National Holiday Allowance – Upward revision of rates: NFIR

National Holiday Allowance – Upward revision of rates: NFIR

NFIR
National Federation of Indian Railwaymen
3, CHELMSFORD ROAD, NEW DELHI – 110 055
Affiliated to:
Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC)
International Transport Workers Federation (ITF)

No. 1/5(g)/Part.V

Dated: 03/07/2015

The Secretary (E),
Railway Board.
NewDelhi
Dear Sir.

Sub: National Holiday Allowance – Upward revision of rates -reg.

Ref: (i) NFlR‘s PNM item No. 5/2013.
(ii) Railway Board’s letter No. E(P&A)1-2013/FE-4/3 dated 02/05/2014.
(iii) NFlR’s Letter No.1/5(g)/Part.V dated 12/12/2014.
****
While discussing NFlR’s PNM item No. 5/2013 in the PNM meeting, the Official Side stated that the Federation’s reply dated 12/12/2014 has been examined by the Board, but however, it has been found that the demand of the Federation to compute NHA by taking into account DA in addition to Basic Pay and Grade Pay and at one and halftime the normal rate prevalent till 1968 is not feasible of acceptance.
In this connection. Federation desires to state that the view taken by the Railway Board is not acceptable to NHR as it does not contain justified and valid reasons. The Federation places below following facts which are required to be taken into consideration for giving justified decision.

(a) The decision of the Railway Board is a clear departure from its original decision which was based on the concept that the Railway employees who are not permitted to avail National Holiday in the exigencies of services have to be compensated by payment of additional amount equal 11/2 times of pay (pay in pay band + grade pay) and dearness allowance thereon. The quantum of compensation was clearly laid down which cannot be changed unilaterally by the Railway Board.

(b) The Vth Central Pay Commission though did not favour the continued payment of National Holiday Allowance. had recommended that the staff who are required to be booked on holidays to perform duties. may be paid Over Time Allowance at the prescribed rates.

NFIR therefore requests the Railway Board to review and accept one of the two options mentioned at (a) or (b) above and grant revision of rates. In case there is still reservation on the part of Railway Board. a meeting may be converted for separate discussion.

Yours faithfully

(Dr. M. Raghavai)
General Secretary

Source: NFIR

Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues

Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues.

No.325/10/2015-AVD-III
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
*****

North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 7th July, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues.

The undersigned is directed to refer to the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 24 th June, 2015 and to say that a Committee has been formed under the chairmanship of Additional Secretary(S&V) to consider the issues related to reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and review of the extra pay, incentives, pay structure and allowances etc. of CVOs in CPSEs.

2. All Ministries/Departments are requested to furnish the following information about the CPSEs under their control within 15 days of receipt of this O.M.:-

i. Whether full time CVO is required in particular organization.
ii. Whether the post of CVOs of two or more organizations can be clubbed together.
iii. Whether the post of CVOs is required to continue with the current

posts or wishes to upgrade/downgrade or to abolish the posts in view of the workload and requirement of vigilance related matters.

iv. Staff strength and volume of vigilance work involved in the CPSEs, turnover of organizations in last 5 years etc.

(M. M. Maurya)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Tel. No. 23094541

To
All Ministries/Departments of Government of India.
Copy to:-
1. The Secretary, Central Vigilance Commission, Satarkata Bhawan, GPO
Com , INA, New Delhi-110023.
2. NIC Section with the request to upload on public domain/Guard file.

Click to check the original order

Grant of Special Casual Leave to Railway employees from Hudhud Cyclone & J&K Flash floods effected : Railway Board Order

Grant of Special Casual Leave to Railway employees from Hudhud Cyclone & J&K Flash floods effected : Railway Board Order

RBE No. 72/2015
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
RAILWAY BOARD

No. E(G)2015/LE 1-1

Rail Bhawan, New Delhi, dated 30-06-2015

The General Manager(s)
East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar.
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.



    Sub: Grant of special leave to the Railway staff who remained absent from duty to Hudhud Cyclone that affected badly coastal areas of Andhra Pradesh and Odisha States (EcoR) and the flash floods in Jammu and Kashmir State.


The matter regarding grant of Special Casual Leave to Railway employees who could not attend duty due to hudhud cyclone which badly affected the coastal areas ofAndhra Pradesh and Odisha States in the 2nd week of October, 2014, and the flash floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, was taken up by All India Railwaymen's Federation(AIRF).

The issue has been carefully considered by the Board and it has been decided that Special Casual Leave upto a maximum of three days may be granted to the affected employees who stay at places far away from their Headquarters, as a result of which they have to commute a long distance to their office, and due to dislocation of traffic arising out of the aforesaid natural calamities they were not able to undertake the journey and report to the Headquarters for duty.

This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Dte. of Ministry of Railways.

(D. Joseph)
Dy. Dir. Estt. (Genl.)

Source: http://www.airfindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/RBE_72.pdf

Clarifications sought by Chairman & Members of 7th CPC during oral evidence by IRTSA

CLARIFICATIONS SOUGHT BY CHAIRMAN & MEMBERS OF 7TH  CPC DURING ORAL EVIDENCE & PRESENTATION BY IRTSA ON 12-12-2014 AT JODHPUR

 

Inter-action by the Chairman, Secretary & the Members of 7th  CPC with IRTSA and clarification placed by IRTSA delegates during the Presentation.

 

1. Ques. (by Chairman 7th CPC) You said that Senior Technicians are taking instructions from JEs; while the Chief OS (Office Superintendent) took instructions 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 Higher Grade Pay need to be followed duly considering duties, responsibilities, accountabilities, etc. but the same is being violated by placing the JEs in the same Grade Pay of Rs.4200 as that of Senior Technician whom they supervise and by placing SSE (Senior Section Engineers) in same Grade Pay of Rs.4600 as that of Chief OS whom the SSE supervise. This is against the settled law that an equal cannot be over an equal.

 

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 of that 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 possess higher responsibility & accountability than other posts.

 

v. Similar is 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. bear 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

 

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 had 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 to accommodate the newly introduced Gazetted scale.

 

ii. If 3.25 multiplication factor had been followed by 5th CPC, the scale would have been placed in 8000-12000 by the 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 Finance 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) (Copy of it is also attached herewith as Annexure – 14/2)

 

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% only.

 

10. Ques. As you said, Previous Pay Commissions recommended Group ‘B’ status to your scale DoPT also given their orders, it is only Railway 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.

 

v. 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 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.

 

iii. For example in Mechanical department of Integral Coach Factory sanctioned cadre strength of Group ‘B’ is only 16. Cadre strength of Technical Supervisors in Mechanical Department (JE & SSE) is 1200. There are roughly 60 Engineering Graduate entrants available many of them completed 20 years of service. There is not enough opportunity available because of meagre Group ‘B’.

 

iv. Confining Cadre Restructure within each Group C, B & A was the main cause of stagnation in Group C.

 

v. Combined cadre structure for Group ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’ is not available in Railways.

 

vi. Apex scale of SSE never received the benefit of Cadre Restructuring.

 

vii. Upgradation from Group ‘D’ to Group ‘C’ and from 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 vis-à-vis 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: http://www.irtsa.net/pdfdocs/Supplementary_Memorandum_to_7th_CPC.pdf