Tuesday, 19 August 2014

My Memorandum to VIIth Central Pay Commission (CPC)

Namaste-Good Morning
I sent following memorandum to  VIIth CPC through email. Email address is sec-7cpc@nic.inI am placing my suggestions on internet so that every one can see and scrutinise my suggestions and rectify same through a memorandum to VIIth CPC.
1. Salaries
1.1   The considerations on which the minimum salary in case of the lowest Group ‘C’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a Secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the reasonable ratio between the two.
Suggestion: Band Pay recommended by the VIth CPC and accepted by the government is recommended to be accepted by the present CPC (VIIth CPC). CPC may not complicate the matter. This would provide matter for discussion by the government and consume time. As far as possible CPC should consider earlier CPCs as base and work forward from that point. Present rate of Dearness Allowance (Dearness Relief for Pensioners) is 100% and may be 130% by the time recommendations of CPC are accepted and implemented. Hence, Starting salary for each of the groups (viz Group A, B, C & D should be present lowest basic salary plus corresponding Grade Pay improved by factor 2.3. For example present Lowest Band Pay is Rs. 4440.00. Corresponding Grade Pay is Rs. 1300.00. This means VIth CPC accepted recommendation fixed minimum basic pay as Rs. 5740.00. This minimum basic pay should be corrected to take in to account price rise. Hence starting basic pay works out to Rs. 5740X2.3 = Rs. 13202 say Rs. 13000.00 (corrected to nearest 1000 rupees). Allowing 3% of basic pay as an annual increment as per accepted recommendation of VIth CPC and rounding to nearest Rs. 100.00 it works out to Rs. 400.00 in the lowest segment of pay scale for Group D employees. In the pay scale segments are added to cover higher post in the particular group of employees. While working out pay scales for all 4 groups following aspects are kept in mind. Starting pay accepted wef 01 January 2006 by the government for each of the groups is increased by 130% over lowest band pay (including corresponding Grade Pay), increment rate for Group A is considered as approximately 1% of starting pay at every segment in the pay scale, for Group B it is considered as approximately 1.6% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale, for Group C it is considered as approximately 2.25% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale and for Group D it is considered as approximately 3% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale. Ratio of starting pay of last (highest) segment and first (lowest) segment for every pay scale is different and is 1.68 for Group A, 2.22 for Group B, 3.0 for Group C and 4.12 for Group D. Based on these considerations recommended pay scales are as under:-

  1. 106000-1000-111000-1400-118000-1200-124000-1200-130000-1600-138000-1400-145000-1600-153000-1600-161000-1800-170000-1600-178000
  2. 48000-800-52000-1000-57000-800-61000-1200-67000-1000-72000-1200-78000-1400-85000-1400-91000-1600-99000-1600-107000
  3. 31000-800-35000-800-39000-800-43000-1000-48000-1200-54000-1200-60000-1400-67000-1600-75000-1800-84000-1800-93000
  4. 13000-400-15000-600-18000-400-20000-600-23000-800-27000-800-31000-1000-36000-1000-41000-1200-47000-1400-54000
These pay scales give ratio of lowest pay for group C employee and that of Chief Secretary (highest pay) works out to 5.7419. This ratio should be acceptable.
Note: Pay Scales and Pension Scales for Industrial and Non-Industrial Non-Basic employees/pensioners need to be added to complete this suggestion.
1.2   What should be the considerations for determining salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?
Suggestion: I recommend CPC should not go in to details of this and consider accepted recommendations of earlier CPCs.
2. Comparisons
2.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector? If so, why? If not, why not?
Suggestion: There is no need to compare pay scales with those in private sector. Some of the reasons are private sector doesn’t have fixed pay scale or rate of annual increment. Both depend on capability of employee and requirements of private sector. Mostly emoluments are based on profit made by a particular organisation. Such controls are not practicable in a government organisation. Hence there is no need to consider this aspect.
2.2 Should there at all be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the public sector? If so, why? If not, why not?
Suggestion: Public sector is mostly dependent on government policy meaning effect of impotents in government sector is visible in public sector. Condition of public sector is in between private and government sector. Hence there is no need to compare government sector and public sector.
2.3 The concept of variable pay has been introduced in Central Public Sector Enterprises by the Second Pay Revision Committee. In the case of the Government is there merit in introducing a variable component of pay? Can such variable pay be linked to performance?
Suggestion: Ideally it is needed. However, in government service it is not only difficult but impossible to implement. Hence, CPC should not consider this aspect.
3. Attracting Talent
3.1 Does the present compensation package attract suitable talent in the All India Services & Group A Services? What are your observations and suggestions in this regard?
Suggestion: It is a misunderstanding that only pay packages attract talent. Job security chances of advancement in the service carry more weight than the pay packages. Private sector is always ready to give higher packages to management staff provided their employees maintain high strength of clients and find more and more new clients. In government sector government treat clients as subjects as if the country is ruled buy a king. Any employee trying to satisfy clients in government service is most likely to fail in his/her career. There are many examples. Recent one is Municipal Commissioner of PimpriChinchwad Municipal Corporation near Pune, Maharashtra. Dr. Shrikar Pardeshi was transferred to less important post even though he did set many valuable trends for betterment of citizens and followed orders of judicial court to demolish unauthorised building construction. It is improbable that Dr. Pardeshi would be removed from service. In private sector either Dr. Pardeshi would have been given higher package of benefits or removed from service depending on his success or failure respectively. Employees with innovative ideas do suffer in government sector.  Government can easily find a solution for this. Awarding success and ignoring failures would be the right solution. This may need some more thinking and elaborate rules for measuring success/failure and deciding on giving award and warnings. What private sector can’t give is security after retirement. Government can easily provide this security through pension and health scheme like Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS is short). Difference in pay packages between government and private sector should be invested in pension-health fund. Proper administration of this fund would make it adequate for all needs. This fund can provide loan to government project. This fund may turn to be adequate to take care of pension and health of pensioners. Another requirement to attract and hold talent is treating employees as care takers and not slaves of the government.
Government incorrectly stopped her pension scheme and is trying to implement pension scheme followed by private sector. Packages recommended in suggestion to Para 1.1 are attractive. What is needed is reverting back to pension scheme followed prior to 01 April 2004 with a few modifications. Recently it is observed that regular recruitment age limits are enhanced. 28 years has become a normal recruitment age with relaxation of age up to 5 years for certain categories of employees. Therefore, it would not be wrong to say employee starts his government service at the age of 35 and retire at the age of 60. This means such an employee can serve for a maximum period of 25 years. However, making 25 yeas of service as a criterion for full pension may result in some employees who joined earlier in age may resign and join private sector. Change in employment age has been increased from 25 to 28 i.e. increase in 3 yeas. Therefore minimum pensionable service for full pension should be brought down to allowable service counted in months for those who are recruited at age more than 25 years. Secondly basic full pension should be 60% of last pay drawn in regular post. This means temporary promotion should be ignored. Basic family pension should continue to remain as 30% of the last pay. If pensionable service is less than allowable service counted in months then earlier formula to reduce pension should be taken in to consideration. There should be some exception to this rule, like death of an employee while in service (not only while on duty). Specific clause should be added for family pension. Second important aspect is health care. Medical treatment is getting unaffordable for government employees day by day. Government should take full responsibility of health care of her employees and their dependents. Present Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) should be made applicable to all irrespective of ministry or department.  These 2 provisions are adequate to attract talent and would be safe from private sector. Private sector can never offer such benefits. This will need funds. Government pays less than private sector to her employees. This difference should be invested in a fund and those resources would be adequate for providing these facilities. There is one more requirement to stop irregular practice by making it compulsory for a retired government servant to stay away from private sector for a minimum period of 2 years.  Use of talent by private sector is welcome but use of  “personally knowing people in government service” is forbidden.
3.2 To what extent should government compensation be structured to attract special talent?
Suggestion:  Please see suggestion against Para 3.1 above. In addition basic pension should improve with age of the pensioner. Simple solution to achieve this is pension scales may be developed instead of fixed basic pension. This will not only attract talent but also ensure that even after becoming pensioner (retirement) he/she would remain loyal to the government. Suggested pension scales are as under:-

Pension Scale for Group D: 6800-220-7900-240-9100-280-10500-300-12000-380-13900-420-16000-480-18400-560-21200-640-24400-740-28100-840-32300-1000-37200-1120-42800-1280-49200-1480-56600-1700-65100-1960-74900-2260-86200

Pension Scale for Group C: 15500-400-17500-400-19500-400-21500-500-24000-600-27000-600-30000-700-33500-800-37500-900-42000-900-46500-1050-51800-1150-57700-1300-64200-1460-71500-1620-79600-1800-88600-2000-98600-2240-109800

Pension Scale for Group B: 24000-400-26000-500-28500-500-30500-600-33500-500-36000-600-39000-700-42500-600-45500-800-49500-800-53500-820-57600-960-62400-1020-67500-1100-73000-1200-79000-1300-85500-1380-92400-1500-99900

Pension Scale for Group A: 53000-500-55500-700-59000-600-62000-600-65000-800-69000-700-72500-800-76500-800-80500-900-85000-800-89000-980-93900-940-98600-1060-103900-1060-109200-1180-115100-1160-120900-1260-127200-1280-133600

Security in old age is more workable motivation than pay. Moreover private sector can’t compete in this field. Starting pay and pension shall play most important role for attracting and holding talent. This would need changes in working conditions also. Briefly I suggest as under:-
a.       Pension shall be admissible to all those who have completed 10 years of service or more.
b.      Full pension should be allowed to all those who have completed allowable service. Allowable service means time period between entry in to service and date of super annuation (retirement age specified)
c.       If service is less than period defined in sub Para b above then a pension factor should be estimated after dividing actual service in months by allowable service in months.
d.      For those who serve more than 10 years but less than allowable service, pension should be reduced by multiplying allowable pension in general case with the pension factor.
e.       EOL shall not be considered for pension as in vogue at present.
f.        Full family pension shall be authorised for all authorised family pensioners after death of an employee while in service irrespective of period of service. This shall ensure family pension and safety of family. This shall be an important factor to attract talent.
g.       Pension fixation should be based on selecting same stage in pension scale as in pay scale. For those who retired earlier notional pay fixation should be adopted for pension fixation.
h.       Pension fixation, issue of PPO and revised PPO must be automatic and shall be implemented without any additional order. A standard format should be chosen/ designed for Pension Pay Order (PPO) for all ministries and departments.
i.         These modifications shall be applicable to all irrespective of time period of service or retirement.
j.        Employees and officers shall be authorised to try new ideas and failures to some defined. Success shall be rewarded with certificate of excellence and additional increments, failures shall be ignored.
k.      There are a few unfortunate employees. They were born on 1st July and had to retire on 30th June as per service condition. They do serve for 365 days (1 year) but can’t earn increment on 1st July. Of course this increment won’t help them in getting pay but can be useful for getting some benefit in pension. It is suggested that for the purpose of retirement benefits they should be granted increment on 30th June AN.
l.         Situation in Para k above is applicable to those employees retired before 1-1-2006 and retired on first of some month in a year. An additional increment, for purpose of pension only, should be granted if the increment had been due on 1st of that month (birth month).
m.    There should be limitation on promotion chances. An employee should be considered 5 times (this number should be fixed by CPC) for promotion from present grade to next higher grade by successive Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). If the employee fails to get promotion then he/she shall not be considered for promotion by any of the DPCs in future. However, the employee shall be considered by Departmental Efficiency Bar Committee (EBC) for granting increments in the next higher grade. Secondly, the employee can appear for direct recruitment to any post as per the selection criteria any number of times. 5 chances are good enough to ensure that the employee is not put to disadvantage by some one who doesn’t like the employee based on some unknown grounds.
4. Pay Scales
4.1 The 6th Central Pay Commission introduced the system of Pay Bands and Grade Pay as against the system of specific pay scales attached to various posts. What has been the impact of running pay bands post implementation of 6th CPC recommendations?
Suggestion: VIth CPC clubbed various pay scales into 4 bands. Pay scales as such continued to exist in the same number. Grade pay was made function of pay scale i.e. change in pay scale changed grade pay. Therefore, no significant achievement was experienced on account of grade pay. This concept should be discontinued. A single pay scale for a group instead of pay bands is more useful concept. This concept should be adopted as suggested in suggestion to Para 1.1 above.
4.2 Is there any need to bring about any change?
Suggestion: Yes. As suggested in Para 1.1 above. The change is based on the dearness allowance sanctioned by the government on date and expected by July 2015.
4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?
Suggestion: It appears that the concept created confusion rather than simplification. Arresting exodus or attracting talent doesn’t depend only on money. Money is a major factor though. Suggested pay scales in Para 1.1 would take care about money part. Higher starting pay, pension and working conditions etc. would not only attract talent but hold it especially on account of new concept of estimating pensionable service i.e. service needed for authorising full pension. Other aspects are part of administrative reforms.
4.4 Successive Pay Commissions have reduced the number of pay scales by merging one or two pay scales together. Is there a case for the number of pay scales/ pay band to be rationalized and if so in what manner?
Suggestion: Yes there is a need to specify a pay scale which would be in effect for a long time say 100 years. Monitory limits in the scale may change periodically. Suggestion in Para 1.1 may be considered.
4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If not, what are your alternative suggestions?
Suggestion:  Advantages of Grade Pay concept are no where specified by VIth CPC. In my opinion it is an obstacle rather than encouragement. It is suggested this should be made part of pay as suggested in Para 1.1 above.
5. Increment
5.1 Whether the present system of annual increment on 1st July of every year uniformly in case of all employees has served its purpose or not? Whether any changes are required?
Suggestion: This concept is acceptable. It helps administration in implementing increment regularly on time. This should continue in future without any limit.
5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?
Suggestion: Accepted recommendations of VIth CPC should continue as explained in suggestion to Para 1.1 above.
5.3 Whether there should be a provision of variable increments at a rate higher than the normal annual increment in case of high achievers? If so, what should be transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement, which could be uniformly applied across Central Government?
Suggestion:  Variable increment concept is difficult to implement in practice. It may lead to favours and corruption. Under strict rules concept of more than 1 increment on account of efficiency may be considered.
5.4 Under the MACP scheme three financial up-gradations are allowed on completion of 10, 20, 30 years of regular service, counted from the direct entry grade. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the scheme? Is there a perception that a scheme of this nature, in some Departments, actually incentivizes people who do not wish to take the more arduous route of qualifying departmental examinations/ or those obtaining professional degrees?
Suggestion: Present scheme is good for employees who are mediocre. It doesn’t help in improving efficiency of work. System of promotion to higher segment of pay scale as explained in suggestion for Para 1.1 above may prove to be more beneficial for government working. Briefly it says there should be specific number of opportunities be given to employees for promotion. In case an employee fails to qualify for promotion he/she be given another opportunity of crossing Efficiency Bar. This would open an opportunity for employee to earn pay in higher segment in the pay scale while discharging duties in the same post. This should be considered as reward for experience.
6. Performance
What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?
Suggestion: It is required that grading of performance should be by a team consisting of officers who write ACR, selected staff officers in other offices etc. Such a committee should suggest more than 1 increment as reward.
1.      Impact on other organizations
Salary structures in the Central and State Governments are broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions. To what extent should their paying capacity be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Govt. employees?
Suggestion:  Working conditions of employees in different organisation are different. As an example consider employees of all such organisation working in same city/town. In spite of being in same place there is vast difference in working conditions. Consider home town. Central government employee may be 1000s of kilometre away fro home town, state government employee may be 100s of km away from home town. On the other hand employees in municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions may be staying in home town. This is just an example. There are many more circumstance wherein there would be difference. Rather than paying capacity service conditions be considered for pay. CPC may recommend certain %age for pay scales. For example 10% reduction for state government employee, 20% reduction for municipal bodies and 30% reduction for other bodies.
8. Defence Forces
8.1 What should be the considerations for fixing salary in case of Defence personnel and in what manner does the parity with civil services need to be evolved, keeping in view their respective job profiles?
Suggestion: Present system may be continued.
8.2 In what manner should the concessions and facilities, both in cash and kind, be taken into account for determining salary structure in case of Defence Forces personnel.
Suggestion: The salary structure should remain same. Concessions and facilities need to be improved.
8.3 As per the November 2008 orders of the Ministry of Defence, there are a total of 45 types of allowances for Personnel Below Officer Rank and 39 types of allowances for Officers. Does a case exist for rationalization/ streamlining of the current variety of allowances?
Suggestion:  No suggestion.
8.4 What are the options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence pensions?
Suggestion: There should be rule for reemployment of defence personnel. Highly trained manpower is not used even in police force. In fact road for civil service should be through armed forces for 25 to 30% of the government jobs.
8.5 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to war widows?
Suggestion: No Suggestion.
8.6 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to disabled soldiers, commensurate to the nature of their disability?
Suggestion: No Suggestion.
9. Allowances
9.1 Whether the existing allowances need to be retained or rationalized in such a manner as to ensure that salary structure takes care not only of the job profile but the situational factors as well, so that the number of allowances could be at a realistic level?
Suggestion: No Suggestion.
9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?
Suggestion: Armed forces guarantee accommodation for all service personnel. Hence there should not be house rent allowance. What is needed is the government should fulfil her responsibility and provide accommodation as per authorisation including separated families.
10. Pension
10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?
Suggestion: NPS is against holding talented employees in the service. This should be discarded and earlier method of pension with certain modifications as suggested to Para 3.2 above be implemented.
10.2 As far as pre-1.1.2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and other retirement benefits?
Suggestion: Active service period after considering maximum period allowed on account of age of an individual should continue to be the basis for pension amount. Joining government service the revised age criterion may not allow 33 years of service period. It should be reduced based on difference between general retirement age and highest age for joining service. For employees for whom age relaxation criteria exists a different service period criteria is needed. To overcome this difficulty maximum service period may be fixed as suggested in suggestion to Para 3.2 above
11. Strengthening the public governance system
11.1 The 6th CPC recommended upgrading the skills of the Group D employees and placing them in Group C over a period of time. What has been the experience in this regard?
Suggestion: No Suggestion.
11.2 In what way can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more efficient, accountable and responsible? Please give specific suggestions with respect to:-
a) Rationalisation of staff strength and more productive deployment of available staff;
Suggestion: Advantage of modern facilities be taken and existing provision of citizen charter, and orders like standing orders be implemented. It must be understood that British way of administration had been effective during their time. It is no more effective. In today’s world people produce more when they feel happy about themselves. People take right action when they know exactly what they need to do. People take responsibilities when they know they will be patted if their efforts benefits the office and are recognised. Recognition does not mean money only. It has many more fields.
b) Rationalisation of processes and reduction of paper work; and
Suggestion:  It is normally found that modern facilities, equipment, gadgets available are used in the same old ways. For example email is not considered authentic unless hard copy of signed letter is produced. Secondly Aadhaar card project was not liked by people because it was implemented in the same old way of filling a form and adding data to government server. This task should have been divided in to many segments and every time 1 segment was considered. The first segment should have been Name, address, personal identification mark on body. Second segment may have been fingerprints, photo etc. next education qualification, employment etc. The government could have designed a number of closely related tables in a single database. These tables could be for every need of person like ration card, passport, employment, education etc. There is no nee for every person to provide data for every table. Minimum requirement should be for name address etc. Remaining data would be needed for getting a specific benefit. For example for getting ration card table for ration card must be provided with suitable information. Every government office must work on this line and make full use of modern facilities to remain updated at least on daily basis if not on hourly basis.
c) Economy in expenditure
Suggestion: Economy in expenditure is needed but reduction at the cost of efficiency must be avoided. Modern facilities may be costly to buy but are useful in improving efficiency of government organisation.
12. Training/ building competence
12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?
Suggestion: An office where responsibilities are undertaken and fulfilled as expected by the beneficiaries within the legal frame work in a routine manner. This means the employees involved in such task know their responsibility and procedure to complete the work to the highest satisfaction of controller and beneficiaries. This would need training and initiative by the employee and minimum guidance by the controller.
12.2 One of the terms of reference suggests that the Commission recommend appropriate training and capacity building through a competency based framework: -  Training needed for different tasks is different. Broadly it can be said that training should include step by step procedure, legal conditions, responsibility and authority at various levels.
 a) Is the present level of training at various stages of a person's career considered adequate? Are there gaps that need to be filled, and if so, where?
Suggestion: This may be a separate subject for study and recommendations. Every office may study and place requirements of training. These requirements may be studied at high level and decided. The decision should include responsibilities of training organisation, trainee and the office where trainee works.
b) Should it be made compulsory that each civil service officer should in his career span acquire a professional qualification? If so, can the nature of the study, time intervals and the Institution(s) whose qualification are acceptable, all be stipulated?
Suggestion: Yes this should be implemented. Details may be left to various departments and the ministries.
c) What other indicators can best measure training and capacity building for personnel in your organization? Please suggest ways through which capacity building can be further strengthened?
Suggestion: No suggestion
13. Outsourcing
13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?
Suggestion:  Outsourcing is not a new concept. It is in practice throughout past life of every office in some way or the other. Outsourcing is getting work done through a single person. This means personal management of persons needed to do a task is avoided. However, creeping of bad practices in the organisation may not be avoided. Outsourcing is welcome with changes in human management. Task can be divided in 2 groups. Government employees may be asked to do portion of a job and rest should be out sourced. Quality and economy of both should be checked to arrive at final decision.
13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be outsourced?
Suggestion: Generally job which needs different resources (not held by the government) is needed to be outsourced. The resources include man power also. This should be left to government offices with post audit check by higher office(s).
14. Regulatory Bodies
14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set up under Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/ Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members + support personnel) may be indicated.
Suggestion: No Suggestion
14.2 Regulators that may not qualify in terms of being set up under Acts of Parliament but perform regulatory functions may also be listed. The scale of pay for Chairperson /Members and other personnel of such bodies may be indicated.
Suggestion: No Suggestion
14.3 Across the Government there are a host of Regulatory bodies set up for various purposes. What are your suggestions regarding emoluments structure for Regulatory bodies?
Suggestion: No Suggestion
15. Payment of Bonus
One of the terms of reference of the 7th Pay Commission is to examine the existing schemes of payment of bonus. What are your suggestions and observations in this regard?
Suggestion: In payment of bonus the government is following her own policy. This should be changed to include criteria for improvement in work while reducing cost. Citizens’ Charter efficiency should be added as one of the criteria. Every office has different working environments. Hence only guidelines could be specified. Details should be left to department/ministry.
Following points may be highlighted.
1)      Pension for different posts and different last pay drawn should be different and this parity must be maintained forever. While estimating revised pension a notional pay fixation should be carried out. Based on new pay so derived and pension calculation rules, every one should get revised pension after every CPC.
2)      Pay scales for employees could be reduced to just 4 numbers, one pay scale for each of the groups A, B, C & D. 6th Central Pay Commission (6th CPC) had made 4 pay bands. Instead of bands there should be groups with a single pay scale for each of the. While working out pay scale 10 levels for posts may be considered, similar to suggestion in the article referred above.
3)      If a single pay scale concept is accepted only starting pay for a post need to be specified. Pay scales should be organised in such a way that certain percentage of every starting pay should be increment.
4)      Concept of GP (meaning Grade Pay) introduced by VIth CPC should be abolished. Suggested 4 numbers of pay scales are given at the end of the article. Concept used is an independent pay scales for every group of government employees, reduced percentage increment rate for higher groups, percentage rate of increment in each of the groups and for entire pay scale remains nearly constant throughout the scale. Marginal modifications are needed to obtained increments in full hundred. Each of the scales are divided using 5 years period for every post.
5)      Government should decide on various posts and select starting pay for every post from a particular 5 year segment of the scales. Every 3-5 years employee may be considered for promotion. Those who pass tests and are found suitable for promotion are placed in the upper segment of pay scale immediately succeeding the present segment.
6)      There should be limitation on considering an employee for promotion. Suggested limitation is an employee should be considered for promotion by consecutive 3 Departmental Promotion Committee (DPCs). Those who fail to get promotion should be allowed to give test for Efficiency Bar (EB). In case a government servant passes test for EB he/she should be allowed higher pay succeeding the present segment but in the same post. Thus even though he/she is not found suitable for higher post his/her experience and quality of work is rewarded.
7)      It is recommended that VIIth CPC should concentrate on pay scales and recommend a structure to be followed not only for present but for future also. Next CPCs could only recommend starting pay for each of the 4 pay scales and rationalise amount of increment. I recommend that each of the CPCs should prepare a structure for different aspects of facilities provided to employees and pensioners. Once the structure is accepted CPCs in future should recommend only the key area. As an example only starting basic pay in the lowest segment of pay scale should be recommended by CPCs based on the approved structure.

Data for following pay scales has been taken from the article referred above. Considerations for various aspects are starting pay accepted wef 01 January 2006 by the government for each of the groups is increased by 130% over lowest band pay (including corresponding Grade Pay) approved by the government based on VIth CPC, increment rate for Group A is considered as approximately 1% of starting pay at every segment in the pay scale, for Group B it is considered as approximately 1.6% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale, for Group C it is considered as approximately 2.25% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale and for Group D it is considered as approximately 3% of starting pay of the segment in the pay scale. Ratio of starting pay of last (highest) segment and first (lowest) segment for every pay scale is different and is 1.68 for Group A, 2.22 for Group B, 3.0 for Group C and 4.12 for Group D.

Pay Scales for Group A to D Employees

  1. Pay Scale for Group A: 106000-1000-111000-1400-118000-1200-124000-1200-130000-1600-138000-1400-145000-1600-153000-1600-161000-1800-170000-1600-178000
  2. Pay Scale for Group B: 48000-800-52000-1000-57000-800-61000-1200-67000-1000-72000-1200-78000-1400-85000-1400-91000-1600-99000-1600-107000
  3. Pay Scale for Group C: 31000-800-35000-800-39000-800-43000-1000-48000-1200-54000-1200-60000-1400-67000-1600-75000-1800-84000-1800-93000
  4. Pay Scale for Group D: 13000-400-15000-600-18000-400-20000-600-23000-800-27000-800-31000-1000-36000-1000-41000-1200-47000-1400-54000

Pension Scales for Group A to D Pensioners

  1. Pension Scale for Group A: 53000-500-55500-700-59000-600-62000-600-65000-800-69000-700-72500-800-76500-800-80500-900-85000-800-89000-980-93900-940-98600-1060-103900-1060-109200-1180-115100-1160-120900-1260-127200-1280-133600
  2. Pension Scale for Group B: 24000-400-26000-500-28500-500-30500-600-33500-500-36000-600-39000-700-42500-600-45500-800-49500-800-53500-820-57600-960-62400-1020-67500-1100-73000-1200-79000-1300-85500-1380-92400-1500-99900
  3. Pension Scale for Group C: 15500-400-17500-400-19500-400-21500-500-24000-600-27000-600-30000-700-33500-800-37500-900-42000-900-46500-1050-51800-1150-57700-1300-64200-1460-71500-1620-79600-1800-88600-2000-98600-2240-109800
  4. Pension Scale for Group D: 6800-220-7900-240-9100-280-10500-300-12000-380-13900-420-16000-480-18400-560-21200-640-24400-740-28100-840-32300-1000-37200-1120-42800-1280-49200-1480-56600-1700-65100-1960-74900-2260-86200


Dinesh Mistry said...


Janahitwadi said...

@ Dinesh Mistry, Thank you for your good wishes. Please advise your friends to study these and suggest changes where needed. I may be able to convince CPC when I meet them in Delhi.

Popular Posts