RECEIVED FROM A MEMBER OF NAVAL FOUNDATION, PUNE BY WHATSAPP
DIST STD
A – GMR FILE
DTG 091901
FROM NHQ
TO 367 IG
SEVENTH PAY COMMISSION (.) IN
RECENT TIMES THERE HAS BEEN SEVERAL SPECULATIVE MEDIA REPORTS AND
DISINFORMATION ON FINAL OUTCOME OF SEVENTH PAY COMMISSION (7TH CPC)
RECOMMENDATIONS (.) SERVICE HEADQUARTERS HAVE MAINTAINED CONTINUOUS INTERACTION
WITH ALL AUTHORITIES CONCERNED AND OUR CONCERNS HAVE BEEN HIGHLIGHTED AT ALL
LEVELS TIME AND AGAIN
2 (.) WHILST A FEW OF OUR CONCERNS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED WE HAVE BEEN
CONSTRAINED TO REQUEST THE GOVT TO HOLD IMPLEMENTATION OF 7TH CPC
AWARD IN ABEYANCE IN VIEW OF ANOMALIES WHICH NEED TO BE RESOLVED
3 (.) IN THE INTERIM PERSONNEL ARE EXPECTED TO DISPLAY MATURITY AND
PATIENCE AND NOT BE SWAYED BY HEARSAY OR SPECULATIVE REPORTS FROM ANY QUARTER
The PM at one time said that OROP is being paid to the ESM from funds due to the poor of the nation, an insulting statement; and a soldier on peaceful OROP rally was man handled at Jantar Mantar a year back. Arun Jeitley claimed recently that there are innumerable definitions for OROP (of course, there is one standard definition but his babus invented many), he again claimed sometime back that election promise by the PM was just a joke, and a senior bureaucrat claims that the OROP will come through over his dead body.......and then where was the restraint on their part? An OMJC is instituted making mockery of Justice that could have been a avoided with an hour or two talk by the authorities with the ESM, now that Justice Mathur spoiled the broth of 7 CPC, everyone wants the ESM to have patience. It never happened in case of other services in this government........Sorry state of affairs....
ReplyDeleteSo we are getting an Association led thru the backdoor. Sixteeen Joint Secretaries of the IAS, the news reports indicate, walked into the Home Minister's office to protest against suspension of one Joint Secretary (IAS) over automatic renewal of a NGO in the adverse notice of the Govt. So, mark 2016 as the beginning of acche din for Defence Services.
ReplyDeleteDemocracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.....Alexis de Tocqueville.
ReplyDeleteIn our country, for civilian government employees it is democracy and for the military personnel it is nothing but socialism with explicitly imposed restraint and servitude.
Really sorry state of affairs. Will the Armed forces get Justice is a moot point
ReplyDeleteVeterans should have faith and patience. Should not speculate unnecessarily
ReplyDeleteFrom the policy on NFU and definition of an Org Gp ‘A’ service, there are three requirements that apply for implementation of NFU vis-à-vis the Armed Forces: -
ReplyDeleteFirst, the Service has to be an Organised Group ‘A’ Service i.e it has to have employees from (6th CPC) Junior Time Scale (JTS) or Entry Grade in Pay Band – 3 to HAG.
Armed Forces fulfil this condition as it has employees from Lts (and equivalents) in JTS or Entry Grade in Pay Band – 3 to Major Generals (and equivalents) in HAG.
Second, in the Organised Group ‘A’ Service, a procedure should exist for Gp B employees to be promoted to Junior Time Scale (JTS) i.e. the Entry Grade for Class A officers and 50% of the vacancies should be available for promotion in a vacancy year.
Armed Forces do not fulfil this condition as they do not have a policy for automatic promotion of JCOs (and equivalents) to Commissioned rank of the Lt & equivalent, reckoned to be equivalent to the Entry Grade for Commissioned Officers i.e. JTS.
Third, officers of a particular batch, for example vacancy year 1985 of Org Gp ‘A’ services are benchmarked against an officer of the IAS whose entry year is 2 years later i.e 1987. Therefore, Org Gp ‘A’ officers of the same Grade(s) of 1985 will draw NFU if an IAS officer of 1987 batch is promoted.
Armed Forces officers’ upto Lt Col & equivalent are promoted on a time frame i.e completion of a certain but same number of years of service i.e 2, 6, 13 years for promotion to Capt, Major and Lt Col & equivalents respectively. But for higher promotions, Armed Forces Officers of Cols and equivalents of an entry year (i.e year of commissioning) and above have different time frames for consideration (empanelment) both intra-service and inter Service.
Have the Armed Forces given a thought to implementation of NFU given the above conditions and the following specific issues?
As the NFU scheme was proposed by 6th CPC in its report released in 2008 and the NFU scheme was implemented in Apr 2009, have the Armed Forces modified their promotion policies and obtained MoD approval to meet the different conditions compared to the IAS/Org Gp ‘A’ Services relationship? Or have the Armed Forces sought waivers/exemptions from any/all of the above conditions?
AIS (IAS, IFS, IPS, IFoS) and Org Gp ‘A’ services (49 of them) have Departmental Promotion Committees (DPCs) for promotion from JTS (Entry Grade) through the various grades. On the other hand, Armed Forces have time-based (AVSC recommended) promotion time frames for Capt, Major and, Lt Col & equivalents. Promotion Boards are conducted only for Lt Col to Col (Selection Grade) and above.
Lt Cols & equivalents who are not promoted due to the “steep pyramid” on first, second or third consideration, are promoted to Col & equivalents in the 26th year of service.
Will NFU become applicable after the second consideration or the third consideration?
Would it not be against the Promotion policy based on merit that Lt Col or higher rank & equivalent (passed over) will draw the same Grade Pay and earn increments as a Col or higher rank & equivalents (Select) of the Army/Navy/Air Force, though 2 years later?
P.S: Have the Armed Forces circulated a draft policy for implementation of NFU?
P.P. S: Isn’t Contempt of Court being committed because Armed Forces doctors are not being paid DACP even after the Apex Court directed payment in 2013?
May I be enlightened?
There are two commissioning entries each year in Jun and Dec for Army and may be similarly for IAF & Navy. Now officers commissioned by time scale Lt Col after 13 years are due for promotion to Col (Selection). Say one to 10 Lt Cols are promoted to Col after 16 years commissioned service. Why cannot other officers of same batch promoted after 18 years CS or granted Pay & Allowances of Col without actual wearing rank of Col. This formula/policy of NFU can be granted for Brig, Major General and Lt Gen. Why creating hurdles. All officers who are superseded can be given Pay & Allowances/higher pension instead of wearing next rank/appointments.I may be wrong. Please guide.
ReplyDeleteSir, Army promotion policy is Arms Zero year, Combat Support Zero plus One year and Services Zero plus 2 years. Take one course commissioning Jan 2000. From that course, by your time frame, Arty/Inf/Armd/Mech Inf will be promoted in 2016; but AD Arty will be considered in 2017 and ASC/AOC in 2018. So what happens to them from the same course. (2) Will you give Arty/Inf/Armd/Mech Inf of 1998 (18 years in 2016) NFU but what about AD Arty and ASC/AOC? It is clear that if you give a Lt Col pay & allowances of a Col, he might have more CS and rank badges be damned will tell the Col (Select) that they can climb trees. Please consider.
DeleteAfter three boards for promotion by selection to Col rank are over and done with, where is the need for an Officer to wait till he completes 26 years of service for getting the time-bound rank of Col? The whole idea of 26 years is absurd.
DeleteThe time bound Col rank should be given by the time an Officer completes 21 years of service.
When NFU is introduced, if ever, the next higher pay-band, now the matrix level, should be granted to those not promoted in the same stream 2 years after the first promotions in the same stream have taken place. That is what happens in the case of AIS Gp A Officers.
Make things simple in today's world.
ReplyDelete