Clarifications sought by Chairman and Members
of the 7TH CPC during the Powerpoint Presentation and Oral Evidence by IRTSA
Delegation at Jodhpur
ISSUES RAISED BY CHAIRMAN & MEMBERS OF 7TH
CPC DURING & AFTER THE PPP IN THE MEETING WITH IRTSA
During the presentation Chairman, Secretary
& the Members of 7th CPC had inter-acted with IRTSA delegates and sough
clarifications for their doubts.
Presentation made through 46 slides was well
received by 7th CPC. We have tried to reproduce it almost in same manner as
happened. There may be some minor deviation in the language, but spirit of
discussion has been truly maintained. Presentation and interaction which lasted
about an hour
was very friendly and Hon’ble 7th CPC heard
IRTSA with positive frame of mind and rapt attention.
1. Ques. (by Chairman 7th CPC ) You
said that Senior Technicians are taking instructions from JEs, likewise Ch.OS
from SSE and you also told that it is Office of Senior Section Engineer which
controls all activities and all of them working within that – It appears that
there is clear command line available, How it interferes in your Grade Pay?
Ans. i. Principle recommended by 6th CPC,
which was also accepted by Govt, that, the senior post should be given with
Higher Grade Pay need to be followed duly considering duties, responsibilities,
accountabilities, etc.
ii. 5th CPC recommendations & Supreme
Court Judgement supports this argument.
iii. Take an example: A senior technician
welder working in Bogie Frame manufacturing section is responsible to the
extent of welding done by him, where as a Technical Supervisor is responsible
for the quality & quantity of output of not only that of welder but for
entire section which may contain 20 to 30 Technicians besides others.
iv. More than that man, material, machine,
other infrastructure, etc are controlled by Technical Supervisors, which
posses’ higher responsibility & accountability than other posts.
v. Similar the case of certification of train,
P.Way, Bridge, Power Distribution, Locos, etc.
vi. Categories like Ch.OS don’t have direct
responsibility on performance & safety of Railways, whereas JE/SSE and
their counterparts (CMT, Store) in all Technical Depts. born direct
responsibility in core activities of Railways.
2. Ques. Is all 4 tier of Technicians
work under your category in all areas?
Ans. Yes. In all areas 4 tier of Technicians,
along with one Group ‘D’ category besides clerk, material / stores clerk, OS,
Ch.OS work under our category.
3. Ques. Who writes ACRs for Ch.OS who
are working in office of SSE?
Ans. Respective AMWs/AEs/AEEs etc.
4. Ques. Why can’t SSE write ACRs for
Ch.OS who are working in their office?
Ans. SSEs who are in the same GP of Rs.4600
cannot write the ACRs for Ch.OS.
5. Ques. Who writes ACRs of Senior
Technicians who work under JEs?
Ans. Senior Technicians’ ACR are written by
SSEs even though Senior Technicians work under JEs.
6. Ques. What would be the reason for
non application of common multiplication factor of 3.25 to SSE (S-13) scale by
5th CPC?
Ans. i. 5th CPC has applied common
multiplication factor of 3.25 to all scales except to SSE (S-13) scale.
ii. This had been done merely to accommodate a
new scale in Gazd scale (Rs.7500-12000) above S-13.
iii. SSE scale had been kept Rs.50 below than
Rs.7500, ie.Rs.7450.
7. Ques. How the disadvantage of
non-application 3.25 multiplication factor carried through to 6th CPC?
Ans. i. Initially 5th CPC recommended
Rs.7000-11500 to SSE compressing it the newly introduced Gazetted scale.
ii. If 3.25 multiplication factor had been
followed by 5th CPC, the scale might have been placed in 8000-12000 during 5th
CPC and correspondingly Rs.5400 GP in 6th CPC.
iii. After the implementation of 5th CPC
recommendations, based on demand from staff side when Govt. decided to modify
the scale of SSE (S-13) instead of placing it in scale 8000-12000, it had been
decided to modify minimum of the scale from Rs.7000 to Rs.7450 to keep it below
newly created scale of Rs.7500-12000.
iv. Since corresponding increase of Rs.450 had
not been done for maximum of scale, Span of the scale has been reduced to 18
years which was 20 years for all other scales.
v. The principle of 6th CPC to calculate the
Grade Pay as 40% of maximum of the fifth pay commission scales put SSE scale in
further disadvantageous position since maximum of scale was low because of 18
years span & non application of 3.25 multiplication factor.
8. Ques. You said that there were
proposals sent to Fin. Ministry from Railway Ministry to upgrade the Grade Pay
of SSE from Rs.4600 to Rs.4800 and that have been returned back without
throwing proper light into it, can you produce copy of the proposals?
The proposals and communications between both
the Ministries were very well available with Railway Board. (Later Secretary
Pay Commission confirmed availability of Railway Board proposals sent to Fin.
Ministry)
9. Ques. Is there any link available
between the cadre of Group ‘C’ and ‘B’?
Ans. No. Promotional avenue from Technical
Supervisors in Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’ is restricted to the vacancies arising
from 4200 Group ‘B’ posts, which may be around 0.5%.
10. Ques. As you said, Previous Pay
Commissions recommended Group ‘B’ status to your scale DoPT also given their
orders, it is only Rly Ministry not followed the classification, is it not
Railways to take decision?
Ans. i. It is true that Railways have not
implemented the classification of posts recommended by Pay Commissions &
DoPT orders.
ii. We bring to your notice, submission made
by DoPT before 5th CPC that even though there were some exemptions in following
the classification rules, but the effort was to ensure that posts carrying
similar functions were given the same classification.
iii. Similarly placed posts in departments
like CPWD, Ordinance Factory, MES, Department of Telecom etc are all classified
as Group ‘B’ Gazetted.
iv. State Governments which are following
central pay commission pattern have also followed DoPT orders in classification
of posts.
v. Railway Board also agreed on the need to
increase the managerial posts (from the pool of senior supervisor) on
functional justification, but didn’t implement.
vi. Hon’ble 7th CPC is requested to give
specific instruction for Railways not to deviate from classification rules
recommended for all Government Departments.
11. Ques. What are all the reasons for
lack of promotion to your category?
Ans .i. Recruitment happens in the apex scale of
Group ‘C’ in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 with Graduate in Engineering
qualification and Railways is the only dept which recruit Engineering Graduates
in Group ‘C’.
ii. Available Group ‘B’ posts are very meagre
to the extent of 4200 only.
iii. For example in Mechanical department of
Integral Coach Factory sanctioned cadre strength of Group ‘B’ is only 16. Cadre
strength of Technical Supervisors including Design in Mechanical Department (JE
& SSE) is 1200.There are roughly 60 Engineering Graduate entrants are
available many of them completed 20 years of service. There is no enough
opportunity available because of meagre Group ‘B’.
iv. Confining Cadre Restructure within each
Group.
v. Combined cadre structure for Group ‘A’, ‘B’
& ‘C’ is not available in Railways.
vi. Apex scale of SSE never received the
benefit of CRC.
vii. Upgradation from Group ‘D’ to Group ‘C’
and Group ‘B’ to Group ‘A’ is being done in Railways, but no upgradation done
from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’.
viii. Ratio of Group A & B Gazetted
officers viz-a-viz Group C are the lowest on the Railways as compared to all
other Departments.
ix. During previous 8 years number of Group-B
employees in Central Govt Departments have increased by 36% even though
employee strength reduced by 25%, But Railways never increased Group ‘B’ posts.
x. Gazetted posts were not increased in tune
with increase of Railways performance including financial performance. Railways
outlay was increased from Rs.60,600 crores during 10th plan to Rs.5.5 lakh
crore during 12th plan Railways. Many of increased activities / work load are
being managed by outsourcing, since there is negative growth in staff strength.
Source: IRTSA
