Denial of improved Pay Matrices to Graduate
Engineers/Diploma Engineers of Railways leading to
serious disappointment among engineers - Removal of
injustice
Ref: NFIR's letter No. IV/NFIR/7 CPC (Imp)/2016/RB-Part I dated 14/08/2017.
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 1 1 .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, NFIR desires to point out the ground reality is that the SSEs (directly recruited Graduate Engineers) do not have reasonable career growth at all, as they continued to remain in the same Grade Pay/Pay Level (GP 4600/Pay Level 7) for not less than 10 to 15 years. There is also no cadre structure for Technical Supervisors beyond 7th CPC pay Level 7 (6th CPC/GP 4600).
It has also been found that the 7th Central Pay Commission had relied upon the study report given by Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad for the purpose of denying allotment of irnproved Grade Pay/Pay Matrices for Graduate Engineers as well Diploma Engineers. Extract of para 6.16.2 of the study report of IIM, Ahmedabad upon which the 7th CPC had relied upon, is reproduced below:
"6.16.2 Sector-Wise Career progression and promotion Rules:
In the above context, NFIR states that never, the Graduate Engineers have been granted promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer on completion of 4-years period and to the post of Divisional Engineer on completion of 4-years in the previous pay level. It seems, the IIM's distorted study report has done grave damage to the career of directly recruited Graduate Engineers in Railways. The incorrect information through IIM's study report with regard to career progression and salary details of Graduate Engineers in Railways had caused irreparable harm to their career, resulting alround resentment among Graduate Engineers/Diploma Engineers.
While the 7th CPC had evolved its own principle (Para 4.1.19 of its report), for pay grading, sadly the pay commission had failed to adhere to its own principle in the instant case of Technical Supervisors in Railways who are either Graduate Engineers or Diploma Holders. It is also surprising to note that the Railway Ministry (as recorded vide Para 11.40.112 of the 7th CPC report) had defended the continuance of existing arrangements on functional grounds, ignoring the truth that the Railway Ministry itself had, in the year 2010 proposed replacement of GP 4600/- with GP 4800/- for improving the career of SSEs etc. The Railway Ministry had also failed to apprise the 7th CPC of its decision as well its proposal to Ministry of Finance for upgradation of Apex Level (GP 4600/-) posts to Group 'B' Gazetted (decision yet to be implemented).
NFIR, therefore, urges upon the Railway Ministry to review the entire issue de-novo for rendering justice to the category of Engineers (Graduate/Diploma) in Railways duly modifying the existing Pay Matrices with retrospective effect.
Source: NFIR
Item No.3
Sub: Denial of improved Pay Matrices to
Graduate Engineers/Diploma Engineers of Railways
leading to serious disappointment among engineers -
Removal of injustice - urged.Ref: NFIR's letter No. IV/NFIR/7 CPC (Imp)/2016/RB-Part I dated 14/08/2017.
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 1 1 .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, NFIR desires to point out the ground reality is that the SSEs (directly recruited Graduate Engineers) do not have reasonable career growth at all, as they continued to remain in the same Grade Pay/Pay Level (GP 4600/Pay Level 7) for not less than 10 to 15 years. There is also no cadre structure for Technical Supervisors beyond 7th CPC pay Level 7 (6th CPC/GP 4600).
It has also been found that the 7th Central Pay Commission had relied upon the study report given by Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad for the purpose of denying allotment of irnproved Grade Pay/Pay Matrices for Graduate Engineers as well Diploma Engineers. Extract of para 6.16.2 of the study report of IIM, Ahmedabad upon which the 7th CPC had relied upon, is reproduced below:
"6.16.2 Sector-Wise Career progression and promotion Rules:
Table 6.16.2:
Career Progression for Graduate Engineer through RRB in Railways | ||
Job Role: Graduate Engineer
|
Designation/Post
|
Promotion Criteria
|
Entry + 1 Level
|
Assitant Engineer
|
Period prescribed for promotion to this level as per
R/Rs is 2 years in the previous level. Actual Average period of promotion is 4 years. |
Entry + 2 Levels
|
Divisional Engineer
|
Period prescribed for promotion to this level as per
R/Rs is 4 years in the previous level. Actual Average period of promotion is 6 years. |
Entry + 3 Levels
|
Sr.Divisional Engineer
|
Period prescribed for promotion to this level as per
R/Rs is 4 years in the previous level. Actual Average period of promotion is 4 years. |
Source: Based on
data provided by the Seventh Central Pay Commission | ||
In the above context, NFIR states that never, the Graduate Engineers have been granted promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer on completion of 4-years period and to the post of Divisional Engineer on completion of 4-years in the previous pay level. It seems, the IIM's distorted study report has done grave damage to the career of directly recruited Graduate Engineers in Railways. The incorrect information through IIM's study report with regard to career progression and salary details of Graduate Engineers in Railways had caused irreparable harm to their career, resulting alround resentment among Graduate Engineers/Diploma Engineers.
While the 7th CPC had evolved its own principle (Para 4.1.19 of its report), for pay grading, sadly the pay commission had failed to adhere to its own principle in the instant case of Technical Supervisors in Railways who are either Graduate Engineers or Diploma Holders. It is also surprising to note that the Railway Ministry (as recorded vide Para 11.40.112 of the 7th CPC report) had defended the continuance of existing arrangements on functional grounds, ignoring the truth that the Railway Ministry itself had, in the year 2010 proposed replacement of GP 4600/- with GP 4800/- for improving the career of SSEs etc. The Railway Ministry had also failed to apprise the 7th CPC of its decision as well its proposal to Ministry of Finance for upgradation of Apex Level (GP 4600/-) posts to Group 'B' Gazetted (decision yet to be implemented).
NFIR, therefore, urges upon the Railway Ministry to review the entire issue de-novo for rendering justice to the category of Engineers (Graduate/Diploma) in Railways duly modifying the existing Pay Matrices with retrospective effect.
Source: NFIR
0 comments :
Post a Comment