Pay Level of Technical Supervisors on Railways in 7th CPC Report – IRTSA Memorandum

7th CPC Report – Main issues of Multiple Factor, Allowances & major Anomaly Reg. Pay Level of Technical Supervisors on Railways

INDIAN RAILWAYS TECHNICAL SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION
(Estd. 1965, Regd. No.1329, Websitehttp://www.irtsa.net)

No:IRTSA/7th CPC/RB/2015-2

Date:14.12.2015

MEMBER STAFF
Railway Board Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001

Sir,
Sub: 7th CPC Report – Main issues of Multiple Factor, Allowances & major Anomaly Reg. Pay Level of Technical Supervisors on Railways

Central Government employees in general and Technical Supervisors on Railways in particular are seriously aggrieved by extremely adverse& unjust Report of the Seventh Pay Commission and appeals to the Government& Ministry of Railway to suitably modify the recommendations especially in respect of the following major issues including those of the Technical Supervisors working on Indian Railways.

1. PAY LEVEL OF TECHNICAL SUPERVISORS ON RAILWAYS
i) 7th CPC observed that Technical Supervisors on Indian Railways play a vital role in the safe and efficient running of trains, but the Pay Level 6 & 7 recommended for this vital category is not commensurate with their duties, responsibilities, accountabilities and job requirements.

1.1. PAY LEVEL OF TECHNICAL SUPERVISORS(Para 11.40.104):
a) Need for higher Pay scales for Technical Supervisors in Indian Railways has been grossly ignored by the Pay Commission – in spite of their higher Recruitment Qualifications, Training, Job Requirements, onerous Nature of Duties, and increase in their Responsibilities due to modernization and introduction of high speed trains. Relativity against other non-technical cadres like Accounts etc. has been further disturbed.
b) As per established law, an equal cannot be over an equal and that Promotion’ implies advancement to a higher grade & Supervisor should be in a scale higher than Supervised whereas the JEs (Junior Engineers) on the Railways have been placed in level-6 in which the Senior Technician are placed even though JEs supervise the Senior Technicians.
c) Railways had agreed for higher Grade Pay for Technical Supervisors (JE & SSE) as recorded in item-3 of Minutes of the Departmental Anomalies Committee (Railways) held on 01.06.2010. “It was brought out in the discussion that Technical Supervisors have superior recruitment conditions, duties and multifarious responsibilities to ensure out-turn targets, optimum productivity, quality control, safety, material management, optimum utilization of man-power machinery, equipment, rolling stock and other resources for efficient train operations. They are also given induction training after recruitment for 18 months period which is very much longer compared to other categories….”
d) It is regretted that all the above points have been ignored while finally recommending the Pay levels for the Technical Supervisors on the Railways.
e) It is, therefore, requested that the Junior Engineers (JEs) on the Railways may please be placed in Level 8 (instead of level 6); and Senior Section Engineers (SSE) may please be placed in Level 10 (instead of Level 7) in the new Pay Matrix – keeping in view the above submissions.

1.2. UPGRADATION OF 33% POSTS OF SSE AS PRINCIPLE SSE AND PLACING THEM IN LEVEL-11 (PARA 11.40.113):
a. 7th CPC vide para no 11.40.113 in the chapter related to Technical Supervisors, accepted that there is stagnation at the stage of Grade Pay Rs.4600 (SSE)
b. Great degree of confusion in the work hierarchy and order of command is thereafter the implementation of Restructuring of certain Group ’C’ cadres in Railways, (RBE No.102/2013), No.PC-111/2013/CRC/4, dated 08/10/2013, the pyramid of Technical Supervisors become inverted with 67% in higher grade post (SSE) and 33% in lower grade post (JE).
c. SSEs gain expertise in their relative fields after putting in years of service. Utilizing the senior most Technical Supervisors as part of managerial post will be to the advantage of Indian Railways.
d. Officers in the Junior Scale & Senior Scale who are from different stream cannot directly look after the work at the field level and as such cannot optimizing performance of their own without a on the spot Manager in the shop / shed / depot etc. It is, therefore, imperative to have posts Principal SSE for better efficiency and effective management at each level with clear line of control.
e. Most SSE including even the Graduate Engineers recruited as SSE (placed in Level-7) are not able to get promoted to next grades of AWM/AE/AEE/ADME etc, due to lack of avenue of promotion since only 0.4% chances are available to them for their promotion.
f. Historically, pay scales of senior most of post of Technical Supervisors were placed even in higher scale than Group ‘B’ & ‘A’ officers by the 3rd& 4th CPC.
g. Foremen ‘A’ & Assistant Shop Superintendent & Special Grade of Principal Foreman were granted the pay scale of Rs.840-1040 & Rs.840-1200 respectively above the pay scale of the rest of the Group C especially because they supervised the later.
h. PAY SCALES OF TECHNICIAN, TECHNICAL SUPERVISORS & GAZETTED OFFICERS GRANTED BY 3RD CP

It is therefore requested that 33% SSE post in PB 2 Grade Pay of Rs.4600 may please be upgraded &designated as Principal Senior Section Engineers and placed in Level- 11.

1.3. Similarly placed Rail Engineers who perform similar duties & responsibilities, have same recruitment qualification working in CMT, Stores & Information Technology wing of Indian Railways may please be placed in level of Pay Matrix proposed for Technical Supervisors.

i. DMS, CMA & JE/IT may please be placed in level-8 of pay matrix recommended by 7th CPC.
ii. CDMS, CMS &Sr.Er/IT may please be placed in level-10 of pay matrix recommended by 7th CPC.

1.3.2. Error in Table below Para 7.7.64 – Reg. Grade Pay of Depot Material Superintendent (CDMS) on Railways – Ref. 7th CPC Report – Chapter 7 Page No. 239 (under Ministry of Railways) and Item 8.2(i) of Railway Board’s OM No. PC-VI/2008/I/RSRP/I(PCVI/2) Annexure ‘B’ Chief Depot Material Superintendent (CDMS) posts available in Ministry of Railways with entry level qualification of Degree in Engineering are placed in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 ( in terms of Ministry of Railways notification issued after 6th CPC cited in reference-2), which has been erroneously mentioned as Grade Pay Rs.4200 in the last row of table given under Para 7.7.64 (page 239) of 7th CPC report. It is requested to please correct this typographical error while issuing implementation orders on 7th CPC.

2. CLASSIFICATION OF POSTS OF SSE, CMS, CDMS &SR.ER(IT) IN GROUP ‘B’(Gaz) (Para 11.40.114):
a. In Para 11.40.114, 7th CPC observed that, keeping in view unique functional, administrative and operational requirements Railway Board didn’t seek for change in classification. This is totally wrong in view of the following facts of the case:
i) Railway Board had long back agreed with the two Federations to upgrade the posts in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Group-B Gazetted and held several meetings for implementing the decision. Railway Board had agreed with the fact that “The percentage of Group ‘B’ officers vis-à-vis total workforce is merely 0.5% in Railways which is 5.6% for All India Central Government Employees and the same needed to be rationalized”.
ii) In all the departments, except the Railways, similarly placed posts in the pre-revised Grade Pay of Rs.4600 have been classified as Group ‘B’ Gazetted.
iii) Financial Commissioner Railway Board had already given concurrence for the proposal of other Board Members to upgrade the posts of Senior Supervisors from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’ keeping in view the Financial advantage to Indian Railways by increasing Junior level Management Cadre as agreed by Railway Board.
iv) Commitment given by CRB to the two Federations in Departmental Council has not been implemented (Rly Board letter No.2013/E(LR)II/1/17 dated 18.02.2014): In meeting with both the Federations held on 07.04.2014, official side headed by CRB agreed for upgradation of posts from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’ and it was recorded that the matter has already been referred to MOF / DoPT, MS and FC will pursue Secretary, MOF &DoPT to resolve the matter urgently even though there was no need for such reference as the posts in Grade Pay of Rs.4600 were in any case required to be placed in Group ‘B’ as per orders of the DOP issued long back vide S.O.946(E) dated 9th April 2009.
v) It is, therefore, requested to classify the posts of SSE, CDMS, CMS &Sr.Er(IT) in Group ‘B’ (Gazetted).

3. ELIMINATION OF STAGNATION OF GRADUATE ENGINEERS RECRUITED AS SSE, CMS & CDMS & Promotion of serving Engineering Graduates SSEs/CMS/CDMS to Group ‘A’ officers Cadre against 50% posts of in IRES & SCRA:

3.1 There is a a lot of stagnation and resultant frustration among Engineering Graduates recruited as SSEs/CMS/CDMS as they do not get a single promotion for long years of service due very low percentage of Posts in Group B on the Railways,

3.2. It is, therefore, requested as under:
a) Minimum service requirement for Graduate Engineer SSEs/CMS/CDMS for eligibility to appear for LDCE for Group B be reduced from existing 5 years to 3 years in view of their qualifications;
b)Graduate Engineers recruited directly as SSE in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 be made eligible automatically to appear for Group ‘B’ LDCE selection whenever JEs/SSEs who are Junior to DR SSE are eligible to appear for the said selection.

4. COMMON MULTIPLE FACTOR NEEDS TO BE HIKED(Para 4.2.9):
a) At present, without implementing 7th pay commission recommendations, year on year increase in the expenditure in both pay and pension has averaged about 11%.Thus real increase on account of increase in pay, all allowances & pension will be only 12.55% (23.55% – 11% = 12.55%).Real increase on account of Pay & DA will be only 5% (16% – 11% = 5%). It is clearly evident that financial implications will be very marginal on account of implementation of 7th CPC recommendations. In the scenario of increase in Government revenue every year and reduction in staff strength of every year, pay element in Government expenditure will come down every year with respect to revenue earning or GDP.
b) 40% fixation benefit was given over 4th CPC scale to 5th CPC scale in general to all the scales.
c) 40% of maximum of 5th CPC scale was given over 5th CPC scale as fixation benefit in general in 6th CPC scales.
d) But, only around 15% pay fixation benefit is recommended by 7th CPC over 6th CPC pay, which is grievously inadequate.
e) Table-1 given below gives the comparison on fixation benefit given by 6th CPC & recommended by 7th CPC.

f) The Multiple Factor of 2.57 proposed by the Pay Commission for Pay Fixation is totally unjust, inadequate and arbitrary and – keeping in view the high inflation (in real terms and wage rise in the organized sector including the PSUs in the two revisions in PSUs since the Sixth CPC. The Fixation Benefit needs to be at least 40% – as after the last two Pay Commissions and the Common Multiple Factor may please be fixed at least (Pay+DA) + 40% of Pay + DA, ie. 3.15 times of 6th CPC basic pay.

g) Proposed entry pay as per table explained above (figures rounded off to next 100). Enhancement given to levels in PB-2 as recommended by 7th CPC as per Job requirement, responsibilities and accountability

5. ALLOWANCES:
5.1. UNJUST FACTORS ADOPTED BY 7TH CPC TO CALCULATE ALLOWANCES IN 7TH CPC SCALE(para 4 of chapter 8.2.5)
a. 7th CPC has used unjust factors to arrive at quantum of allowances in new pay and abolished 52 allowances.
b. No allowances should be abolished and it should be left to the decision of respective departments for the continuance of allowances as per nature of duties & job requirements.
c. Factor of 3.15 (proposed for new minimum pay) should be used for allowances that are paid in fixed amount. Factor of 1.6 (half of proposed factor for new minimum pay) may please be used for allowances that are indexed partially with DA.
d. Factor of 1.4 @ 40% fixation benefit in pay be used for allowances that are indexed fully with DA.
e. Factor of 1 be used for allowances that are paid in percentage of Basic Pay.

5.2. Breakdown Allowance(para 8.10.8 &8.10.80): Breakdown allowance should be continued in Railways and it may please be paid equal to over time calculation on hours worked for restoration.

5.3. NH Allowance(para 8.6.11): National Holiday Allowance should be paid atleast equal to one day wages. It should be paid for working on holidays including Sundays if the employees are not given with compensatory rest.

5.4. PCO Allowance(para 8.17.101):Incentive system followed in Indian Railways is unique for its system & within Railway Budget hence 7th CPC’s recommendations on PCO Allowance may please be ignored and the same be continued to be paid at the existing rates of 15% & 7.5% of new basic pay respectively. PCO Allowance may please be extended to CMT, Stores, Design& Drawing and other left out areas.

5.5. Teaching Allowance(para 8.14.8 & 8.14.9): To attract more talented teaching faculties, teaching allowance should be paid @ 30% as proposed by Railway Board some time back. Eligibility for maximum period of five years recommended by 7th CPC should be ignored since many of Railway training institutes are having eight year tenure for teaching faculties.

5.6. Risk & Hardship Allowance(para 8.10.64): Risk & hardship allowance should be extended to sheds & depots and open line staff &Technical Supervisors as per medium & low risk factors of Risk & hardship Matrix recommended by 7th CPC.

5.7. Fixed Medical Allowance (para 8.17.52): Considering the high cost of medical treatment in old age FMA should be raised from the present level of Rs.500 to Rs.2000 and it should be paid to all the retired employees without any restriction.

5.8. Internet Allowance, Mobile Phone Allowance, News Paper Allowance (para 8.17.61): Almost all Indian Railways employees are using their individual mobile and / or internet to perform the official duty. All the non-supervisory employees may please be granted with Rs.500 and Technical Supervisors may please be granted Rs.1000 as communication allowance. Or All supervisors may please be provided with CUG connections with free talk time of Rs.1000 per month.

5.9. Night Duty Allowance (para 8.17.77): Formulation of weightage of 10 minutes for every hour of duty performed between 22.00 and 6.00 hours may please be changed to 20 minutes for every hour of duty performed between 18.00 and 6.00 hours in view of hazards of work during Night Shift.

6.1. UNJUST RAISING OF BENCHMARK PROPOSED BY 7TH CPC FOR MACPS(PARA 5.1.45)
a. MACPS & ACP were recommended by the last two pay Commissions as a Financial Upgrading for those who were unable to get any promotion over long years of service due to lack of promotional avenues.
b. Seventh Pay Commission has very unjustly proposed raising of benchmark for MACPS from “Good” to “Very Good” and the very purpose of this Scheme would be defeated – since the Benchmark is not applicable to any of the Promotions in Group C.
c. It is, therefore, requested that unfair benchmark of “very good” proposed by the 7th CPC for the purpose of financial upgradation under MACPS may kindly be withdrawn and the same may be maintained as “Good”.

6.2 FINANCIAL UPGRADATION UNDER MACPS AFTER EVERY 8 YEARS & IN CADRE HIERARCHY: Financial up-gradation under MACPS after 10, 20 & 30th years is in any case very inadequate and may kindly be provided after maximum of 8 years of service at each Level in the Cadre hierarchy.

7. CGEGIS – Central Government Employees Group insurance Scheme(para 9.3.6)
a. Term insurance premiums have plummeted over last 6 years. Since 2009, term insurance premium have crashed by 75 percent. A one crore cover for 30 year old male cost around Rs.30,000 in 2008, but one would be able to get the same cover today for around Rs.8000. But 7th CPC has made its
recommendations exactly opposite to the trend in the market, instead of passing on the benefit to employees, 7th CPC recommended for taking away even meager benefit extended in the form of contribution to CGEGIS.

b. Huge unjustified increase in monthly deduction for GIS: 7th CPC has recommended for increasing monthly deduction & insurance amount by 41.7 times for Group ‘A’ & ‘B’ and 50 times for Group ‘C’ as given in table below,

c. 7th CPC recommended a ratio of savings fund to insurance fund as 75:25.

d. Therefore, for the annual contribution of Rs.18,000 by a Group ‘C’ employee Rs.13,500 will go for savings fund and Rs. 4,500 will go for insurance fund.

e. On cessation of account (ie on retirement) savings amount plus 8.7% interest per annum (compounded quarterly) for savings account has to be paid to the employee.

f. In case of demise of the employee savings amount plus Interest as applicable on date plus insurance amount has to be paid.

g. So for risk coverage to the value of Rs.15,00,000 a Group ‘C’ employee need to contribute Rs.4,500 annually.

h. Whereas in LIC’s New Amulya Jeevan-II insurance policy, which covers only risk (100% goes to insurance fund), if a person joins at the age of 20 for the period of 30 years, for risk insurance amount of Rs.25,00,000annual contribution is only Rs.3,652 per year. In LIC’s New Amulya JeevanII
policy annual contribution is less by Rs.848 and insurance amount is more by Rs.10,00,000 than CGEGIS recommended by 7th CPC.

i. Unreasonable recommendation by 7th CPC: For 0.81 times of contribution recommended by 7th CPC, LIC of India a PSU is offering an insurance amount of 1.67 times recommended by 7th CPC.

j. When around 30,00,000 employees are going to be in the Group insurance scheme, annual deduction has to be much less than LIC’s policy which is offered for individuals.

k. Monthly deduction given in the table below for recommended insurance amount by 7th CPC is sufficient as per the rates applicable in New Amulya Jeevan-II insurance policy.

8. PENSION & RELATED BENEFITS
8.1. Withdrawal of National Pension System/New Pension Scheme (NPS)and Restoration of existing benefits of Pension & GPF for those appointed after 1.1.2004. Refund of contributions to NPS with Interest thereon at appropriate rate.

8.2. Increase in the rate of Additional Pension and Family Pension to the old pensioners : Sixth Pay Commission had recommended additional Pension of 20, 30, 40, 50 and 100 % for retirees and family pensioners on attaining the age of 80, 85, 90, 95 and 100 years respectively. But this did not meet
with the requirements of those in the age group of 65 to 80 years of age for meeting additional expenses on old age diseases and disabilities and other unforeseen exigencies, which further increase even faster in later years. Recommendation of Sixth Pay Commission for grant of 100% additional Pension after 100 years of age was illusionary and unjust in view of rare chances of survival up to or beyond 100 years of age. 7th CPC has also not changed these conditions.

9. Additional Pension / Family Pension may please be paid at following rates – in view of gradual increase in the expenditure on Medical treatment and health care in old age:
i) 10% additional Pension/Family Pension after 65 years of age
ii) 20% Additional Pension/Family Pension after 70 years of age
iii) 30 % additional Pension/Family Pension after 75 years of age
iv) 50% additional Pension/Family Pension after 80 years of age
v) 70% additional Pension/Family Pension after 85 years of age
vi) 100% additional Pension/Family Pension after 90 years of age

Thanking You
Yours faithfully,
Harchandan Singh,
General Secretary, IRTSA

Source: IRTSA

Major Federations and Unions views on the recommendations of 7th Pay Commission

MOST DISAPPOINTING AND RETROGRADE RECOMMENDATIONS – CONFEDERATION

Major retrograde recommendations of the 7th CPC to be settled before implementation – AIRF

Serious disappointment on retrograde and perverse recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission – NFIR

BPMS comments on 7th CPC recommendations related to Central Government Employees

Assessment of INDWF on 7th CPC Recommendations – Fitment, Annual Increment MACP and Cadre Reivew

Recommendations of 7th Pay Commission are very disappointing – BPMS

7th Pay Commission Shortcomings – BPS writes to FM

Pay Level of Technical Supervisors on Railways in 7th CPC Report – IRTSA Memorandum

Recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission relating to Pension/Retirement Benefits – RSCWS