NFIR
No.IV/DAC/7CPC/2016
Dated: 241/11/2017
The Secretary (E),
Railway Board,
New
Delhi
Dear Sir,
Sub:
Departmental Anomaly
Committee to settle the anomalies arising out of
the implementation of 7th Central Pay Commission's
recommendations-reg.
Ref: (i) Railway Board's letter No. PC-
VII/2016/DAC/I dated 05/10/2016, 29/03/2017,
18/04/2017, 03/05/2017, 25/05/2017, 06/06/2017
& 20/11/2017.
(ii) NFIR's letter No.
IV/DAC/7 CPC/2016 dated,09/06/2017 &
16/08/2017.
In continuation of above cited references, the
Federation furnishes additional material on
Item No. 17 pertaining to Pharmacist category to
facilitate the DAC to discuss in the ensuing
meeting. Attention is also invited to NFIR's
letter of even number dated 09/06/2017 on this
issue of which Item No. 17 of the enclosure is
relevant (Annexure-I).
Federation also encloses an Item under heading
"
grant of Additional Allowance to the
remaining categories of Running Staff viz.,
ALP, Sr. ALP, LP (Shunting), Goods (Guard)
" together with copy of Board's letter
No. PC-VII/2017/R-U/38 dated 20/11/2017 to NFIR
for discussion in the second meeting of the DAC
(Annexure-II).
So far as the subject "
Technical Supervisors of
Railways", is concerned, the DoP&T vide
F.No. 11/2/2016-JCA-I(Pt.) dated 30th October 2017
has since advised the Secretary (Staff Side) that
this being Railway specific item, the Staff Side
may take up at the Department Anomaly Committee of
Ministry of Railways. A copy of Note pertaining to
Technical Supervisors of Railways is also enclosed
which may be clubbed with Item No. (xviii) sent to
Railway Board on 08/11/2017 (Annexure-III).
DA/As above
Yours faithfully,
(Dr. M. Raghavaiah)
General Secretary
Annexure I
The Commission has failed to appreciate that the
category of pharmacist possessing the upgraded
qualification of 4 year Degree (Technical) has not
been considered on par with the other categories
of staff holding Degree qualification. The study
report submitted by the IIM Ahmedabad which forms
the basis.of recommended pay scales to all the
employees of the Central Government, does not
contain the category of Pharmacist,
apparently, the Pharmacist category has not been
studied for the purpose of granting appropriate
Pay Scale.
In view of the prevailing situation the case of
Pharmacist deserves to be review by the Anomaly
Committee for grant of atleast GP 4600/- at the
time of appointment.
Annexure-II
Grant of Additional Allowance to the remaining
categories of Running Staff viz.,
ALP,
Sr. SLP, LP Shunting, Goods (Guard)
Railway Board vide letter No. PC-VII/2017/1/7/5/5
dated 10/08/2017 issued instruction for grant of
revised rates of Additional Allowance to the
Running Staff viz., Loco Pilot
(Goods)/Passenger/Mail-Express/Motorman, Sr.
Passenger (Guard) and Guard (Mail/Express) w.e.f.
01st July 2017 without covering the remaining
Running Staff belonging to the categories of ALP,
Sr. ALP, LP (Shunting), Guard (Goods) etc. In this
connection, Federation contends that the remaining
Running Staff have been discriminated against
wrongly ignoring the fact that there working
conditions and responsibilities are akin to those
Running Staff who have been granted revised rates
of Additional Allowance.
Federation further contends that the ALP, Sr. ALP,
LP (Shunting) and Guard (Goods) are also part of
Running Staff for all purpose, therefore they also
need to be covered for grant of Additional
Allowance like other Running Staff to avoid the
feeling of de-motivation among them.
NFIR, therefore, requests the Railway Board to
review the case afresh and issue instructions for
granting Additional Allowance to the ALP, Sr. ALP,
LP (Shunting) and Guard (Goods).
Annexure-III
Sub:
Seventh CPC pay structure - grave
injustice done to Graduate Engineers and Diploma
Engineers in Railways - Review urged.
NFIR invites kind attention of the Railway Board
to Para 11.40.104 to 11.40.115 of the 7th CPC
report (Page No. 747 to 749).
Vide Para 11.40.109 of the 7th CPC report, it has
been stated that "
the next post in the
hierarchical structure for Technical
Supervisors is the post of Assistant Engineer.
There is a 1:1 ratio between the posts of
Assistant Engineer filled by Direct Recruitment
and those filled through promotion".
In this connection, Federation points out that no
promotions are presently available for SSEs on the
basis of 1:1 ratio. The ground reality is that
directly recruited Graduate Engineers to the post
of SSE (6th CPC GP 4600/-) continued to remain in
the same Grade Pay/Pay Level for not less than 15
to 20 years. Federation also conveys that it would
be incorrect to call them "
Technical
Supervisors" while their official designations
are Sr. Section Engineers or Jr. Engineers.
It is further learnt that the 7e Central Pay
Commission had relied upon the study report given
by Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad for
denying the improved pay matrices for Graduate
Engineers as well Diploma Engineers. Para 6.16.2
of the study report of IIM, Ahmedabad submitted to
the 7th CPC is reproduced below:
"6.16.2 Sector-Wise Career Progression and
Promotion Rules:
NFIR hopes that the Railway Board admits the truth
that never promotions have been granted to the
Graduate Engineers on completion of 4-years period
to the post of Assistant Engineer and to the post
of Divisional Engineer on completion of 4-years in
the previous pay level. The IIM's distorted study
report has done grave damage to the career growth
of directly recruited Graduate Engineers in
Railways. The wrong information given to the 7th
CPC with regard to career progression and salary
details of Graduate Engineers recruited though RRB
in Railways through IIM's study report has caused
severe damage to their career resulting around
resentment among them.
It is sad to state that the Pay Commission has
deviated its own principle as enumerated
vide
Para 4.1.19 of its report, which is reproduced
below:-
"Historically the qualification and skill set
required as well as roles and responsibilities
discharged at various levels in the overall
hierarchy have been central to the basis for pay
grading. The rationalization index has been
applied keeping this principle in
mind".
It is surprising to note that the Railway Ministry
(as recorded vide Para 11.40.1 12 of the 7th CPC
report) had strongly defended the continuation of
existing arrangements on functional grounds,
ignoring the reality that the Railway Ministry in
the year 2010 had proposed replacement
of GP
46001- with GP 4800/- for improving the career
growth of SSEs etc. The Railway Board
also
failed to mention before 7th CPC of its decision
to upgrade Apex Level (GP 4600/-) posts to
Group 'B' Gazetted (which is yet to be
finalized). A.serious anomaly has arisen as a
result of
misleading facts placed by Railway
Ministry before 7th CPC and also the totally
incorrect study
report of IIM, Ahmedabad
presented to the 7th CPC as sought by the
Commission.
NFIR, therefore, urges upon the Railway Ministry
to review de-novo the entire issue and
rectify all aberrations and anomalies arisen
consequent upon the denial of improved pay
structure and status to the Graduate Engineers as
well as Diploma Engineers in Railways and also
accord approval for time bound promotions to
them.
Source:
NFIR
