generis (one of its own kind, unique) and it was not taken into account for determining any allowance or benefit.

3. We give below briefly the course of negotiation and approach of various earlier Pay Commissions on the question of grant of interim relief.

4. The Second Pay Commission gave a report within a month’s time and recommended an Interim Relief of Rs. 5/-. The third pay Commission gave three instalments of Interim Relief on varying rates. After appoint of the 4th CPC in July, 1983, Government sanctioned (Vide Department of Expenditure O.M.No. 7(39)-E III/83 dated 2nd August, 1983) on their own initiative Interim Relief at varying rates of Rs. 50 and Rs. 100 per month. In March, 1985, 4th CPC submitted a report and granted a further interim relief at 10% of Basic pay subject to a minimum of Rs. 50 per month. Again before the setting up of the 5th CPC, the Government sanctioned Rs. 100 as interim Relief. As it was not considered adequate, the staff side of the National Council, JCM submitted a memorandum to the 5th CPC demanding additional interim relief. The Govt. vide their Department of Expenditure, Resolution No. 5(12)EIII/93 dated 12.01.1995 amended the terms of reference to enable the Commission to decide upon the additional interim relief. The 5th Central Pay Commission in their interim report submitted on 2 nd May, 1995, recommended Interim Relief equal to 10% of Basic Pay subject to a minimum of Rs. 100/-. The terms of reference of 6th CPC on the issue of Interim Relief was as under:-

“2.g. To examine desirability and need to sanction any interim relief till the time the recommendations of the Commission are made and accepted by the Government. “

5. It has to be recalled that the Government did not initially refer the question of Interim Relief to the 5th CPC but when the Staff Side submitted their memorandum to the Commission on I.R., the Government had to amend the terms of reference and refer the issue to the Commission for their decision.

6. These go to establish the need for a relief in view of the erosion in the real value of wages, the need to fill the widening gap in wages when compared to outside rates and the fact that final recommendations of the 7 th Pay Commission are bound to revise the wage structure and above all the need to provide some relief to the employees who would retire before the Commission’s recommendations are finally submitted to the Government and accepted by them.

7. We give hereunder a table indicating the retail prices of the commodities which goes into the computation of minimum wage as per Dr.Ackroyd formula as on 1.1.2006 (quoted by the 6th CPC in their report. Page 53. Table 2.1`.1 Chapter 2.2.) and the actual retail price of those very commodities as on 1.1.2011. The percentage increase in the prices of each commodity is also given in the table. The average rise in prices was of the order of 174%, whereas the Dearness allowance entitlement was only 51%.. The table clearly indicate the erosion in the real value of the wages.

Sl.No	Name of articles	Price as 1.1.2006	As on date	%increase
1	Rice	18	38	120
2	Dhall 4 varieties; average	40	87	120
3	Raw vegetables	10	40	400
4	Green veg.	10	56	560
5	Other veg	10	40	400
6	Fruits	30	100	330
7	milk	24	32	40
8	Sugar,jiggery. average	24	43	95
9	Edible oil.3 varieties.average	50	95	95
10	Fish	120	300	150
11	meat	120	240	100
12	egg	2	3	50
13	Detergents/soap	200	350	75
14	Cloth	80	120	50
	Average increase			174

8. The need based minimum wage computed on the basis of Dr Ackroyd formula as on 1.1.2014 will be around Rs. 26,000 bringing about a gap of almost 12,000 at the level of an MTS. We shall submit the details thereof in our main memorandum.

9. The only Public Sector undertaking in which the wage agreement has been reached in 2013 is the Coal India Limited. As per the said agreement, the minimum wage at the lowest level of the worker as on 1.12014 is:

Basic Pay ——————————–Rs. 15, 712
Dearness allowance: 29.6%
Special allowance: 4.0%
Special DA: 1.795%
Attendance bonus: 10%
Total: 49.395%————————– Rs. 7132.46
Total salary: —————————–Rs.22844.46
At the MTS level 22.844.46 x 130% —- Rs.29697.

10. As per the formula adopted by the 5th CPC, the minimum wage will work out to Rs. 22,857 as under:

A. Per Capita NNP at constant price for 2004-05 – Rs. 24,143
B. Per capita NNP at constant price for 2011-12 – Rs. 38,037
C. The increase registered over 8 years. – Rs. 13,894.
D. Percentage increase over 2004-05 – 57.54877.
E. Emoluments of an MTS as on 1.1.2014 – Rs. 14,000

F. 57.55% of Rs. 14,000. – Rs. 8,857.
G. Wage to be fixed in thecase of MTS as on1.1.14. – Rs. 22857.

From the above it is seen that Central Government employees presently have a very depressed salary structure. The final outcome of the deliberations of the 7 th CPC will become available only by 2016. It is, therefore, needed that the employees have to be compensated in the form of Interim Relief. In our opinion the Commission may, as has been done by the various earlier Pay Commissions, recommend atleast 25% of Pay in Pay Band plus Grade Pay as Interim Relief subject to a minimum of Rs. 4000/-. Incidentally we may point out that the grant of interim relief will enable the Government to spread out the financial outlay on account of wage revision over a period of more than three years.

We further urge that the Commission may kindly recommended Interim Relief at the above rate subject to minimum of Rs.2000/- to as pensioners and Gramin Dak Sevaks of Postal Department.

SHIVA GOPAL MISHRA

Secretary, Staff Side, National Council JCM.

Source: http://ncjcmstaffside.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Memorandum-for-IR-and-DA-merger_03.06.2014.pdf

The post NC JCM Memorandum to 7th CPC on merger of DA with Pay and Interim Relief appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Draft Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire by Confederation: Suggestion, Addition and Alteration if any called for.

admin — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:15:31 +0000

Draft Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire by Confederation: Suggestion, Addition and Alteration if any called for.

Daft Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire

1. Salaries

1.1 The considerations on which the minimum salary in case of the lowest Group ‘C’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a Secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the reasonable ratio between the two.

Any Commission which considers the question of emoluments for employees/workers should first be inspired by the implication flowing from the amendment to the preamble of our Constitution where-by the words “socialist & secular” were prefixed to the word “Republic”, as also the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in Article 43 i.e. the state should endeavour to secure living wage for its employees/workers.

Group C is a skilled worker. MTS is the lowest category of Group C. The 6th CPC evolved the MTS by amalgamating some of the unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled functions without any scientific basis or logic. From the standpoint of the stipulation in the recruitment rules, eligibility criteria etc, MTS deserves to be categorized as a skilled worker. In practice, most of the departments have outsourced or contractorised the unskilled or semi skilled jobs leaving the MTS to cater to the requirements of the skilled functions.

Wage structure in civil service is to be determined on the basis of the computation of the minimum wage; fair comparison of wages elsewhere etc. The living wage, which is a constitutional guarantee, has not been defined. The 15th Indian Labour Conference held in 1957 brought in the concept of “Need Based Minimum wage” on the basis of Dr. Aykhroid formula. The need based minimum wage is required to be provided for an unskilled worker whenever one is employed. The definition underwent minor changes, when the Supreme Court revised the norms later. Presently there are no unskilled regular employees’ cadre in Government of India services. The Commission is required to first determine the need based minimum wage as per the Dr. Aykhroid formula and make necessary adjustment to determine the wages of MTS which is the lowest category in Government of India services. The co-relation of the wages of the skilled and skilled worker at the lowest grade had always been of the order of 130% for the skilled worker. The minimum of the pay of the MTS has therefore to be determined at 130% of the need based minimum wage.

The minimum maximum ratio obtaining in different countries as per information gathered by V CPC was as under:

Malaysia – 1:3

Sweden 1:4

USA – 1:4

Britain – 1:6

France – 1:6.6

Indonesia – 1:6.9

` Australia – 1:7.7

Thailand – 1:9

Hong Kong – 1:40

However, the earlier Pay Commissions had adopted a ratio of 1:10. Since the minimum wage in the Central Government sector is no more related to an unskilled worker, this ratio must be proportionately changed to 1:9. If one is to take into account the fact that the Pay of Cabinet secretary, being the topmost Civil Servant I, for no valid justification,is excluded by the 6th CPC, the ratio in reality between the minimum and maximum will be more than 1:9.

Therefore, so far as maximum salary in the case of a Secretary level officer is concerned the reasonable ratio between minimum and maximum salary may be taken as 1:9 and salary of Secretary level officer may be fixed by multiplying the minimum wage by a factor of 9.

1.2 What should be the considerations for determining salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?

Salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest and the lowest level functionaries should be determined by applying the existing vertical and horizontal relativities which have been evolved over a time through various Pay Commissions.

In respect of special functionaries like Professionals and technocrats who normally prefer to work in the Private Sector and therefore either do not offer themselves for Government service or tend to leave it and go over to the Private Sector, Instead of providing them the salary structure of Group A administrative post they may be granted a special Pay package.

Similarly unskilled workers engaged in hazardous activities like scavenging, maintenance of rail track, in Laboratories, Hospitals may also be considered for a special treatment.

2. Comparisons

2.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

There should be no comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector for their functions and objectives are incomparable. While the private sector is motivated by the concept of maximization of profit, the requirement of service to public without any favour is the cardinal principle of governance. A civil servant is supposed to possess the qualities of being fearless but appreciative of inherent individual difficulties, non discriminatory between one citizen and the other; sense of equality; adherence to therules and regulations etc.

However a “fair comparison with outside wages” is a principle which has been adopted world over for determination of wages of Civil (Government) servants and therefore atleast at the level of unskilled work, the average minimum wage obtaining in selected Private/Public sector undertakings is a must, subject to the condition that it should not be less than the Need Based Minimum wage determined and quantified on the basis of norms adopted by the 15 ILC.

So far as perquisites are concerned no comparison with those obtaining in Private sector is possible except in the case of House Rent/Travelling Allowances. Other perquisites in the Private sector have been granted on altogether different considerations.

2.2 Should there at all be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the public sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

Yes. For the sake of a fair comparison of wages.

2.3 The concept of variable pay has been introduced in Central Public Sector Enterprises by the Second Pay Revision Committee. In the case of the Government is there merit in introducing a variable component of pay? Can such variable pay be linked to performance?

The concept of performance related pay structure was actually imported by the 6th CPC through the Pay Band and Grade Pay system. In the absence of an objective measurement criterion to evaluate the performance of individual officials and groups, the innovation was flawed right at the outset. The 6th CPC failed to recognize the fact that in Governmental set up, segmentalisation of functions into tiny units is next to impossible. In order to make the concept workable, the organization must be capable of finalizing clear cut targets both at the individual and group levels. This being difficult in most of the Governmental organizations, it is not desirable either to continue with the existing system or import or replicate what is done in the Public Sector Undertakings. This apart, it is pertinent to point out that most the west European countries, which adopted the Performance pay related scheme in civil service in the hay-days of Thatcher-Reagan era subsequently discarded it as infeasible.

3. Attracting Talent

3.1 Does the present compensation package attract suitable talent in the All India Services & Group A Services? What are your observations and suggestions in this regard?

Generally the pay package in Government service at all levels is at a low level compared to the exorbitant pay packets provided by some of the Transnational Corporation in the private Sector. This has no doubt a deleterious impact on the quality of personnel recruited to Civil service, especially at lower levels. Since the Group A Service officers in Civil Service enjoy enormous power, perks privileges and an incomparable job security it has continued to attract talents. As mentioned elsewhere, while parity with the pay and perquisites with the private sector is neither desirable nor feasible, the Commission must ensure thin at the widening gap in this regard is taken into account as an important factor to be addressed. The element of statutory Pension is one very important and significant factor in attracting persons for Government service. Therefore, the NPS and PFRDA Act may be scrapped and statutory pension as a service condition may be restored.

3.2 To what extent should government compensation be structured to attract special talent?

Government may be required to requisition the service of personnel with special talents of professionals and technocrats for specific jobs. The Commission may evolve a scheme for the recruitment and retention of such professionals and technocrats with special pay packets and flexible service conditions.

4. Pay Scales

4.1 The 6th Central Pay Commission introduced the system of Pay Bands and Grade Pay as against the system of specific pay scales attached to various posts. What has been the impact of running pay bands post implementation of 6th CPC recommendations?

The Pay Band and Grade Pay system evolved by the 6th CPC in implementation of the concept of performance related pay structure in civil service, as mentioned elsewhere, was a disaster. Having introduced without proper consultation with the stake holders, It did not serve the requisite purpose. The system brought about innumerable anomalies of varied nature, which could not be addressed by the National or Departmental Anomaly committees within the parameters stipulated by the Government. The failure of these committees to address the issues which were appreciated by all concerned as genuine stand testimony of the incorrigible character of the scheme leaving no alternative except to discard it to be replaced by the Pay scale structure.

4.2 Is there any need to bring about any change?

Yes. This has to be changed lock, stock and barrel.

There is a need to revert to Time Scale pattern of wage structure abandoning the Pay Band Grade Pay Structure. The time scale of pay should have a minimum pay and annual increment at the rate mentioned in answer to question No. 5.2 but without any maximum so that it is a running pay scale. This will eliminate the phenomena of stagnation.

4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?

No. Not at all.

The Pay Band & Grade Pay structure has not prevented the highly qualified technocrats and professions to leave the Government in search of better career avenues in public and private sectors.

4.4 Successive Pay Commissions have reduced the number of pay scales by merging one or two pay scales together. Is there a case for the number of pay scales/ pay band to be rationalized and if so in what manner?

It must be noted that the successive Pay commissions had reduced the pay scales only at the Group C and D levels. It has now reached a saturation point. There is no much scope to have further exercise in this direction except where clear overlapping exists. The Commission must however attempt to bring about uniform hierarchical set up at all levels in all departments. The pay scales are to be constructed by a common multiplication factor as was done by the 5th CPC.

4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If not, what are your alternative suggestions?

It is not working and must be replaced with the pay scale structure which was in vogue prior to the implementation of the 6th CPC. . The purpose for which it had been devised is not specified by the VI CPC. It also did not serve as a fitment benefit. At best the grade pay can only be termed as an adhoc increase which has been allowed over the existing basic pay and DA as on 1.1.2006.

5. Increment

5.1 Whether the present system of annual increment on 1st July of every year uniformly in case of all employees has served its purpose or not? Whether any changes are required?

No. In fact the single date increment system has brought in anomalies, which were discussed at length at the National Anomaly Committee, without reaching an agreement. In our Opinion, the commission must recommend, for administrative expediency, two specific dates as increment dates. Viz. Ist January and Ist July. Those recruited/appointed/promoted during the period between 1st Jan and 30th June, will have their increment date on 1st January and those recruited/appointed/promoted between Ist July and 31st December will have it on Ist July next. This apart the Commission is required to specifically recommend that those who retire on 30th June and 31st December are granted one increment on the last day of their service.

5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?

The reasonable quantum of increment should not be less than 5% of the basic pay or the rate of increment agreed upon through bilateral discussion in the Banking industry, whichever is higher.

5.3 Whether there should be a provision of variable increments at a rate higher than the normal annual increment in case of high achievers? If so, what should be transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement, which could be uniformly applied across Central Government?

Without defining the term “high achiever” and prescribing transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement the system of variable increments at a rate higher than normal annual increments will be misused on subjective assessment of high achievements. For these reasons and for what we have stated in reply to question No. 2.3 the scheme of variable increment is not desirable.

5.4 Under the MACP scheme three financial up-gradations are allowed on completion of 10, 20, 30 years of regular service, counted from the direct entry grade. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the scheme? Is there a perception that a scheme of this nature, in some Departments, actually incentivizes people who do not wish to take the more arduous route of qualifying departmental examinations/ or those obtaining professional degrees?

There should be 5 financial upgradation in the departmental promotional hierarchy.

MACP is a time bound promotional scheme. The scheme is required to be continued to motivate personnel at all levels and at all departments especially in those organizations, where normal promotional avenues are few and far between. Normal promotions are dependent upon the availability of vacancies at higher levels. The job requirement of certain organizations may not be capable of creating requisite number of higher level positions whereas it might need large number of personnel at lower levels. MACP alone can take care of that specific situation. The arduous route of career progression through examination and professional qualification, no doubt will be preferred if and if only such promotions are made available for the eligible candidates within a reasonable period of residency in the feeder cadre. Say three years.

6. Performance

What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?

We are against the system of incentives to reward good performance as this would only encourage favouritism and nepotism for the reasons stated to our reply to question No.2.3 an d 5.2

7. Impact on other organizations

Salary structures in the Central and State Governments are broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, Panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions. To what extent should their paying capacity be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Govt. employees?

Capacity of a Governmental organization to pay cannot be gauged only from the available resources but also its potential to raise resources. Wages cannot be determined on the single factor of capacity of the Government to pay. It must be noted that there are various State Governments in the country which pay better pay packets, perquisites and allowances to its employees than what is provided to the Central Government employees. Panchayati Raj institution, Municipalities, normally follow the salary structure of the respective State Governments. It is also to be noted that various State Governments do revise the wages of their employees once in five years. In any case the incapacity of the government to pay cannot be a justification to deny the minimum wage to workers and the salary structure based upon that concept, especially in the background that the government is to function as a model employer. It also cannot be an excuse for denial of wages on a fair comparison of the wages existing in the society which is evolved as a product of collective bargaining of the workers.

8. Defence Forces

8.1 What should be the considerations for fixing salary in case of Defence personnel and in what manner does the parity with civil services need to be evolved, keeping in view their respective job profiles?

No comments

8.2 In what manner should the concessions and facilities, both in cash and kind, be taken into account for determining salary structure in case of Defence Forces personnel.

No comments

8.3 As per the November 2008 orders of the Ministry of Defence, there are a total of 45 types of allowances for Personnel Below Officer Rank and 39 types of allowances for Officers. Does a case exist for rationalization/ streamlining of the current variety of allowances?

No comments

8.4 What are the options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence pensions?

No comments

8.5 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to war widows?

No comments

8.6 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to disabled soldiers, commensurate to the nature of their disability?

No comments.

9. Allowances

9.1 Whether the existing allowances need to be retained or rationalized in such a manner as to ensure that salary structure takes care not only of the job profile but the situational factors as well, so that the number of allowances could be at a realistic level?

The existing allowances need to be retained. They are at a realistic level having been evolved by successive Pay Commission over detailed deliberations.

9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?

The IIIrd CPC had recommended that Government should lay down appropriate HRA rates in different cities and town based not on population criteria, but on an actual assessment of prevailing level of rent in different cities and Towns. Alternatively, certain notional rents for different types of accommodation meant for officers and personnel of specified pay groups should be laid down for particular cities after studying the actual market rent in that city. The house rent allowance will have to be the actual rent payable by an employee in a particular location as reduced by 10% of basic pay being the amount factored in the computation of minimum wage.

10. Pension

10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?

We are of the considered opinion that the new pension scheme which came into existence for the employees recruited after 1.1.2004 must be scrapped. The old statutory pension scheme as was in vogue prior to 1.1.2004 must be made applicable to all Government employees irrespective of the date of their entry into Government service. The New pension scheme has in fact created a class within class amongst the Central Government employees which is discriminatory and impermissible. It is clearly in contravention of the dictum pronounced by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Nakara Vs Union of India and therefore deserves to be rescinded.

Since this New Pension Scheme has been introduced with effect from 01.01.2004, it will come into operation only after 30 years in the year 2034 or so when present new entrants retire and get pension from annuities purchased from 40% of total accumulated pension fund.

10.2 As far as pre-1.1.2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and other retirement benefits?

The concept of modified parity introduced by the 5th CPC as a measure to reduce the financial implication must be replaced with the full parity concept as was made applicable for the personnel retired prior to 1.1.1986. In other words, the pay of every retired person must be re-determined notionally as if he is not retired and then his pension to be computed under the revised rules. This alone will protect the value of pension of a retired person.

5th CPC in their Para 127.6 has observed, “It needs to be averred emphatically that pension is not in the nature of alms being doled out to beggars. Senior Citizens (Retired Government employees) need to be treated with dignity & courtesy benefitting their age. Pension is their statutory, inalienable, enforceable right & it has been earned by the sweat of their brow” Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its landmark 5 Judge Constitutional Bench judgement dated 17.12.1982 in the case of D.S. Nakara Vs Union of India ruled – “A Pension scheme consistent with available resources must provide (adequate pension) so that the Pensioner would be able to live

i) free from want, with decency, independence and self respect and

ii) At a standard equivalent at pre-retirement level.

iii) Pensioners from payment of pension form a homogenous class. Different formulae affording unequal treatment cannot be adopted to compute their pension solely on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later.

A comprehensive scheme of retirement benefit has been suggested by the stake holders both as an agenda in the National Council meeting of JCM and the meetings of SCOVA. The Commission is requested to consider the well thought out scheme formulated in those agenda and make recommendations to the Government, so that the pension and retirement benefits will really become meaningful for the retired employees. We shall elucidate the points in detail when we submit the memorandum to the Commission on retirement benefits.

11. Strengthening the public governance system

11.1 The 6th CPC recommended upgrading the skills of the Group D employees and placing them in Group C over a period of time. What has been the experience in this regard?

The then existing Group D employees, to the best of our understanding have all been trained, upgraded or promoted to function as skilled group C employees.

11.2 In what way can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more efficient, accountable and responsible? Please give specific suggestions with respect to:

a) Rationalisation of staff strength and more productive deployment of available staff;

b) Rationalisation of processes and reduction of paper work; and

c) Economy in expenditure.

Whatever rationalization effected so far by the Government had been through an unscientific and arbitrary executive fiat like the one issued in 2001 and which was kept operative till 2009. The said exercise only reduced the staff strength drastically. We are not aware of any rationalization or reduction in Group A cadres through this exercise even though the executive instruction covered all grades and cadres in the Government service. It in effect made most of the departments of the Govt. of India either non functional or dysfunctional. In our considered opinion, the 7thCPC must recommend to the Government to set up a Committee in each department with experts from outside the organization, the officials from within the organization and representative of the Unions of the respective department to study the functional changes taken place over the years, especially due to the induction of modern technology the new challenges and the best way to meet those challenges’ reduction in paper work, customer satisfaction and economy in expenditure and make suggestions to the Government for their acceptance and implementation in toto.

12. Training/ building competence

To ensure that periodical professional training is imparted to all personnel to update the skills.

12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?

No comments. This in fact is a matter which must be considered by an Administrative Reforms Commission rather than a Pay Commission.

12.2 One of the terms of reference suggests that the Commission recommend appropriate training and capacity building through a competency based framework.

a) Is the present level of training at various stages of a person’s career considered adequate? Are there gaps that need to be filled, and if so, where?

b) Should it be made compulsory that each civil service officer should in his career span acquire a professional qualification? If so, can the nature of the study, time intervals and the Institution(s) whose qualification are acceptable, all be stipulated?

c) What other indicators can best measure training and capacity building for personnel in your organization? Please suggest ways through which capacity building can be further strengthened?

In our opinion in- service training is the best course for skill development.

Outsourcing of Governmental functions per se is undesirable and must be stopped.

13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?

The experience has been sheer duplication of work by existing regular employees and deterioration of efficiency in pubic service.

13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be outsourced?

No. for reasons stated in reply to question No. 13.

14. Regulatory Bodies

No comments.

14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set up under Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/ Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members + support personnel) may be indicated.

No comments. The reply has to be given Government Departments.

14.2 Regulators that may not qualify in terms of being set up under Acts of Parliament but perform regulatory functions may also be listed. The scale of pay for Chairperson /Members and other personnel of such bodies may be indicated.

No comments. The reply has to be given Government Departments.

14.3 Across the Government there are a host of Regulatory bodies set up for various purposes. What are your suggestions regarding emoluments structure for Regulatory bodies?

No comments.

15. Payment of Bonus

One of the terms of reference of the 7th Pay Commission is to examine the existing schemes of payment of bonus. What are your suggestions and observations in this regard.

The 7th CPC must make note of the recommendations of the 5th CPC & Bazle Karim Committee Report which are yet to be acted upon by the Government. The present system of Productivity linked bonus is the product of bilateral agreements and cannot be changed through unilateral decisions. What is needed is that the Government must issue necessary guidelines to enable all departments to enter into such bilateral agreements with their staff unions so that the adhoc bonus system presently in vogue in many departments could be abolished.

***

Message from Confederation for Suggestion in draft reply:-

MOST URGENT

MOST IMPORTANT

DRAFT REPLY TO 7TH CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION QUESTIONNAIRE – SUGGESTION, ADDITION AND ALTERATION, IF ANY, CALLED FOR.

Dear Comrade,

We place hereunder the draft reply to the questionnaire issued by the 7th CPC. We want you to go through the same and make suggestions to enrich it further. We propose to place the same at the staff side meeting of the National Council on 6th May, 2014. The final version as formulated by the Staff Side will also be published on7th May. 2014. We have to arrive at a consensus taking into account all shades of opinions.

The replies are drafted to make it as brief as possible. It covers only common issues. The staff side National Council will be submitting a detailed memorandum later as and when it is called for by the 7th CPC. The said memorandum will be drafted taking into account the views of all organizations including pensioners organisations. Department specific issues are to be covered by the memorandum submitted by the respective departmental organizations. Since there will be very short time available for submission of memorandum, in view of the overall time frame of 18 months all affiliates are requested to finalize their approach and prepare the memorandum and keep it ready for submission without loss of time.

It will be our endeavor that on common issues, complete unanimity of opinion emerges amongst all Federations of Central Govt. employees.

Suggestions may be sent by e-mail to confederationhq@gmail.com

With greetings,

Yours fraternally

S. K. Vyas K. K. N. Kutty M. Krishnan

Advisor President Secretary General

Mob: 09868244035 Mob: 09811048303 Mob: 09447068125

Source: http://confederationhq.blogspot.in/2014/04/most-urgent-most-important-draft-reply.html

The post Draft Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire by Confederation: Suggestion, Addition and Alteration if any called for. appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire is being prepared by Confederation CHQ

admin — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:16:41 +0000

Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire is being prepared by Confederation CHQ

Reply to be submitted to 7CPC on Questionnaire is being prepared by Confederation CHQ under the able and experienced guidance and leadership of Com.S.K.Vyasji (Advisor, Confederation) and Com.KKN.Kutty ( National President, Confereration). Suggestions if any, by the C-O-C s and Affiliated Organisations may be sent by e-mail to Confederation CHQ (e-mail-ID confederationhq@gmail.com ormkrishnan6854@gmail.com ). Karnataka C-O-C has already sent its valuable comments and feedback to the CHQ.

Final Draft of the reply to the Questionnaire will be exhibited in the Confederation website.

It will be better if all the affiliates of Confederation submit the reply on the same line

M.Krishnan

Source: Confederationhq.blogspot.com

The post Reply to 7th CPC Questionnaire is being prepared by Confederation CHQ appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Bharat Pensioners Samaj reply to 7th CPC questionnaire-Revised draft

admin — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:02:21 +0000

Bharat Pensioners Samaj reply to 7th CPC questionnaire-Revised draft

Ms Meena Agarwal

Secretary GOI Seventh Central Pay Commission

Post Box No 4599 Hause Khas

P.O. New Delhi -110016

e.mail: secy-7cpc@nic.in

Madam,

Subject: 7th CPC Questionnaire

Reference: D.O. No 7cpc/15/questionnaire dated 9th April 2014

‘Bharat Pensioners Samaj’. One of the identified Pensioners’ Federation by GOI M/O Personnel, PG & Pensions-DOP& PW and a stake holder. In its capacity as one of the oldest & largest Pensioners Organization with over 500 Affiliated Associations, submits hereunder its reply to the questionnaire issued vide your D.O. No 7cpc/15/questionnaire dated 9th April 2014.

As Pension is not independent of Salary. Salary structure also, is a matter of concern to pensioners. However, Bharat Pensioners Samaj limits its answers to Question Nos 1.1,1.2 , 10.1 & 10.1.2 under the heads ‘Salary’ & ‘Pension’ .

Q.1.1 The consideration on which the minimum and maximum salary in case of the lowest group c’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the ratio between the two.

Ans. Socialistic structure of the country , constitutional provisions for equality & reduction of vast inequality in income & wealth between highest and lowest paid should be the main considerationfor fixing maximum & minimum Salary.

The Ratio between maximum & minimum of Salary be brought down to 1: 9. Ensuring uniformly equal % rise in Salary of all employees by adopting a common multiplication factor.

4th CPC had determined the ratio between minimum & maximum of salary to be 10.7(Chapter 41 & 43). In accordance with the basic fiber of a socialistic State this ratio should have gone reducing Pay Commission after Pay Commission. Even in capitalist countries like America & Britain this ratio is 1: 3.3 &1:5 respectively? In countries with weaker economy like Philippines this is 1: 9.5. VI CPC adopted conversion factor of 1.86 to arrive at the minimum of lowest pay Band, where as it adopted a factor of 3.37 for arriving at the highest scale. This shredded the very basic fiber of the Constitution of Indian Socialistic State by raising the ratio between minimum & maximum of Salary to 1: 12.85. This negative and socially regressive effect of the 6th Central Pay Commission has had the effect of worsening wealth and income inequality not only between pre-and post-2006 retirees, but even within pre-2006 retirees wherein higher-ups got full parity in Pension(Through modified parity) .Adoption of a ratio of 1:9 between minimum & maximum paid will therefore rectify to some extent the injustice done so far .

Defence Employee:

As far as Armed forces are concerned they do the supreme sacrifice for the country & must be the highest paid .For them the ratio between lowest & highest paid must not be more than 1:5.

Q.1.2 What should be the consideration for determining salary for various levels of functions between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?

Ans. Equal % rise in Salary of all employees should be the main consideration .Revise the highest existing Salary first. Divide the revised maximum Salary by 9 to arrive at the revised minimum Salary. Divide the revised minimum salary by existing salary. The factor so arrived may be adopted as common multiplication factor.

Q. No 10.1 New pension Scheme i.e The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS).

What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?

Ans. Withdraw New Pension Scheme: for following reasons:

(i) Pension of Govt. employees is a deferred wage. Since wage paid out to them

during the course of work tenure is kept low by design, to cater for pension.

(ii) He/She forgoes with interest 8.33% of govt. matching contribution to PF.

(iii) Pension is a social security measure & cannot be subjected in any way to Market risks

(iv) It does not guarantee minimum return & thus lacks the basic fiber of Social Security Scheme (iv). It is in no way better than the existing Pension Scheme .

(v)It does not provide guaranteed Family Pension to dependents & disabled siblings which exist in present scheme, even in case of spouse & dependent parents where death of the employee occur in early years of service there is no adequate social security.

Q. 10.1.2 i.e. As for as pre 2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and retirement benefits?

Ans. 1.Keeping in view the Socialistic structure of the country , constitutional provisions & to reduce vast inequality between have & have lots, it is proposed: The Ratio between maximum & minimum of Pension be brought down to 9:1. Ensuring uniformly equal rise in Pension of all pensioners, irrespective of pre- retiral status. By adopting common multiplication factor for revision of Pension, raising the ratio between minimum & maximum pension to 1:12.85 by 6thCPC , instead of reducing it, was unconstitutional.

7th pay commission is requested to first workout the top most revised pension, divide it by 9 to arrive at the minimum revised pension & then derive a uniform multiplication factor by dividing minimum revised Pension by minimum pre-revised Pension, with the condition that Pension shall not in any case be less than 65% & family Pension 45% of the last Pay in Pay Band i.e. Pay in Pay Band+ GP /Pay scale or of average of last 10 months emoluments (Whichever is more beneficial) as was worked out & recommended by TECS (Tata Economic Consultancy Services) consultant to Vth CPC (Para 127.9 Vol III 5th CPC report)

2.One Rank one pension i.e full parity: ‘Justice must be equal for all’.

Otherwise, it breeds contempt, discontentment, inefficiency, corruption & finally the insurgency. We have seen it happening in Tribal areas of N.E, Chhatishgarh, Jharkand, Orisa, MP etc.

Vast inequality of income and wealth between lowest & the highest paid, violation of Article 14 has already induced contempt, discontent, inefficiency & corruption, in Civil services.

Govt. granted One Rank One Pension (OROP) to Armed forces, Judges granted it to themselves. Even a period of private practice of lawyer judges, to be counted towards qualifying service. Higher Bureaucracy got it through modified parity. All other Central Govt. employees & Pensioners are definitely not the 2nd grade citizens! One Rank one Pension to all retirees is now a constitutional requirement to ensure equality.

3.Defence Pensioners:

As far as defence pensioners are concerned they do the supreme sacrifice for the country .For them the ratio between highest & lowest paid must not be more than 1:5 and instead of being thrown out at an early age they must be transferred to paramilitary/police force after active tenure in armed forces. Otherwise, if these retired army personnel trained in all sort of weaponry are left uncared, they may fall prey to undesirable anti National outfits. In their case it is also essential that retirees from uniformed cadre & civilian defence Pensioners are treated at Par for all purpose.

4.Dearness relief :

100% neutralization with automatic merger with Pension whenever it goes to 50% :The Pension of Central Government Pensioners undergo revision only once in 10 years during which period the pension structure gets seriously dis-aligned; 50% increase in price takes place even in less than 5 years. This results in considerable erosion of the financial position of the pensioner. DR does not adequately take care of inflation at this level. Working employees are getting automatic relief by way of 25% increase in their allowances with every 50% rise in Dearness Allowance. As pensioners do not get any allowances, they feel discriminated against. In order to strike a balance, DR may be automatically merged with Pension whenever it goes to 50% .

5.Additional old age Pension :

5% upward enhancement in pension be granted every five years’ after the age of 60 years & upto 80 years & thereafter as per existing dispensation. As in the present scenario of climatic changes, incidence of pesticides and rising pollution, old age disabilities/diseases set in by the time an employee retires and go on manifesting very fast, needing additional finances to take care of these disabilities and diseases, especially as the cost of health care has gone very high.

6.Pension to be net of Income Tax :

The purchase value of pension gets reduced day by day due to continuously high inflation and steep rise in cost of food items and medical facilities. Retired persons/Senior citizens do not enjoy fully public goods and services provided by Government for citizens due to lack of mobility and many other factors. Their ability to pay tax gets reduced from year to year after retirement due to ever-increasing expenditure on food, medicines and other incidentals. Their net worth at year end gets reduced considerably as compared to the beginning of the year. Inflation, for a pensioner is much more than any tax. It erodes the major part of the already inadequate pension. To enable pensioners, at the far end of their lives, to live in minimum comfort and to cater for ever rising cost of living, they may be spared from paying Income Tax.

7. Restoration of commuted value of Pension in 12 years:

Commutation value in respect of employee superannuating at the age of 60 years between 1.1.1996 and 31.12.2005 and commuting a portion of pension within a period of one year would be equal to 9.81 years Purchase. After adding thereto a further period of two years for recovery of interest, in terms of observation of Supreme Court in their judgment in writ petitions No 395-61 of 1983 decided in December 1986, it would be reasonable to restore commuted portion of pension in 12 years instead of present 15 years. In case of persons superannuating at the age of 60 years after 31.12.2005 and seeking commutation within a year, numbers of purchase years have been further reduced to 8.194. Also, the mortality rate of 60 plus Indians has considerably reduced ever since Supreme Court judgment in 1986; the life expectancy stands at 76 years now. Therefore, restoration of commuted value of Pension after 12 years is fully justified.

8. The 6th Central Pay Commission’s improved/new benefits, like full pension for 20 years of service/10yrs service etc have been limited only to post-1.1.2006 retirees. This is in violation of the letter and spirit of Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in Nakara Case.

We appeal to the 7th CPC to extend the above benefits to all pre-1.1.2006 retirees with monetary benefit from 1.1.2006 to do them equal justice. And that new/improved benefits which 7th CPC may recommend, too be made equally applicable to present & past pensioners

9.Medical facilities:

“Health is not a luxury” and “not be the sole possession of a privileged few”. It is a Fundamental Right of all present & past Employees!

To ensure hassle free health care facility to Pensioners/family pensioners, Smart Cards be issued irrespective of departments to all Pensioners and their Dependents for cashless medical facilities across the country.

These smart cards should be valid in

all Govt. hospitals
all NABH accredited Multi Super Specialty hospitals across the country which have been allotted land at concessional rate or given any aid or concession by the Central or the State govt.
all CGHS, RELHS & ECHS empanelled hospitals across the country.
Medical attendants. For reimbursement of bills for treatment & for hospitalization . No referral should be insisted in case of medical emergencies. For the purpose of reference for hospitalization & reimbursement of expenditure thereon in other than emergency cases Doctors/Medical officers working in different Central/State Govt. department dispensaries/health units should be recognized as Authorized medical attendant.

The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is recognized as a fundamental right of all workers in terms of Article 21 read with Article 39(c), 41, 43, 48A and all related Articles as pronounced by the Supreme Court in Consumer Education and Research Centre & Others vs Union of India (AIR 1995 Supreme Court 922) The Supreme court has held that the right to health to a worker is an integral facet of meaningful right to life to have not only a meaningful existence but also robust health and vigour. Therefore, the right to health, medical aid to protect the health and vigour of a worker while in service or post retirement is a fundamental right-to make life of a worker meaningful and purposeful with dignity of person. Thus health care is not only a welfare measure but is a Fundamental Right.

We suggest that, all the pensioners, irrespective of pre-retiral class and status, be treated as same category of citizens and the same homogenous group. There should be no class or category based discrimination and all must be provided Health care services at par .

10. Hospital Regulatory Authority:

To ensure that the hospitals do not avoid providing reasonable care to smart card holders and other poor citizens, a Hospital Regulatory Authority should be created to bring all NABH-accredited hospitals and NABL-accredited diagnostic Labs under its constant monitoring of quality, rates for different procedures & timely bill payments by Govt. agencies and Insurance companies. CGHS rates may be revised keeping in mind the workability as per market conditions.

11.Fixed Medical allowance (FMA):

As is recorded in Para 5 of the minutes of Committee of Secretaries (COS) held on 15.04.2010 (Reference Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan No 502/2/3/2010-C.A.V Doc No. CD (C.A.V) 42/2010 Minutes of COS meeting dated 15.4.2010) which discussed enhancement of FMA. “CGHS card estimates for serving Personnel: Since estimates are not available separately for pensioners M/O Health & Family Welfare had assessed the total cost per card p.a. in 2007-2008 = Rs 16435 i.e. Rs.1369 per month for OPD”. Adding to it inflation, the figure today is well over Rs 2000/- PM. Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India vide its letter no. G-25012/2/2011-SSI dated 07.06.2013 has already enhanced FMA to Rs 2000/- PM for EPFO beneficiaries. Thus, to help elderly pensioners to look after their health, Adequate raise in FMA will encourage a good number of pensioners to opt out of OPD facility which will reduce overcrowding in hospitals. OPD through Insurance will cost much more to the Govt. As such the proposal for raising Fixed Medical allowance to Pensioners is fully justified and is financially viable.

We suggest that FMA for all C.G. Pensioners be raised to at least Rs 2000/- PM without any distance restriction linking it to Dearness Relief for automatic further increase. We further suggest that FMA be exempted from INCOME TAX.

Fixed Medical Allowance (FMA) is a compensatory allowance to reimburse the medical expenses. As Medical Reimbursement is not taxable, FMA should also be exempted from Income Tax.

12.Grievance redressal Mechanism:

Pensioners/Family Pensioners are exploited, harassed and humiliated by their own counterparts in chair, who at the sight of an old person adopt a wooden face and indifferent attitude. Pensioners do not have representation even in Forums & Committees wherein pension policies and connected matters are discussed. The forum of Pension Adalat too is not of much avail as it meets only once a year which is too long a period for an elderly nearer to his end. Moreover, these Adalats deal with settlement claims only. SCOVA too meets only twice a year for about 3 hours at each occasion. Moreover, the scope of SCOVA is limited to feedback on Government policies. DOP&PW is perceived as a toothless authority which lacks direct Service Delivery Capability. It has been striving over the years to redress the Pensioners’ grievances through the ‘Sevottam’ model of the Department of Administrative Reforms & Public grievances; in the absence of strict timeline with punitive clause it is, however, proving to be a failure. Grievances are either not resolved for years or closed arbitrarily without resolving correctly.

We therefore, appeal that for resolving Pensioners complaints ,

(i) A strict time line with punitive clause be introduced in “Sevottam model”
(ii) Grievances are not allowed to be closed without resolving.
(iii) SCOVA be upgraded to JCM level covering all Pensioners by introducing suitable legislative amendment if required.

13. Representations in various committees : As recommended vide Vth CPC report Vol III para 141.30 Pensioners’ representatives should be included in various committees & other Fora of Govt where issues relating to the welfare of pensioners are likely to be discussed &debated :

Discussing, debating and deciding the matters / Policies relating to Pensioners, with representatives other than those of pensioners, is unfair & against the Rules of ‘Natural Justice’. At present various Committees like National Anomaly Committee (NAC) and JCM (on Pensioner matters), are there, wherein matters / policies relating to pensioners’ welfare are discussed and decided, but they do not have pensioners’ representatives with the result their viewpoints, hardships & anomalies are not properly represented. As pensioners are a homogenous class, there is an urgent need to constitute separate Committees for pensioners wherein matters / policies / anomalies relating to pensioners of all Groups, categories &departments may be discussed.

14. Govt. should not indirectly pressurize courts by appealing again & again to get judgments reversed in its favor & must implement all court judgments in case of all similarly placed persons.

V CPC recommended in para 126.5 that any Court Judgment involving a common policy matter of pay/pension to a group of employees/pensioners, should be extended automatically to similarly placed employees/pensioners without driving every affected individual to the Courts of law. This recommendation is never followed by GOI, with the result Pensioners in the evening of their life, are forced to approach the legal forums, seeking the same relief. This in turn, bulges court dockets. VII CPC to look into this matter once again and to issue suitable guidelines as deem fit and necessary.

With regards

Truly Yours,

ER.S.C.Maheshwari

Secy.Genl. Bharat Pensioners Samaj

Source: www.scm-bps.blogspot.in

[http://scm-bps.blogspot.in/2014/04/bharat-pensioners-samaj-draft-reply-to.html]

The post Bharat Pensioners Samaj reply to 7th CPC questionnaire-Revised draft appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.