India must pay for good governance
Sumit K. Majumdar
In the last 25 years, civil service salaries have risen substantially. Yet, they are no comparison to private sector wage levels that have risen a hundred times in the same timeframe. The price of such disparities is psychological dysfunction among civil servants who are capable and highly motivated. India cannot short-change good governance. The prognosis for India's governance looks bleak, as good candidates for superior civil service jobs seek alternative careers.
Pegged at extraordinarily generous rates by Lord Cornwallis so as to eradicate corruption indulged in by the employees of East India Company, the salary scales of civil servants provided the motivation for generations of British and Indian men to seek employment in India's civil services.
The Indian Civil Service (ICS) was one of the best-paid jobs on earth. In 1805, a Collector of Madras Presidency was paid Rs 2,500 a month — a gigantic sum by today's standards. If prices have risen by 200 times in the last two centuries, then that salary today is worth at least Rs 500,000.
As late as 1980, when the last serving ICS officer, N. K. Mukherjee, retired as the Cabinet Secretary, his monthly salary of Rs 4,000, though having stayed static for that level of appointment for two centuries, was adequate. Private sector salaries were such that senior functionaries were paid about Rs 10,000 a month. In the last 25 years, civil service salaries have risen substantially. The Cabinet Secretary is now paid ten times what his previous generation counterpart was. Nevertheless, what has risen more substantially is the level of salaries paid in India's private sector. They have risen by a hundred times in the last 25 years. The wage disparity is huge and has psychological consequences.
Facts from Yesterday
In 1947, a mid-level District Collector would have been paid Rs 2,000 a month while his Commissioner would draw Rs 3,500. The Chief Secretary of the Madras Presidency would be paid Rs 3,750. An ICS Member of the Governor's Executive Council would be paid Rs 5,000 a month, while the Governor of UP was paid Rs 10,000. For 1947, these were large sums.
At that time the Reserve Bank of India Governor was paid Rs 7,500 a month, while a Secretary and Treasurer of the Imperial Bank, the precursor of the State Bank of India, was paid Rs 4,000. Comparably, the best private sector company would pay its general manager Rs 5,000 and its Managing Director Rs 6,000 a month. Government pay was outstandingly handsome.
Some Facts Today
Today a 35-year-old District Collector is paid Rs 20,000 a month, a 50-year-old Secretary to a State government gets Rs 34,000 and the Chief Secretary Rs 38,000. The RBI Governor and the SBI Chairman do just a bit better at about Rs 44,000.Now, look at private sector salaries. A brand new graduate joining a call centre gets Rs 20,000, while a 30-year-old Systems Analyst is paid Rs 60,000 per month. What will motivate youth to join in national governance?
At upper levels the situation is extraordinary. A private sector general manager is paid Rs 300,000 a month. Compare the salary of his college mate who got into the IAS. But look at the disparity between the salary of an Executive Director of a private sector bank, probably paid about Rs 10,00,000 a month, and that of the RBI Governor.
Or, for that matter between that of the CEO of a private sector company, probably paid Rs 15,00,000 a month, and that of the Chief Secretary of a State. In the financial sector the disparity ratio is over 20; in the last case the disparity ratio is 40!
Challenges of Economic Emancipation
In the last decade India has embarked on a journey of liberalisation in which the role of market is absolute. The private sector salary rates represent the forces of demand and supply. Price and wage controls cannot be resorted to because the capping of private sector wages leads to retardation of incentive to work. Controls have dysfunctional consequences, as witnessed for a major part of India's contemporary history. The supply side revolution, well under way, will be stopped in its tracks if controls are applied. Yet, as British mathematician-philosopher Alfred North Whitehead had remarked: "The major advances in civilisation are processes, which all but wreck the societies in which they occur." The runway wage inflation in the private sector, reflecting the working of a free-market economy, can have dysfunctional consequences and wreck the process of societal evolution. With that the quality of governance would go downhill. The question is how much is to be paid for good governance? Very large amounts. Lord Cornwallis had recognised this in the 1790s. How do we handle the conundrum today? If today's civil servants are paid a tenth or less of what their private sector colleagues earn, who can blame them if they are de-motivated?
If India wants good governance it has to pay for it. If, following the efficiency wages hypothesis, low wages will attract only unworthy candidates. Thus, the prognosis for India's governance looks bleak, as good candidates for superior civil service jobs seek alternative careers.
Pay Commissions
Initial thoughts on a pay commission would be that its report would be simple. It would simply increase all government sector salaries at least ten times. While that would be easy, it would be disastrous for the government that would disappear under its fiscal obligations.
The burden of supporting several million employees at vastly enhanced rates of pay is a recipe for disaster. Yet, this potential liability has to be met head-on and budgeted for. A way out is the significant shrinkage of employment in Groups B, C and D. This would be impossible for reasons political.
A pay commission could also recommend that a large fund be set up to implement golden handshakes; this amount be treated as an investment and accordingly budgeted for. The subsequent reduction in manpower would lead to significant savings.
The next Pay Commission should address the disparities in salaries. It also needs to increase by a factor of at least ten the salaries of Group A employees. Even then the senior civil servants will be earning a third or half of their private sector counterparts. It must deal with the re-structuring of the government machinery.
The price of wage disparities is psychological dysfunction among civil servants who are capable and motivated. As the supply of capable and motivated civil servants dwindles, the price could be anarchy. Serious thought must be given to the question of how much India pays for good governance.
(The author is Professor of Technology Strategy, University of Texas at Dallas. He can be contacted at majumdar@utdallas.edu)
Source: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2006/06/23/stories/2006062300891100.htm
I totally agree with the views. The Commission may kindly note the points.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with the views. The Commission may kindly note the points.
ReplyDeleteBrilliant Article. Thanks, Manisha.
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with the views. Commission may like to consider while submitting report.
ReplyDeletePAY HIKE FOR GROUP 'A' OFFICERS: QUESTION & ANSWER for discussion:
ReplyDeleteDo you feel that the pattern of pay scales for all Group A Services should be redesignated so as to attract candidates of the requisite caliber? Keeping in view some of the compensation packages being offered to fresh professionals by the private sector, what emoluments would you suggest for an entrant to a Group-A Service in Government?
The latest mean average of the salaries offered to the pass outs of all IIMs should taken as the parameter while fixing the salary of entrants to group ‘A’ service. Considering all aspects including the paying capacity of the Government a 100% increase on the present basic salary merged with DP and DA can be termed as reasonable though the same is also not at par with private sector. A calculation based on an officer posted at Mumbai (Basic Pay 8000) as on 31-12-2006 will be as follows:
A. Revision of Basic Pay:
BP= Basic Pay = 8000
DP= Dearness Pay = 4000 (50% of BP)
DP Merged with BP =12000
X= DA @ 29% of DP merged with BP =15480
Revised BP @ 2X = 30960
(The increase in the BP way will be in the
B. Revision of HRA:
The present applicable rates for different cities are 30%, 15% and 7.5%
The rates may be revised as 30%, 20% and 10% respectively.
Hence the officer in Mumbai gets Rs. 9288 per month as 30% HRA of the revised Basic Pay.
(The amount even at this rate is just adequate for a reasonably good accommodation only in major cities. It is pertinent to note that if an employee overstays in a government accommodation provided to him rent at commercial rate will be collected from him, and quiet often the rent so collected at Mumbai is more than 50000 per month. This gives a clear picture of the actual situation)
C. Revision of CCA:
The present rate should definitely be increased six fold (kindly see also the answer to question 13.1)
Hence the CCA for the officer at Mumbai will be Rs. 1800.
D. Revision of TA: TA paid to the Group ‘A’ officers is only Rs.800 per month. The present rate is fixed a decade ago when average cost of petrol in the country was less than Rs. 20 per litre whereas now the same is more than Rs.50. The amount then was sufficient for buying more than 40 litres of petrol whereas the same will not be now enough for transportation to office by ordinary bus, in cities like Bangalore. Reimbursement of cost of petrol at specified eligibility quantity, in lieu of payment of TA component in the salary should be adopted in respect of Group ‘A’ officers. Even nationalized and public sector banks provide this to their officers At the entry level the officer should be eligible for cost of 50 liters as applicable in the city of his posting. Hence if we assume that the cost of petrol in Mumbai is Rs. 50, the officer will be eligible for Reimbursement of Rs.2500.
(Those who have no vehicles may be paid a fixed TA which should be linked with petrol cost. Rs.1800 per month will be a reasonable amount to start with.)
Total Emoluments:
The sum total of all the above components (A+B+C+D) for the officer posted in Mumbai will be Rs. 44548 per month and Rs. 534576 per annum. Even this amount is not at par with the best in the entry level in private sector. In any case compensation at the minimum of at least this rate is required if the civil service is to remain manned with people as talented as it has always had.
The revision as detailed above to Group ‘A’ officers will not have any significant impact on the economy for the following reasons:
a) The Group A constitutes less than 3 per cent of the work force, and hence the financial implications will be very negligible.
b) About one forth of the amount increased will be deducted at source itself as Income Tax and educational cess etc. Hence the effective extra expenditure to the exchequer will be only three fourth of the actual increment.
c) The increased income will in turn add to the purchasing capacity of the employees. A portion of that again will go back to the Government as VAT and Service Tax. Of the amount to be reimbursed as cost of petrol a considerable portion will go to the government only by way of applicable taxes and levies.
Above all, it is not true to say that the country at present is not financially sound enough to pay decently to the higher-level officers who are implementing and supervising its unprecedented progress, forward.
Other Benefits:
In addition to what is detailed ab,ove all Group ‘A’ officials should be made entitled for:
a) Air travel eligibility in economy class on official and LTC tour. At present an officer posted in south will have to spend six days in train to attend a one day conference in Delhi.
b) Rent free BSNL land and mobile phones, Lap top computers and Internet connection. This is especially important as Group ‘A’ officers are supposed to be on duty round the clock.
c) Medical facilities to include consultation in recognised private hospitals.
d)Stay in good quality hotels on tour. The condition is pathetic at present. Hotels can be specially recognized in each place for this purpose on contractual rates.
e) At present like all other employees, Group ‘A’ officers also are entitled for LTC to hometown, with family, only once in two year block. Group ‘A’ officers are liable to be transferred to any place in India and hence may be provided this facility once every year.
f) The government needs to purchase/lease housing for Group ‘A’ officers.
g) Other further incentives to match (to the minimum level at least) those provided by private sector. Some suggestions:
1) Entertainment allowance.
2) Facility to travel abroad to any one of the specified countries (as can be arranged as special packages each year in association with national air lines) or on any luxury train such as ‘Palace on Wheels’ in lieu of one ‘LTC to anywhere in India’ in the entire career subject to minimum specified years of service, and other conditions.
The article by Sumit K. Majumdar is brillians. Personalities like him may be consulted by the commission and the government.
ReplyDeleteThe comment "PAY HIKE FOR GROUP 'A' OFFICERS: QUESTION & ANSWER for discussion" also appears very rational. However it seems that some corrections are needed in that text. The author or moderator kindly repost it after corrections.
Class 1 officers should be paid a remuneration of all inclusive -on cost to government basis - a minimum of 6 lacs rupees per year.Otherwise which meritorious candidate now will join?
ReplyDeleteAll Group officers who have completed five years in service have to be given official cars. The practice of appointing drivers can be discouraged.
ReplyDeleteIt is the rule of the market that Quality never comes cheap. If we want best man power in the higher ranks of the government machinery, we have to pay for that. While revising salaries, same yard stick cannot be applied for lower level staff and higher level officers. after all the higher level officers are there in that position only because they are more qualified and talented than the others. One of the best recruiting authority in the world has made the selection. Class one officers should be paid handsome remunerations so as to attract best candidates.
ReplyDeleteI agree fully with Mr.Sumit K. Majumdar,and with the authors of the above comments. Same yard stick shoud not be applied for lower level staff and higher level officers, since their recruitment itself is through two authorities.
ReplyDelete(UPSC & Staff Selection Commission)
This do not mean that there is no need to revise the salaries of the general government staff. It also needs to be reviewed, but compensation at the senior group (A), shall be restructured altogether, to match the best in the private sector. The financial
impact will be very less as they constitute only a small portion of the total government work force.
The above is a very lopsided view of the whole issue. The entire Government machinery is run by the so-called 'lower level staff' / general Goverment staff. The basic work of researching / gathering of information / analysing and giving the correct perspective to any issue is done by the 'general Govt. staff'. The 'higher level Officers' only affix their approval at the end of the whole exercise. In case any deviation from Rules and norms is detected at a later date, the so-called 'higher level Officers' shrug any responsibity and immediately look towards the 'general Government staff' to fix the said respeonsibility. It is the lower level staff that is made a scape goat all the time for any and every folly on the part of the 'higher level officer'. Vice-versa, when things go rightly, the said Officers ensure that they are the only ones to claim all the appreciation and rewards. So, by trying to seek for application of different yardsticks in hiking the pay scales, the 'higher level Officers are Senior Group 'A' Officers are only living upto their tricks. One does not need any great mental aptitude to go along with the remarks made by the general Government staff on any file. As no earth shaking discovery is made the Senior Group 'A ' Officers on their own, efforts to net better payscales for themselves by leaving out their colleagues, i.e., the general Govt. staff, stands proof for their selfish, self-serving attitude which is today the bane of the entire nation.
ReplyDeleteRead the above (11th) comment. My friend has wrong understanding of fixing responsibilities. in fact it is the higher officers who have to take responsibilty of the acts of their subordinates, and face the consequences. The responsibility cannot be shifted. Thesocalled 'basic work' can be done by any man of ordinery prudence and can be left mostly to computers also. Acadamic and otherwise brilliance is not needed for these work. It is not same case with the Group 'A' level officers who have to take considered decisions which will have far fetching effects, and who have to manage crises, many of the times unprecedented.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, even the author of that comment will not have a case that any person who has decided to pursue his career in the government service, will deliberately opt the lower ranks than the Group 'A' posts. They are in those positions because they were less competent than those who have been able to get through the UPSC recruitment.
If the recruitment cannot be done by the same authority, what is the justification in applying same standard of revision to the executive and non executive level employees?
Read all the comments, especially the last two. It is just a matter of fact that the salaries in the lower level of government service though not matching the entry level in certain sectors, are not very bad. But no doubt that the salaries in the higher levels are very low by any standard. The salaries at all levels need to be revised, with special emphasis on restructuring the pay and other emoluments of the Gazetted officers so as to attract the best qualified people. It is not in the interest of the presently serving Gazetted officers only. It is in the interest of the Nation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the views that very good pay and perks need to be provided to the higher level officials. The lower level employee's pays also need to be reviewed and more avenues may be given to efficient candidates from the lower ranks to come up the ladder. That way even a revision applying different parameters will also meet the ends of justice, and motivate employees at all levels.
ReplyDeletePlease read the 12th comment above.The results of the far-fetching decisions taken by our Group A Officers is there for all to see in the state of the affairs of the Nation. As far as the comment on opting for a lower rank than Group A service in the Govt. is concerned, one can only say that it shows how far removed the person is from the reality. It is only now due to the advent of Private enterprises that the general Indian populace is seeing certain degree of economic flexibility in the sense that one is better able to encourage the younger generation in dedicating time to pursue better career opportunities. Previously,the time factor alongwith economic liabilities involved in preparation and clearance the Civil Services Exams, has forced many acadmically brilliant youngsters to settle for a Grade which involved less devotion of time. Hence, sweeping statements regarding 'academic brilliance' or 'competence' do not appear to reflect extraordinary 'prudence'.
ReplyDeleteDividing the Government servants on the basis of Group A and others, while seeking for payscales on par with the private sector, only goes on to reflect the insecurity of the Group A Officers as they too are well aware of the unrecognised abilities of their subordinates. Recognition of the same will mean accepting a challenge to prove themselves better than their unfortunate subordinates of 'ordinary prudence'.
All said and done, the need of the hour is to seek for better payscales in the Government sevice. When the ordinary government staff is asking for better salaries and perks they are only comapring themselves to the equally qualified and experinced pesonnel in the provate sector. Hence, by trying to corner the maximum benefit at the expense of the other lower level Officers, let us not try to reveal the Beaureucratic attitude of stepping on another person to reach higher levels without personal merit.
The 13th comment on better promotional prospects is most welcome. Only it should be linked to regular, strictly conducted and evaluated Departmental Exams. It will provide fair oppotunity to make for the loss of oppotunity at the entry level.
The above arguement is not convincing at all. A person who join the lower ranks because of financial and other reasons still have an option to try for the Group 'A' post while in the service. Academic brilliance and ability of the directly recruited Group 'A' officers are no doubt superior than the other staff. Anyone who has had a chance to interact with government employees at different levels will certainly testify about the same. No doubt pay at all levels need to be revised, but pay and perks at the higher levels should be made to match the best in the market.
ReplyDeleteIn any case why should the other employees get offended by it as the impact is going to be small, will not affect them adversely and will only motivate them to try to achieve higher career.
Read this article I found from Yahoo answers:
ReplyDelete“The decision to constitute the Sixth Pay Commission (SPC) for central government employees has set off alarm bells in many places. The alarmist view is that the SPC will deal a severe blow to public finances of the sort dealt by the Fifth Pay Commission (FPC).
These fears are exaggerated. First, it is not true that it was the FPC that devastated public finances. Out of the increase in the combined fiscal deficit of the Centre and the states of about 3.5 percentage points in the nineties, the FPC award accounted for only one percentage point. Tax reductions and increase in interest rates did most of the damage. (Pinto and Zahir, EPW, March 6, 2004).
Secondly, the SPC promises to be even less of an ogre. Interest rates are lower today. Tax revenues are buoyant. Not least, the workforce in state governments has shrunk over the years. According to the Twelfth Finance Commission (TFC), employee strength in the states fell from 8.1 million in 1997 to 6.7 million in 2003 — a decline of 17% over six years.
This vital fact seems to have escaped those who have been screaming their heads off about governments accepting the fifth pay commission recommendation on pay hikes while ignoring its recommendation on workforce reduction of 3% per annum. Thanks to the decline in workforce, salaries as a proportion of expenditure (excluding interest and pension) fell from the peak of 41.3% in 1999-00 to 37.3% in 2002-03, about the same level as in 1997-98.
There is good news on pension payments too. Pension as a proportion of GDP in the states rose from 0.72% in 1996-97 to 1.24% in 2000-01— and it stayed at that level for the next two years. Since 2004, there has been a switch from defined benefit to defined contribution payments. Along with the decline in work force in states, this should cause pension payments to trend downwards over time.
We do not have current data on the workforce at the Centre. But the trends in pay and allowances are altogether reassuring (see the accompanying table). Pay and allowances in 2004-05 fell off their peaks of 1997-98 and 1998-99 and indeed were lower than before the FPC award. In the face of these improvements, it is hard to argue that governments at the Centre or the states do not have the capacity to pay more.”
Manisha, Post the above comment (Text from yahoo answers) as a seperate posting for discussions.
ReplyDeleteWhile revising the pay & perks of the employees, the authorities need to be realistic in approach . In fixing the rates of HRA, and CCA, even at present they are following classification of cities which was done a few decades ago. An example is Bangalore, as pointed out by authors of some of the comments above. House rents in that city is among the highest in the country and are at par with ( if not more than ) the house rent in Delhi and Mumbai. The rents in Kolkatta and Chennai are in fact less than 50% of the rents in Bangalore. Still government pay HRA of 30% at Chennai and Kolkatta, but HRA in Bangalore is only 15%…..! If the govt. can not provide it for financial reasons, how can the government expect the employees to meet it from the megre salary they get….?
ReplyDeleteBus fare in B’lore is almost two and a half, times more than Chennai, petrol cost is more by about Rs.5 per litre, and these difference reflect also on the price of every other products and services. (Recent reports says that 9 out of the countries 40 richest people live in Bangalore whereas in Chennai it is just one and in Kolkatta, Nil). These are certainly clear indicators of the cost of living. Very recently only Bangalore was declared as ‘A1′ city for the purpose of CCA , and the hike was a great amount of Rs 60…….! In any case it is difficult to understand the logic behind declaring a city as ‘A1′ for CCA purpose and in a lower class for house rent rates.
TA paid now is irrespective of the petrol or transport cost in each place. There is a difference of almost 10 rupees in petrol cost in Delhi and Bangalore, but the TA rates are equel. TA should be linked with petrol price in each place.
There is a big hue and cry about the appointment of the Sixth Central Pay Commission. The corporate India is scared that, the pay revision for the ‘Babus’ will derail the economy altogether. On the other hand the government employees complain that the present salary and other emoluments are not sufficient for leading a decent life, especially in the post liberalization era of high pay packets.
ReplyDeleteOn a realistic analysis, it can be seen that, the main problem in the Government service is that compensation at the senior levels is highly uncompetitive while the salaries at the lower ranks are not too bad when compared with market levels. In the Group 'A' level, where the officials have to take important decisions, which affects the welfare of the general public, and implement important schemes and programs, for the development, and growth of the nation, there is indeed a need to recruit the best available talent. The civil service in India has always been manned with the cream of the talent. The recruitment by UPSC is known to be the toughest in the world, and the training provided is considered as among the best. Even in spite of that there are complaints from many corners that the bureaucracy in the country is not efficient and is slow paced.
Are They Inefficient?
The actual problem in fact is, not with the quality of manpower, but with the system and procedure which is unnecessarily complicated, and which can only be addressed by administrative reforms. It is not correct to blame the officers or question their efficiency or integrity, for delays or hurdles in delivering, which in fact is mainly due to the administrative system, which needs to be thoroughly modified. Of course there is a question of attitude also, which can be improved by steps including betterment of working conditions. In fact Government officers themselves are the most affected victims of the system. A good example is the Pay Commission itself. Pay revisions for the government employees are due once in ten years. The Fifth Pay Commission had stated that the Sixth Commission be appointed by 2003 so that new pay scales could be made effective from 1.1.2006. The Sixth Commission was set up in October 2006 only, ie, ten months later to the date on which the revision should have actually been implemented! The Commission has been given a time frame of 18 months to submit their report. The Fifth Commission has taken 33 months to submit their report. Even if the present commission submits its report within time, it takes several months for the Government to take a decision. Who is to be blamed here, - the employees, who are at the receiving end?
Another example is the medical benefits provided under the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) on medical insurance basis on payment of a monthly subscription. You have to undergo a long course of torture under the present system if you are to avail the facilities. You have to consult first a doctor in your CGHS dispensary and get a reference to consult the relevant specialist, only in a government hospital. By the time you get the reference, the time will be over for that day for you to go and stand in the long queue of the Government hospital. So on the second day you stand in the queue and consult the specialist. If he asks you to undergo any tests, you cannot go directly to the clinical lab. Before that you have to obtain an endorsement for the tests by your CGHS doctor. It will be practically impossible to get it the same day as the CGHS dispensaries work up to 1’clock noon only. Hence on the third day you meet your CGHS doctor, and get his endorsement to have the tests done at a CGHS recognised lab. Can you now proceed straight to the lab? No, before that you have to go to your office and submit a written request for permission to undergo the tests. So that day also is over. Next day you are able to give the blood sample for testing and get your report by the evening. The fifth day you have to show the reports to the specialist in the Government general hospital. He prescribes the medicines. You have to now go back to your dispensary for the medicines, before One’o clock, noon, which will be already over by the time you consult the government doctor. Hence the next day you have to go again to the CGHS dispensary, and get endorsement by your doctor for the medicines, and then submit the prescription in the medicine counter, which can be at another part of the city. Usually common drugs such as Paracetamol only will be readily available and all other medicines will have to be locally purchased by them. So they will note down the prescription and ask you to come and collect the medicine on the day after the next. At last you get the medicines on the eighth day, if you are fortunate. All these visits to CGHS and Government hospital involve reporting and taking endorsement from various counters, and long queues. Later, for getting reimbursement of your medical bills, you have to do a lot of paper work, and repeat the same route as mentioned above, this time taking signatures. There is no exaggeration in what is detailed above which is the real situation at present. Who is to be blamed? Definitely not the CGHS beneficiary employee, nor the employees of the CGHS. The procedure was not this bad earlier, when the beneficiaries were permitted to have specialist consultation in recognised private hospitals also, after getting a reference covering “consultation and all necessary tests”, and could go directly to the pvt. hospital without any permission from the office, have the consultation and required tests done immediately, and the cost at CGHS rates were directly paid to the hospital by the Government. The “employee friendly” NDA government has made the changes, making the facilities practically unavailable, as medical attention is an immediate requirement on one’s falling sick.
A common man approaching a government office for some purpose if faced with similar complicated procedure and consequent delays, will not bother to listen about the reasons and would blame it on the inefficiency, lack of integrity and negative attitude of the concerned employees. The problem can only be solved by administrative reforms to simplify the procedure. It is a policy matter and has to be a political decision. The employees, who are the most demoralised lot because of the present scenario, would be the happiest to welcome the changes.
Need For Revision
It is to be noted that, not too long ago, the salaries in the private sector was not as attractive as they are now. Many of the serving government officers have joined the service when they were having other options also. They should not be punished nor made to regret for having chosen to become a public servant than serving some ‘only profit’ motivated private enterprises. The Govt. official also have to live, bring up and educate his children among those who are employed in the private sector or well paid public sector organisations. At present for even a Group ‘A’ officer it would be difficult to afford to send his child, to an IIM or any other premier institute, which is sponsored or established by the Government itself, whereas those who being less competent were not able to make it to the Civil Services, and hence joined the public or private sector, would be able to provide quality education for their children.
Regarding other benefits such as promotional avenues also, the private sector, has emerged as much more attractive. In the private sector (especially in software, banking, Telecommunications, Insurance etc.) a qualified employee gets promoted to the next level in about three years, whereas in the government the same takes many more years. This will definitely demoralize the presently serving officers, and would fail to attract the cream of talent to join also. In fact there has been only a reduction in the facilities provided to the Govt. employees. Suspension of LTC a few years back is an example. For the new entrants to the service, even the pension, which was once considered as an attractive factor in the Govt., has been made contributory, resulting in an actual decrease of 10% in the net salary. Even their savings through the Provident Fund attracts 0.5% less interest, than the private sector. (The govt. incurs huge loss to provide for this higher interest to the private sector). Moreover, the salary of the Govt. employee is as such subject to income tax, whereas in the private sector, they split the salaries in to components and reimbursements so as to avoid income tax to the maximum.
The bureaucracy being adequately paid is, in fact, in the interest and for the welfare of the large sections of the community, and promotes equity and social justice, for the reasons including the following:
a) It is the Govt. machinery, which has to formulate and implement schemes and programs for the welfare and benefit of the larger community. Hence it is necessary that the Govt. machinery be manned with people with ability and quality.
b) Govt. provides and ensures employment opportunities for the talented among the under privileged sections including SC/ST, OBC, physically handicapped, etc. The well-paid jobs in the private sector, by and large are accessible to the convent / public school educated elite layer of the society. There are no prescribed criteria for the recruitment in to the private sector employment. So the Govt. sector remains the only avenue available for the children of the ordinary man, to come up in life by one’s own effort. If salaries in the Govt. are not made at par with that of the private sector, it only adds to widen the gap between the elite and the poor sections of the society.
c) Being underpaid would demoralize the public servant, which in turn would slow down the process of development.
d) An adequately paid civil service would be less or not corrupt, which again is beneficial for the community.
The present scenario
A Group ‘A’ officer at the entry level, at present is appointed on a basic pay of Rs. 8000/ per month. Apart from that he gets paid dearness pay (DP), Dearness allowance (DA), Traveling Allowance (TA), House Rent Allowance (HRA) and City Compensatory Allowance (CCA) if applicable. The sum total of the salary and all these components per annum will be around Rs.200,000/- for an officer posted in a major city, which is meager, by any standard, and which is less than the entry level pay of an employee of average caliber in the private sector.
CCA at the highest rate today is Rs. 300/- only, which provides an amount of less than Rs.10/- per day for a family in cities including Mumbai, Delhi, and Bangalore, where the cost of living is very high compared to other towns and villages. The CCA for different cities will have to be increased at least six fold of what it is today. There is also a need for changing the basis of classification of cities. City living cost is directly related to factors including the general income of the residents, price of petroleum products in that city etc. A very good example is Bangalore, the Software capital of India, where very high salaries are paid to people in the software and related fields, which constitutes a large section of the residents. Naturally the pay in other private sector areas also is on the higher side in that city. Apart from that, the price of petroleum products in the city is also among the highest in the country, resulting in a corresponding increase in the cost of living. But very recently only the Government increased CCA in that city to Rs. 300.
HRA even at the highest rate of 30% of the present pay scales are not enough for a decent accommodation. Again if Bangalore is taken as an example, the HRA provided for, is only 15%. In fact the average actual house rent in that city is much higher than that of some other cities where HRA is 30%. A direct recruited Group ‘A’ officer in Bangalore will get an HRA of Rs. 1800/- per month (15% of basic pay + DP) only, with which it is not possible even to get a one room accommodation with the least minimum facilities.
The TA paid to the Group ‘A’ officers is only Rs.800 per month. If the officer is residing within 1 km from the office he is not entitled for TA at all. The present rate is fixed a decade ago when average cost of petrol in the country was less than Rs. 20 per litre whereas now the same is more than Rs.50. The amount then was sufficient for buying more than 40 litres of petrol whereas the same will not be now enough for transportation to office by ordinary bus, in cities like Bangalore. TA necessarily needs to be linked with cost of petrol.
Attractive Pay Needed at Group ‘A’ Level
If the central civil service is to remain efficient, there is need to provide very good remuneration and working condition for the officials at the Group ‘A’ level which shall be at par with the private sector. Another factor to be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Govt. officers is the pay structure in public sector organizations like ONGC, Reserve Bank, Nationalized and public sector Banks, SEBI, and the oil companies. It is a fact that the selections to these organizations are easier compared to selection by UPSC. Most of the officers of these organizations have joined them on their failure to get through the civil service and other UPSC examinations. There is need to make at least the Group ‘A’ services, if not higher, at least at par with the pay and other emoluments provided by the best of such organizations. Even a 100% increase on the present gross salary would not be at par with the private sector and would fail to attract the best talent. However considering all other aspects including the paying capacity of the Government a 100% increase along with other facilities for Group ‘A’, officers can be termed as just and reasonable. A minimum and reasonable increment of 10% of Basic pay per year is to be provided defining also the number of years to be normally served in that scale on the expiry of which the employee will have to be, if not promoted to the next higher position, at least entitled to draw pay at the next higher scale. For a Group ‘A’ officer the span of tenure to be served in the entry level should not be made more than four years.
Apart from that all Group ‘A’ officials should be made entitled for:
1. Reimbursement of cost of petrol (or any other fuel) at specified eligible quantity, in lieu of payment of TA component in the salary. Even nationalized and public sector banks provide this to their officers At the entry level the officer should be eligible for cost of 50 liters as applicable in the city of his posting.
2. Air travel eligibility in economy class on official and LTC tour. At present a central government officer posted in south will have to spend six days in train to attend a one-day conference at New Delhi.
3. Rent free BSNL land and mobile phones, Lap top computers and Internet connection. This is especially important as Group ‘A’ officers are supposed to be on duty round the clock.
4. Medical facilities to include consultation in recognized private hospitals.
5. Entitlement to stay in good quality hotels on tour. The condition is pathetic at present. Hotels can be specially recognized in each place for this purpose on contractual rates.
6. At present like all other employees, Group ‘A’ officers also are entitled for LTC to hometown, with family, only once in two year block. Group ‘A’ officers are liable to be transferred to any place in India. Hence Group ‘A’ officers may be provided this facility once every year.
7. The government needs to purchase/lease housing for Group ‘A’ officers.
8. Other further incentives to match (to the minimum level at least) those provided by private sector. Some suggestions:
a) Entertainment allowance.
b) Facility to travel abroad to any one of the specified countries (as can be arranged as special packages each year in association with national air lines) or on any luxury train such as ‘Palace on Wheels’ in lieu of one ‘LTC to anywhere in India’ in the entire career subject to minimum specified years of service, and other conditions.
Comparison with State Governments pay
The central government service has always been and should always be above all other Government or local body services. People with much more competence only are able to get through the recruitment process in all levels of the central service, when compared to state or other such services This difference will always reflect on the pay structure also. Moreover, all important and key positions in the state administration are manned by officers of central services such as IAS, IPS, IFS, who also are the beneficiaries of the central pay revision. However more avenues may be provided for qualified employees with sufficient service, from the state services for deputation (and absorption also) into Central services.
Another point to be considered is that, unlike the state government and other employees, the central Govt. employees are liable to be transferred and posted at any where in the country. This causes them much difficulty financially and in other ways. The studies of their children are most affected, and for reasons related to that, quiet often the employee will have to stay apart from family again causing much expenses as he has to provide means for two households, apart from personal difficulties and emotional issues.
Special Provisions for Professionals
Scientists, Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, CAs, and other professionals wherever such professional qualifications with previous experience are prerequisite for applying for the post should be paid a special allowance similar to Non Practicing Allowance, now paid to doctors only. Otherwise it will be difficult to retain or attract talented professionals to Government service.
Special Incentives To Promote Social Welfare
The Government should set an example by itself as a model employer by providing special incentives to its employees, to promote social welfare, family planning, communal harmony and national integration. A few suggestions:
1) Recently the government has issued directions to all CBSC schools including private institutions not to collect fee from girl students who are the only surviving child of their parents. The government should set an example by providing special increment for the employees who are having only one girl child and who undergoes family planning surgery himself / herself or for spouse. This should be in addition to the increment presently available for family planning for employees having two children.
To promote national integration, inter caste and inter religious marriages should be encouraged among employees and welfare and safety of such employees should be protected by special provisions including preference in allotting Government accommodation, and relaxation of transfer rules for them.
Read 5th comment reg, pay hike.
ReplyDeleteRevised BP X 2 is not understood. On what concept it has arrived may be explained. While calculating Revised BP, IR bot taken into consideration atd DA as on 1.1.06 is 24% and not 29%.
In any case, while submitting suggestion, Paying capacity of Govt. needs to be taken into consideration. It is meant for 28 lakhs emplyees.
let us consider this formula
Basic Pay +
50% of Basic+
24% DA on Basic and DP+
10% of IR on Basic & DP+
40 % of Basic
For 8000 it comes to Rs 19280 or say a revised pay scale of 20000 with 1000 as increment.
HRA shoul be 50% of new Basic
CCA be 10% of Basic
TA be 10% of basic
Medical Allownce Rs 1000(fixed)
Mobile Allownce Rs 300 for below 8000 and 500 for above 8000
that comes to Rs.15500 and total salary comes to around 35500 per month.
Let us not forget that Govt. will not agree for such a massive revision in basic, it is allownces which will make the difference. burden will make let us
There is a big hue and cry about the appointment of the Sixth Central Pay Commission. The corporate India is scared that, the pay revision for the ‘Babus’ will derail the economy altogether. On the other hand the government employees complain that the present salary and other emoluments are not sufficient for leading a decent life, especially in the post liberalization era of high pay packets.
ReplyDeleteOn a realistic analysis, it can be seen that, the main problem in the Government service is that compensation at the senior levels is highly uncompetitive while the salaries at the lower ranks are not too bad when compared with market levels. In the Group 'A' level, where the officials have to take important decisions, which affects the welfare of the general public, and implement important schemes and programs, for the development, and growth of the nation, there is indeed a need to recruit the best available talent. The civil service in India has always been manned with the cream of the talent. The recruitment by UPSC is known to be the toughest in the world, and the training provided is considered as among the best. Even in spite of that there are complaints from many corners that the bureaucracy in the country is not efficient and is slow paced.
Are They Inefficient?
The actual problem in fact is, not with the quality of manpower, but with the system and procedure which is unnecessarily complicated, and which can only be addressed by administrative reforms. It is not correct to blame the officers or question their efficiency or integrity, for delays or hurdles in delivering, which in fact is mainly due to the administrative system, which needs to be thoroughly modified. Of course there is a question of attitude also, which can be improved by steps including betterment of working conditions. In fact Government officers themselves are the most affected victims of the system. A good example is the Pay Commission itself. Pay revisions for the government employees are due once in ten years. The Fifth Pay Commission had stated that the Sixth Commission be appointed by 2003 so that new pay scales could be made effective from 1.1.2006. The Sixth Commission was set up in October 2006 only, ie, ten months later to the date on which the revision should have actually been implemented! The Commission has been given a time frame of 18 months to submit their report. The Fifth Commission has taken 33 months to submit their report. Even if the present commission submits its report within time, it takes several months for the Government to take a decision. Who is to be blamed here, - the employees, who are at the receiving end?
Another example is the medical benefits provided under the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) on medical insurance basis on payment of a monthly subscription. You have to undergo a long course of torture under the present system if you are to avail the facilities. You have to consult first a doctor in your CGHS dispensary and get a reference to consult the relevant specialist, only in a government hospital. By the time you get the reference, the time will be over for that day for you to go and stand in the long queue of the Government hospital. So on the second day you stand in the queue and consult the specialist. If he asks you to undergo any tests, you cannot go directly to the clinical lab. Before that you have to obtain an endorsement for the tests by your CGHS doctor. It will be practically impossible to get it the same day as the CGHS dispensaries work up to 1’clock noon only. Hence on the third day you meet your CGHS doctor, and get his endorsement to have the tests done at a CGHS recognised lab. Can you now proceed straight to the lab? No, before that you have to go to your office and submit a written request for permission to undergo the tests. So that day also is over. Next day you are able to give the blood sample for testing and get your report by the evening. The fifth day you have to show the reports to the specialist in the Government general hospital. He prescribes the medicines. You have to now go back to your dispensary for the medicines, before One’o clock, noon, which will be already over by the time you consult the government doctor. Hence the next day you have to go again to the CGHS dispensary, and get endorsement by your doctor for the medicines, and then submit the prescription in the medicine counter, which can be at another part of the city. Usually common drugs such as Paracetamol only will be readily available and all other medicines will have to be locally purchased by them. So they will note down the prescription and ask you to come and collect the medicine on the day after the next. At last you get the medicines on the eighth day, if you are fortunate. All these visits to CGHS and Government hospital involve reporting and taking endorsement from various counters, and long queues. Later, for getting reimbursement of your medical bills, you have to do a lot of paper work, and repeat the same route as mentioned above, this time taking signatures. There is no exaggeration in what is detailed above which is the real situation at present. Who is to be blamed? Definitely not the CGHS beneficiary employee, nor the employees of the CGHS. The procedure was not this bad earlier, when the beneficiaries were permitted to have specialist consultation in recognised private hospitals also, after getting a reference covering “consultation and all necessary tests”, and could go directly to the pvt. hospital without any permission from the office, have the consultation and required tests done immediately, and the cost at CGHS rates were directly paid to the hospital by the Government. The “employee friendly” NDA government has made the changes, making the facilities practically unavailable, as medical attention is an immediate requirement on one’s falling sick.
A common man approaching a government office for some purpose if faced with similar complicated procedure and consequent delays, will not bother to listen about the reasons and would blame it on the inefficiency, lack of integrity and negative attitude of the concerned employees. The problem can only be solved by administrative reforms to simplify the procedure. It is a policy matter and has to be a political decision. The employees, who are the most demoralised lot because of the present scenario, would be the happiest to welcome the changes.
Need For Revision
It is to be noted that, not too long ago, the salaries in the private sector was not as attractive as they are now. Many of the serving government officers have joined the service when they were having other options also. They should not be punished nor made to regret for having chosen to become a public servant than serving some ‘only profit’ motivated private enterprises. The Govt. official also have to live, bring up and educate his children among those who are employed in the private sector or well paid public sector organisations. At present for even a Group ‘A’ officer it would be difficult to afford to send his child, to an IIM or any other premier institute, which is sponsored or established by the Government itself, whereas those who being less competent were not able to make it to the Civil Services, and hence joined the public or private sector, would be able to provide quality education for their children.
Regarding other benefits such as promotional avenues also, the private sector, has emerged as much more attractive. In the private sector (especially in software, banking, Telecommunications, Insurance etc.) a qualified employee gets promoted to the next level in about three years, whereas in the government the same takes many more years. This will definitely demoralize the presently serving officers, and would fail to attract the cream of talent to join also. In fact there has been only a reduction in the facilities provided to the Govt. employees. Suspension of LTC a few years back is an example. For the new entrants to the service, even the pension, which was once considered as an attractive factor in the Govt., has been made contributory, resulting in an actual decrease of 10% in the net salary. Even their savings through the Provident Fund attracts 0.5% less interest, than the private sector. (The govt. incurs huge loss to provide for this higher interest to the private sector). Moreover, the salary of the Govt. employee is as such subject to income tax, whereas in the private sector, they split the salaries in to components and reimbursements so as to avoid income tax to the maximum.
The bureaucracy being adequately paid is, in fact, in the interest and for the welfare of the large sections of the community, and promotes equity and social justice, for the reasons including the following:
a) It is the Govt. machinery, which has to formulate and implement schemes and programs for the welfare and benefit of the larger community. Hence it is necessary that the Govt. machinery be manned with people with ability and quality.
b) Govt. provides and ensures employment opportunities for the talented among the under privileged sections including SC/ST, OBC, physically handicapped, etc. The well-paid jobs in the private sector, by and large are accessible to the convent / public school educated elite layer of the society. There are no prescribed criteria for the recruitment in to the private sector employment. So the Govt. sector remains the only avenue available for the children of the ordinary man, to come up in life by one’s own effort. If salaries in the Govt. are not made at par with that of the private sector, it only adds to widen the gap between the elite and the poor sections of the society.
c) Being underpaid would demoralize the public servant, which in turn would slow down the process of development.
d) An adequately paid civil service would be less or not corrupt, which again is beneficial for the community.
The present scenario
A Group ‘A’ officer at the entry level, at present is appointed on a basic pay of Rs. 8000/ per month. Apart from that he gets paid dearness pay (DP), Dearness allowance (DA), Traveling Allowance (TA), House Rent Allowance (HRA) and City Compensatory Allowance (CCA) if applicable. The sum total of the salary and all these components per annum will be around Rs.200,000/- for an officer posted in a major city, which is meager, by any standard, and which is less than the entry level pay of an employee of average caliber in the private sector.
CCA at the highest rate today is Rs. 300/- only, which provides an amount of less than Rs.10/- per day for a family in cities including Mumbai, Delhi, and Bangalore, where the cost of living is very high compared to other towns and villages. The CCA for different cities will have to be increased at least six fold of what it is today. There is also a need for changing the basis of classification of cities. City living cost is directly related to factors including the general income of the residents, price of petroleum products in that city etc. A very good example is Bangalore, the Software capital of India, where very high salaries are paid to people in the software and related fields, which constitutes a large section of the residents. Naturally the pay in other private sector areas also is on the higher side in that city. Apart from that, the price of petroleum products in the city is also among the highest in the country, resulting in a corresponding increase in the cost of living. But very recently only the Government increased CCA in that city to Rs. 300.
HRA even at the highest rate of 30% of the present pay scales are not enough for a decent accommodation. Again if Bangalore is taken as an example, the HRA provided for, is only 15%. In fact the average actual house rent in that city is much higher than that of some other cities where HRA is 30%. A direct recruited Group ‘A’ officer in Bangalore will get an HRA of Rs. 1800/- per month (15% of basic pay + DP) only, with which it is not possible even to get a one room accommodation with the least minimum facilities.
The TA paid to the Group ‘A’ officers is only Rs.800 per month. If the officer is residing within 1 km from the office he is not entitled for TA at all. The present rate is fixed a decade ago when average cost of petrol in the country was less than Rs. 20 per litre whereas now the same is more than Rs.50. The amount then was sufficient for buying more than 40 litres of petrol whereas the same will not be now enough for transportation to office by ordinary bus, in cities like Bangalore. TA necessarily needs to be linked with cost of petrol.
Attractive Pay Needed at Group ‘A’ Level
If the central civil service is to remain efficient, there is need to provide very good remuneration and working condition for the officials at the Group ‘A’ level which shall be at par with the private sector. Another factor to be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Govt. officers is the pay structure in public sector organizations like ONGC, Reserve Bank, Nationalized and public sector Banks, SEBI, and the oil companies. It is a fact that the selections to these organizations are easier compared to selection by UPSC. Most of the officers of these organizations have joined them on their failure to get through the civil service and other UPSC examinations. There is need to make at least the Group ‘A’ services, if not higher, at least at par with the pay and other emoluments provided by the best of such organizations. Even a 100% increase on the present gross salary would not be at par with the private sector and would fail to attract the best talent. However considering all other aspects including the paying capacity of the Government a 100% increase along with other facilities for Group ‘A’, officers can be termed as just and reasonable. A minimum and reasonable increment of 10% of Basic pay per year is to be provided defining also the number of years to be normally served in that scale on the expiry of which the employee will have to be, if not promoted to the next higher position, at least entitled to draw pay at the next higher scale. For a Group ‘A’ officer the span of tenure to be served in the entry level should not be made more than four years.
Apart from that all Group ‘A’ officials should be made entitled for:
1. Reimbursement of cost of petrol (or any other fuel) at specified eligible quantity, in lieu of payment of TA component in the salary. Even nationalized and public sector banks provide this to their officers At the entry level the officer should be eligible for cost of 50 liters as applicable in the city of his posting.
2. Air travel eligibility in economy class on official and LTC tour. At present a central government officer posted in south will have to spend six days in train to attend a one-day conference at New Delhi.
3. Rent free BSNL land and mobile phones, Lap top computers and Internet connection. This is especially important as Group ‘A’ officers are supposed to be on duty round the clock.
4. Medical facilities to include consultation in recognized private hospitals.
5. Entitlement to stay in good quality hotels on tour. The condition is pathetic at present. Hotels can be specially recognized in each place for this purpose on contractual rates.
6. At present like all other employees, Group ‘A’ officers also are entitled for LTC to hometown, with family, only once in two year block. Group ‘A’ officers are liable to be transferred to any place in India. Hence Group ‘A’ officers may be provided this facility once every year.
7. The government needs to purchase/lease housing for Group ‘A’ officers.
8. Other further incentives to match (to the minimum level at least) those provided by private sector. Some suggestions:
a) Entertainment allowance.
b) Facility to travel abroad to any one of the specified countries (as can be arranged as special packages each year in association with national air lines) or on any luxury train such as ‘Palace on Wheels’ in lieu of one ‘LTC to anywhere in India’ in the entire career subject to minimum specified years of service, and other conditions.
Comparison with State Governments pay
The central government service has always been and should always be above all other Government or local body services. People with much more competence only are able to get through the recruitment process in all levels of the central service, when compared to state or other such services This difference will always reflect on the pay structure also. Moreover, all important and key positions in the state administration are manned by officers of central services such as IAS, IPS, IFS, who also are the beneficiaries of the central pay revision. However more avenues may be provided for qualified employees with sufficient service, from the state services for deputation (and absorption also) into Central services.
Another point to be considered is that, unlike the state government and other employees, the central Govt. employees are liable to be transferred and posted at any where in the country. This causes them much difficulty financially and in other ways. The studies of their children are most affected, and for reasons related to that, quiet often the employee will have to stay apart from family again causing much expenses as he has to provide means for two households, apart from personal difficulties and emotional issues.
Special Provisions for Professionals
Scientists, Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, CAs, and other professionals wherever such professional qualifications with previous experience are prerequisite for applying for the post should be paid a special allowance similar to Non Practicing Allowance, now paid to doctors only. Otherwise it will be difficult to retain or attract talented professionals to Government service.
Special Incentives To Promote Social Welfare
The Government should set an example by itself as a model employer by providing special incentives to its employees, to promote social welfare, family planning, communal harmony and national integration. A few suggestions:
1) Recently the government has issued directions to all CBSC schools including private institutions not to collect fee from girl students who are the only surviving child of their parents. The government should set an example by providing special increment for the employees who are having only one girl child and who undergoes family planning surgery himself / herself or for spouse. This should be in addition to the increment presently available for family planning for employees having two children.
To promote national integration, inter caste and inter religious marriages should be encouraged among employees and welfare and safety of such employees should be protected by special provisions including preference in allotting Government accommodation, and relaxation of transfer rules for them.
THERE CAN BE NO COMPARISON WITH THE WORKING OF THE GOVT SERVANTS AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES. THIER ROLES ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT. ALL THAT A PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES DOES IS DRIVEN ENTIRELY BY AND ALSO LEADS TO HIS OWN BENEFITS. BOTH MONETARY AND OTHERS.BETTER HE PERFORMS THE BETTER HE GETS FOR HIMSELF. THE KEY WORD HERE IS “HIMSELF”. WHAT A GOVT EMPLOYEE DOES ESSENTIALLY RELATES TO POLICY MAKING, MOITORING,REGULATION, IMPLEMENTATION AND EXECUTION. HE ALSO DEFENDS OUR COUNTRY AGAINST ALL KINDS OF THREATS, NOT ONLY MILITARY BUT ALSO DIPLOMATIC, ECONOMIC AND MANY MORE THAT ARE EIGTHER INCIDENTAL OR PERPETUAL. IN SHORT, HIS WORK SETS THE INDICATORS USED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO QUANTIFY THEIR OPERATIONS IN A COUNTRY. HIS WORK ACTUALLY DETERMINES WHAT KIND OF PLAYING FIELD IS AVAILABLE TO ANY PRIVATE SECTOR TO OPERATE. GOVERNMENT SERVANT IS THUS THE MOST CRUCIAL LINK THAT DETERMINES THE SMOOTH ADMINISTRATION. THUS THE NEED TO EMPLOY THE BEST TALENT WITH THE GOVT CAN NEVER BE OVER EMPHASISED. AND THE ADAGE ” ONLY MONKEYS WORK FOR PEANUTS” HOLDS TRUE EVEN FOR THE GOVT. BUT CAN YOU REALLY AFFORD “MONKEYS” RUNNIG AND MANAGING ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED ROLES?? IT MAY BE OK TO EXPERIMENT WITH “MONKEY-PEANUT” PHENOMENON IN PRIVATE SECTOR BUT CERTAINLY NOT WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH CRITICAL AREAS OF MANAGING THE COUNTRY. THE DELINE THAT WE SEE IN THE FUNCTIONAL AREAS OF THE GOVERNANCE IS A WARNING ENOUGH TO PUT FORWARD A CASE FOR THE RETAINING THE BEST TALENTS IN THE GOVT. THAT THERE IS DECLINE IN THE LEVELS OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE GOVT SERVANTS AND THAT THERE IS FLIGHT OF THE BEST TALENTS AWAY FROMTHE GOVT IS A VERY POWERFUL ARGUMENT FOR THE BEST COMPENSATION VAILABLE IN THE COUNTRY FOR GOVT SERVANTS. THE GOVT SERVANT IS THE EXECUTIVE MACHINERY OF THE ANY COUNTRY. THAT THIS MACHINERY NEEDS TO BE WELL OILED AND BEST MAINTAINED NEEDS NO EMPHASIS.
ReplyDeleteHappened to read all the above comments. Most of the comments are absolutely wrong! Take a few for example:
ReplyDelete“Civil services exam is one of the toughest in the world”. It appears that the commentator has done some ‘wonders’ by clearing the civil services exam. How many times in the past has the UPSC failed to draw a merit list due to shortage of candidates with requisite calibre? But this has happened many a time in the past due to shortage of candidates with desirable caliber and quality while selecting candidates for the armed forces. A merit list is always drawn by the UPSC to fill up the Group-A/B vacancies corollary being civil services exam is not one of the toughest in the world. Had it been the case, there should not be any reservation in the selection procedure and many posts would have left unfilled due to lack of candidates with extraordinary brilliance.
Even in some cases the exams conducted by the SSC is more difficult than the CSE conducted by the UPSC. One cannot clear the SSC exams if one is not excellent in English and Arithmetic. Whereas English is just a qualifying subject in the UPSC exams, knowledge in Arithmetic is immaterial. There are many instances where the candidates are unable to clear the SSC exams but they are able to clear the UPSC’s CSE exam. Can anybody challenge this fact?
SSC was created not to select candidates with low level talent/academic brilliance, but to share the burden of UPSC which was unable to conduct so many exams during a year. SSC is known as the world’s largest recruiting agency in terms of examining the number of candidates for various groups of services.
Based on the above arguments, determining the pay scales of employees on the basis of the entry level exams would be irrational and illogical.
Pay Commission should consider treating all groups of employees evenly and equally by offering a singly entry level pay to all categories of employees from a low level Peon to a Group-A officer. This will attract candidates with ‘requisite caliber’ at all levels of services and remove the unnecessary classification of services. It will also remove all sorts of discrimination and follow the principle of equal pay for equal work. Everybody is supposed to work for 8 hours a day and nobody puts any extra efforts to discharge his assigned duties.
Unemployment and underemployment are rampant in our country. Given the security of tenure, housing, medical, education, retirement package etc. available in the government sector, candidates with ‘requisite calibre’ will be available to the government at all levels and at all times.
Another example – “Group 'A' level officers have to take considered decisions which will have far fetching effects, and who have to manage crises, many of the times unprecedented”.
Is the Group-A officers authorized to take decisions which will have far fetching effects on the society? If that is the case, then what will our legislators and cabinet do? What crisis have our Group-A officers managed so far? The Kashmir issue? Insurgency in various parts of India? Earthquake in Uttar Kashi? Super Cyclone in Orissa? Sunami in the South? Can anybody tell what important crises have been managed by these Group-A officers so far?
One time achievement and lifelong enjoyment! Gather materials, take coaching, and prepare hard for about two years. In the third year you will become a Group-A officer provided you have a bit of good luck. And you will continue to accumulate flab throughout your long career. The Pay Commission should devise a formula by which it can shed the flab of the babus by putting them through rigorous litmus tests several times during their career.
Departmental exams should not be conducted to select candidates for higher posts but to examine the competence of a person to continue to hold a post. How do you feel about that?
About the last comment:
ReplyDelete"Even in some cases the exams conducted by the SSC is more difficult than the CSE conducted by the UPSC. One cannot clear the SSC exams if one is not excellent in English and Arithmetic. Whereas English is just a qualifying subject in the UPSC exams, knowledge in Arithmetic is immaterial. There are many instances where the candidates are unable to clear the SSC exams but they are able to clear the UPSC’s CSE exam. Can anybody challenge this fact?"
I have never heard anything more foolish.
"Is the Group-A officers authorized to take decisions which will have far fetching effects on the society? If that is the case, then what will our legislators and cabinet do? What crisis have our Group-A officers managed so far? The Kashmir issue? Insurgency in various parts of India? Earthquake in Uttar Kashi? Super Cyclone in Orissa? Sunami in the South? Can anybody tell what important crises have been managed by these Group-A officers so far?"
"The Kashmir issue?": Kashmir still remain as an integral part of India despite all attempts by the enemies of the country.No?
"Insurgency in various parts of India?":
who can say the same is not effectively managed and checked....? Punjab.....? Assam......? North East.....?
"Earthquake in Uttar Kashi? Super Cyclone in Orissa? Sunami in the South?": Crises management during all such natural calamities are appreciated even by international agencies.
The authoor's credentials are well clear from his comments. He has written and got qualified through the SSC as it is tougher than UPSC...........!
"Is the Group-A officers authorized to take decisions which will have far fetching effects on the society?"
ReplyDeleteYes. sir. Very much yes. An example is the post of District Magistrate / deputy Commissioner / District Collector.
"Is the Group-A officers authorized to take decisions?"
ReplyDeleteWhat about a doctor in Government service ? Is his not the final word as far as his field is concerned?
Exerts from an article by: Subir Gokarn,chief economist, Crisil.
ReplyDeletePublished in Business Standard ,January 01, 2007.
Government salaries: Most people who have expressed a view on the issue think that the Sixth Pay Commission will set back the process of fiscal consolidation. It will, indeed, do so if it follows the convention of raising government pay scales across the board. But, if it were to adopt an approach that is more in tune with the current economic scenario, in particular, with the pattern of demand-supply imbalances in the markets for several kinds of specialised skills, it could stem what appears to me to be an impending crisis.
The gap between market and government compensation structures for specialised skills is so wide now that the government will have increasing difficulty retaining its existing professional cadres, let alone attracting new entrants. At the same time, the government pays way above market wages for a whole range of completely obsolete skills. Pro-rata adjustments will only exacerbate the problem.
So, will the Sixth Pay Commission take the bull by the horns and structure pay scales in a way that is more reflective of market conditions? I am not arguing for an equalisation across private and public sectors, merely for consistency, which is necessary to retain and attract absolutely critical talent and skills. We must do everything we can to avoid a situation in which government employees are either totally incompetent or totally corrupt or, worse, both.
In one of the comments above it is stated that ".......the exams conducted by the SSC is more difficult than the CSE conducted by the UPSC.........There are many instances where the candidates are unable to clear the SSC exams but they are able to clear the UPSC’s CSE exam."
ReplyDeleteAs a person working as a faculty member with an organization coaching candidates for Staff selection commission and other competitive examination, what I have noticed is that the first preference of meritorious candidates always had been, and still continues to be the Civil Service and other exams by UPSC. Those who fail, try mostly to pass the probationary officers test by banks, or similar tests by PSUs. The third choice is clerical positions with nationalised banks. Those who are not able to make any the three above only tries the recruitment by Staff Selection Commission. Mostly this category contains those who failed to get employed in the private sector. It is not the same case with the direct recruits to higher levels. They are certainly "the cream of the talent” The heavy pay packets offered to many such officers who in recent days quit the government service to join private sector is proof of this.
I am indeed in favour of revision of pay scales at all levels. But at the same time I feel that merit should always be honoured.
THE AUTHOR OF THE ABOVE COMMENT IS DEFINITELY A FRAUD!!
ReplyDeleteTo the author of the comment just above this:
ReplyDeletewhy getting angry, man....? It is a matter of common knowledge, that those who seek employment in the public sector prefers (if they feel cofident enough) CSE or other Cadre (IES, ILS, ICLS etc.)selections by UPSC. The second choice indeed is public sector organisations in the officer or lower grades. Those who are not able to make the same, or those who do not feel confident enogh to try them usually settle for the Staff selection commission recruitements. There is no dispute regarding that. however this does not mean that SSC exams are easy to get throgh. It just means that UPSC selection is the toughest.
Cool down man. Facts remain facts.
On perusal of all the above comments and many other articles published elsewhere, I am of the opinion that the country has to pay well for good governance, especially to the higher group officers. There had been doubts raised by many, as to whether we can afford to do so. The answer is yes, we can, and we have to. More important should be the question whether we can afford to compromise on the quality of manpower required to run the government machinery in the country. As rightly pointed out by many, a just and reasonable hike of 100% to the higher group officers will not have much impact on such a large economy like ours.
ReplyDeleteApart from the revision of pay the government should also provide other attractive schemes for LTC, medical benefit, air travel entitlement, entitlement to stay in good hotels on official tours, and access to modern communication equipments and services such as mobile phone, internet etc., to retain and attract best merit. The suggestion to allow travel abroad or on luxury trains such as ‘Palace on wheels’ are very suitable and are not going to cost any considerable burden on the government. Bear in mind that almost all good private companies provide Leave Travel Abroad with family for their senior executives. The same can also be arranged as packages in association with national airlines or on reciprocate basis with willing nations. For the luxury trains a small percentage of seats can be reserved for this purpose.
Providing vehicles, or helping them to acquire vehicles are another such step. Lately the government has been discouraging even the purchase of official cars. It is very pathetic that senior government officers have to come to office in mopeds and crowded public buses. It is absolutely necessary that they should be in such a position to command respect in their private and social life also, if they are to command respect in their official capacity. (Some may argue that the same is not needed as their designation itself is that ‘public servants’. Such arguments just can hold good for the sake of those arguments only) All the group ‘A’ officers on completion of their probation may be provided with a car which can be used for official as well as private use. There is no need to provide driver and fuel for the private use except a monthly quota of petrol to be provided in lieu of the TA component in their salaries. Otherwise the government may provide interest free loans to all such officers. If contractual rates are arrived at with car manufactures for this purpose, the financial impact would not be much.
Another proposal found in the blog about making attestation of documents by Gazzetted officers chargeable with a specified fee and/or designating all Gazzetted officers of the central government as Notaries under the Noteries act, also seems very good. This will add to the income of the officers without casting any burden on the exchequer. Moreover it adds revenue to the Government as well. This will also add more dignity and status to the officers and attract more good candidates to the service. Further, in the present days when there is a price for everything in the government and outside, there is no justifcation for keeping attestation only a free service. As pointed out by many, the officers who are not now bound to perform the attestation would not hesitate to do so once this system is introduced.
My suggestion about the pay revision of the general staff of the government service is that, along with pay revision, there is also the need for downsizing the work force and implementing other schemes to reduce cost of administration and employment, in such a manner that the total impact of such revision apart from inflation adjustment, should be nil or minimal.
There is no doubt, to get good governance, we have to employ talented, capable, officers in the cadres for postings in higher positions. We cannot do so without paying good salary and perks, for the simple reason that talent or merit never comes cheap. Most of the presently serving officers, who undoubtedly were the toppers among their academic batches, and who have joined the civil service out winning the others, are now regretting about their decision to join the government service.
ReplyDeleteMany such officers are leaving the service, frustrated. The country has heavily invested for imparting the best training to them. Seniors among them have acquired good experience, which can be of great value for the country. They are also having knowledge of important matters passing of which to the outsiders will not be in the best interests of the nation. Hence it is in the greater interests of the nation that we should try to retain them.
In the small state Kerala, in the recent days about half a dozen of senior officers having exceptional caliber and vast experience had quit the service. It is a national phenomenon now. Many officers are opting for deputation abroad in UN, World Bank, ADB etc. also. The average of the compensation offered to such officers from outside is 8 to 10 times of what they are paid in the service. The country only will have to suffer if the drain of such talent is allowed to continue.
The country has to pay well for the higher-ranking officers and such posts should be made attractive so as to make them the dream of the best talented youth.
Hence I agree with all the proposals for better treatment and special pay and working conditions for the Group A officers. It is not for the benefit of just the officers, but also of me, you, and the generations to come. I pity the mindset of those who think that there is no necessity for having good talent in the government service, and the better talent should go to the private sector. I can only say such people do not care about the country.
I have a further proposal regarding the retirement age of the Group A officers. The retirement age for direct recruit Group A officers should be made 65 years. This will be beneficial for the government in the following ways:
1) The country can make more use of their experience gathered over years. Presently many such officers are given extension of tenure after 60 because the government thinks their service much valuable.
2) This will help attracting better candidates and also in retaining present officers.
3) The government will have to pay pension for 5 years less for such officers.
4) The retirement age for senior cadre officers in many developed countries are above 60.
5) The retirement age for judges of the upper judiciary is 65.
About the above comments:
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with the concept and logic behind the proposal to increase the retirement age of 'Grp.A' officers.
However, instead of raising the retirement age of 'Grp.A' officers as such, it would be better to offer them to continue as such or to accept other suitable positions maching their learning and experince, from a pool of identified posts, on contract basis for a term of 3 years (renewable in exceptional cases for a second tenure). The officers shall not be eligible for pension during such period.
'60' in the present world is not to be considered as 'old age', and there is no justification in wasting the talent and experince of officers from that age without making good further use of it.
The article by Sumit K. Majumdar is partially correct. He has given the views on one side of the government machenary i.e. group A officer. To run a system, the reqirements of other groups can not be ignored. There are thousands or lacs of deserving candidates, who could not join Gruop A services due to limited number of seets compromise to join lower grades. Even the ground reality is that the only 10% of group A works sincerely.
ReplyDeletethanxa lot for thepity thats been shown by Mr. Antony. But y it is for officers only why not for below officer ranks? There is lot of disparity in pay and perks between these two categories. There is a high gap between these two categories. First that should be justified. Then u talk abt officers mr. Antony.
ReplyDeleteRead below Extracts from an article by Mr. C.K.G. Nair, Director, (Development Policy) Planning Commission, New Delhi, published in ‘The Hindu- Business Line, February 3, 2006:
ReplyDelete“But also remember that 40 per cent of the top-level managers in the corporate sector de-monopolised in the last decade have migrated from the babudom and are producing immense results for those private corporates.
Similarly, the Singapore-Hong Kong experience with a substantially hiked pay and perquisite structure has been the main reason for their success in promoting responsive administration. Probably what is needed is grain-chaff management and deciding the pay and perquisites accordingly.”
The experiment of Singapore - Hong Kong will perfectly work for India too. The pay (basic) for a new entrant to Group A shall not be less than 30000/ month.
ReplyDeleteYes, I also think 30000/ basic is just and reasonable. (remember that there will be no DA,DP when the revision is made)
ReplyDeleteRead this article by Lt gen Harwant singh on Pay commissions
ReplyDeleteThe Tribune 17 Feb 2007
Defence Forces and Pay Panels
Persistently wronged in the past
Lt-Gen Harwant Singh ( Retd )
The government has constituted the Sixth Pay Commission to review the
pay and allowances etc of central government employees. Many
economists have questioned the wisdom of constituting a pay commission
at this stage and phase of the country's economy. Be that as it may,
here we are concerned with the expectations and hopes of the defence
personnel who have been persistently wronged in the past.
The defence forces constitute nearly forty percent of the central
government employees; their officers, forming the largest officer
cadre amongst the central services. Consequently, better part of the
exertions of a pay commission ought to relate to their case. The Fifth
Pay
Commission's report runs into over 2100 pages, in three volumes, out
of which, just over 50 pages pertain to the case of defence forces.
The Commission assembled a staff of nearly 150 officers to assist it,
in working out the details of pay, allowances, etc of central
government employees, and prepare the report. It took officers from
Postal Service, BSF, Forest Service, etc for this task,but none from
the defence services. The Committee of secretaries constituted to
review the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission, took an
officer from the police on the committee, but none from the defence
services. Besides much else, the Commission gave a brigadier more
pension than a major-general.
A brief review of the attitude of the previous pay commissions and the
government, towards the defence forces would be in order.
The Post War Committee, ostensibly to rationalize the pay structure of
the armed forces, linked it to that of the civil services as
determined, basing on the report of the First Pay Commission. On the
pretext of simplicity, 'all inclusive' pay was introduced; withdrawing
all allowances.
No such reduction was introduced in the case of other civil services.
This came to be known as New Pay Code, which was not applied to the
King's Commissioned Officers, ( KCIOs) Since they formed the top
echelons in the army then, their silence was bought in this manner.
Later some allowances had to be re-introduced. In the case of those
below officer rank, their pay
was dropped by one third. However, they were given a princely sum of
Rs 5 per month to compensate for hardships of military life, but there
was nosuch relief for officers.
Surprisingly, the case of defence services was not looked at by the
pay commission, but by a departmental committee of the MoD. Same
practice was followed in the case of the Second Pay Commission and
nothing came of it. The Third Pay Commission was, for the first time,
entrusted with the task of determining pay and allowances of defence
personnel. The
Commission wanted to hear the defence services case directly from the
armed forces. However, the MoD came up with the preposterous
contention that the,requirement of discipline in the armed forces does
not permit them to put up their case direct to the Pay Commission.?
Further the Pay Commission was not required to go into the issue of
service conditions of defence personnel but was to take these as
'given.' Equally unbelievable is the acceptance of this untenable and
absurd stance of the MoD by the defence forces on the one hand and by
the Commission on the other.
This methodology resulted in the creeping back of the 'all inclusive'
concept with the attendant disadvantages and washing away of the
corrections that had been brought in to soften the 'all inclusive'
character of the pay structure.
The Third Pay Commission, after examinations of the advantages and
disadvantages of military career, came up with the incredulous
conclusion that advantages outweigh advantages. Truncated careers,
extremely limited promotions, long separations from families,
limited family accommodation in peace stations, hard living conditions
in uncongenial and difficult areas, risk to life and limb and a
hundred other travails, which are associated with military life and
recognized the world over, were seen as great benefits of military
career. In every country of the world these travails are termed as 'X'
factor and fully compensated
through pay, perks, pensions and relief in income tax etc, but not in
India.
No other country in the world during the last hundred years has been
continuously in a state of war for nearly sixty years as the Indian
army.
Yet, in the views of the Third Pay Commission there was no
justification for introducing 'X' factor for the military.
To compensate for limited promotions in the defence forces and to
soften the blows of the earlier Pay Commissions, the service chiefs,
at best, were able to get 'running pay band' for officers from the
Fourth Pay Commission.
Further upto the rank of brigadiers, rank pay was added to the basic
pay. However, due to some mischief, an amount equal to the rank pay
was deducted from the basic pay. This continued over a span of 10
years, affecting nearly 50000 officers. While a high court has told
the government to 'pay-up' the amount thus deducted, the latter has
taken the case to the Supreme Court and that is where the matter rests
now. For the purpose of pension, defence
personnel, remained equated with civilian employees, consequently
condition of 33 years service to earn full pension stayed, placing the
former at a great disadvantage. First you retire 90 to 95 percent
after 17/25/28 years of service and then tell them, sorry you cannot
get full pension, as you did not complete 33 years of service. This is
Indian Government's version of
natural justice and fair play.
The Fifth Pay Commission took away the running pay band and further
lowered the status of service officers. It too did not accept the 'X'
factor. It sought views from the IDSA, an organ of the MoD, which made
a host of outlandish and irrelevant recommendations. Such as reduction
of strength of the army by 35 percent, disbandment of RR units etc,
and that at a time when army's commitments in the NE and J and K were
on the increase. Further the Service Chiefs were excluded from all the
disadvantages introduced in the pay and allowances of all ranks: not
without a purpose.
Successive pay commissions, aided and abetted by the government, have
made service in the military so unattractive that besides lingering
deficiency of nearly 13000 officers, lower standards of intake not
withstanding, there is near exodus from the service. Between 2001 and
2004, in all 2000 officers applied to leave the army. These included 2
lt-gens, 10 maj-gens, 84
brigadiers, and the rest colonels and below. In all 1472 were allowed
to leave.
The situation in the IAF is more distressing. How many from the IAS,
IPS and other central services have opted to leave! Can there be a
more convincing inequality between the civil services and service in
the military and its unattractiveness! There is disenchantment amongst
the officers and simmering discontent prevalent in the troops. India
has an unbroken record of military defeats stretching back to two
thousand years, sans the victory against East Pakistan in 1971. Still
we are so indifferent to issues of national security! No amount of
sophistication and state of the art weaponry can compensate for poor
leadership and demotivated troops in the military.
The Sixth Pay Commission must look at the service conditions of
defence personnel and the imperatives of the applicability of 'X'
factor in their case. 'Running pay band' must be reintroduced,
truncated careers should be compensated by grant of 75 percent of last
pay drawn as pension. NDA and IMA cadets should get pay and not
stipend and their stay with these academies should be counted towards
service, as is the practice everywhere. The Pay Commission needs to
study the practices followed in UK, USA and other democracies in
respect of pay and allowances of their defence forces and relate these
to India's armed forces. Within various services, equation should be
sought in the sum total of pay including allowances drawn in full
length of service and to that should be added the 'X' factor in the
case of the military. Government must refrain from taking advantage of
the good discipline of defence personnel. It must act in good faith
and exercise fair play.
Finally, what one gets in the military are peanuts. Peanuts will
attract monkeys and the only time they won a battle was against Lanka
( Sri Lanka ) under Sri Ram.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: For a Government which can’t pay reasonably (rather better) and do justice and welfare for it’s employees, there is serious doubt that it would be able to do justice and welfare of rest of the citizens. Mr. P. Chidambaram think about it, before Congress losses all over India (already the alarming bells are ringing in several recent State election results for Congress) and it throws you out of your job.
ReplyDeleteBoth the State and Central Govt. complain against the high cost of Government money towards payment of salary to Govt. Employees, while at the same time, they are blind to the perpetual hike in the salaries of our elected representatives i.e. MPs & MLAs. While the Govt. also blames the Govt. employees for being corrupt and lazy, they turn a Nelson's Eye to the MPs/MLAs who hardly attend office, which if they do, only to disrupt it and create a nuisance.
ReplyDeleteRead an article published in Zee News 16th August 2007:
ReplyDeleteIndia at 60: Private job pays twice that of govt remuneration
New Delhi, Aug 15: India's long march from an agriculture-dominated economy at the time of independence to become the world's biggest back-office has taken the charm away from government jobs with salaries in private sector higher by as much as two times.
According to data available with salary tracking firm Pay scale, the median annual salary in a private sector company currently stands at Rs 5,65,214 compared to Rs 2,45,745 in the government entities.
The scenario is a far cry from those at the time of independence, when in early 1950s various government departments were established and public sector salaries used to be among the most attractive.
Yet, today wages for some of the highest government offices -- including the president of india and reserve bank of india -- are lower than even mid-level executives at various private sector firms.
The initial salary of the president of India, the constitutional head of the country -- was fixed at Rs 10,000 per month, which was considered to be among the highest for any office bearer at that time.
However, the president currently earns a monthly salary of just Rs 50,000, a level to which it was raised with effect from 1996, which pales in comparison to the lakhs being paid to senior level private sector executives.
Similarly, the RBI Governor used to get a monthly salary of about Rs 7,500 after independence, while the then Secretary and Treasurer of the Imperial Bank, now known as State Bank of India, was paid Rs 4,000 a month. In contrast, the biggest of private sector firms paid a salary of just about Rs 5,000 to their general managers and managing directors making the government salaries much more attractive.
The situation has, however, reversed with CEOs in private sector banks earning in multiples of SBI chairman's annual remuneration of about Rs 5,76,000 (about Rs 48,000 a month) last fiscal.
Even salaries of some mid-level call centre workers are currently in excess of Rs 50,000 a month -- higher than the monthly wage of chiefs of some public sector enterprises.
Global management consultancy firm Hay Group said in its world pay report that India's top-level executives were taking annual salary of 92,750 dollars (more than Rs 38 lakh).
Although salaries for top managers in India are currently lower than a number of countries, hay group said it might not remain so as the pay was increasing at double-digit rates in India - between 15-20 per cent.
Interestingly, average salary in public sector is also rising at a similar pace. The government said in its pre-budget economic survey released earlier this year that the per capita emoluments in public sector rose from Rs 493 in 1971 to Rs 23,056 in 2006.
During pre-independence days, government salaries were put at generous levels to check corruption among employees of East India Company. The trend continued for some years after independence while motivating people to seek jobs in government departments, but somehow it could not match the private sector down the years.
As per Goldman Sachs, per capita income in India will increase four-fold by 2020, but the growth is expected to be largely driven by the private sector.
It is gathered that most of the posts made herein are from Group A in Govt. service. Why make such a hue n cry about it? This blogging won't get u what u want. Just go and do ur job.
ReplyDeleteI also noticed that several of you have been posting ur comments during office hours - don't u have anything better to do??
AT LEAST THIS TIME THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE GIVEN A PROPER TREATMENT BY THE SIXTH CPC.
ReplyDeleteMANY OF THE GOVERNMENT JOBS HAVE BECOME LEAST ATRACTIVE TO THE TALENTED PEOPLE NOW.FOR EXAMPLE;IN CENTRAL PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT (CPWD),OUT OF THE 350 JUNIOR ENGINEERS SELECTED FOR APPOINTMENT IN 2005,ONLY 180 JOINED.OUT OF THESE,90 ALREADY LEFT THE DEPARTMENT.THE EXAMINATION IS HELD ALL INDIA BASIS. IT IS SEEN FROM THE RECORDS THAT IN THE LAST ONE DECADE 10%-30% JUNIOR ENGINEERS JOINED IN THE DEPARTMENT LEFT THE JOB AND JOINED ELSEWHERE SEING THE POOR SALARY,CUMBERSOME JOB AND VERY POOR CAREER PROSPECTS.
AT PRESENT THE JEs DONT GET THEIR FIRST PROMOTION EVEN AFTER 27 YEARS OF SERVICE.THEY ARE BEING PAID LESSER TO THE DRAFTSMEN,CLERKS(ASSISTANT CSS) IN CPWD.THEIR CADRE STRENGTH REDUCED TO 50% IN 20 YEARS TO PAVE WAY FOR CADRE REVIEWS OF GROUP A SERVICES.
WHY THESE KIND OF SITUATION IS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE?
IS IT A FACT THAT GOVERNMENT IS NOT INTERESTED TO ATTRACT TALENTED PEOPLE? WHY CANT GOVERNMENT CREATE SUFFICIENT PROMOTIONAL POSTS EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO FINANCE INVOLVED AFTER INTRODUCTION OF ACP SYSTEM AT LEAST TO HAVE GOOD GOVERNANCE? WHY SCALES WERE NOT UPGRADED ATLEAST ALONG WITH THE ONCE EQUALLY PLACED INSPECTORS OF CENTAL EXCISE,POLICE,CUSTOMS ETC.?
WHY ONLY Rs 150 pm CONVEYANCE ALLOWANCE ONLY BEING PAID TO THEM FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE FIELD DUTIES OF EMERGENCY NATURES AND BOUND TO WORK ROUND THE CLOCK??
IS IT NOT A FACT THAT FINANCE MINISTRY IS ALSO HAVING A STEP MOTHERLY ATTITUDE IN THE CASE OF EMPLOYEES OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS?
-BABU O VARGHESE,MUMBAI
We can't always compare the government with the private sector. Private sector employee works better than government employee is a known fact (except few exceptional).
ReplyDeleteI think the fate of civil servants in India in terms of salary is because of their own inability to make their work visible. There are number of corrupted civil servants in our country who will still go on doing corruption even after the salary hike. I think instead of thinking about salary, lets think of promoting a work culture that will subsequently bring reward, respect and talent to the system. Those are more imprtant than even monetary value for a person taking up public services (they are not client & customer in the market). It is a very consumeristic approch to see everything in terms of money especially for a public servant in a country where people are starving. Make the life more fulfilling by bringing smile to the masses. If this does not give you happiness then better join private jobs and earn money. I think only talent is not enough we need heart to care for people.
Give Salary hike up to the mark first, and then start adminstrating the dose of work culture....
ReplyDeleteWorld expects govt. workers to work like private workers, but when issue of salary comes, people start preaching about work culture, corruption and all the goobledygook.....
If everybody start seeking jobs in private sector for money, who will work for Govt?
Almost 90% of the Govt. workers are living on meagre salary for what??? For the Nation...what else???
i totally agree that govt. should pay higher so as to get good governance.
ReplyDeletePay revesion needs at all level whether it is at Executive or Non Executive. I feel, saying only Group A officers are intelligent and important, is an injustice to Non executives. They are equally important to nation. Computer cannot do all types of work. Pay should be revised at all level with equal proportion.
ReplyDeleteI am unable to understand the purpose of the commission
ReplyDeletea) if it is trying to rediscover the usefulness of the which portion of governance is how much important?
b) simply salary hike as regard to inflation which jumped to certain level.
Whatever India has achieved, not because of good governance, is something else but which may not be attributed to the administration or work of IAS people. The report has undue stress on IAS, even other institution of administration have not been taken into consideration, like police force and investigating agencies etc.
India needs a good technological edge over the other developing and developed economies, this fact has been ignored. We must take into account of the few of the leading countries which have made considerable changes into their technological advances, governance, socio-economic procedures, extended new frontiers in almost every traditional knowledge arena. One should compare with China. I perceive that the IAS personnel may loose their requirement in near or distant future same as BBC in India. After 60+ years, we are most populous, poor, unemployed, not technical advance, every-thing-import, going-to-short-of-food, convert-cities-to-slum, and this list goes on. IASs have enjoyed a very secure constitutional cover, to not stand against the corrupt politicians, but they have either connived with them or surrenders before the “system as whole?”. This is a fact every one knows. If India has to progress in a uni-polar world, driven only by technological advances, we need only technical expertise, good governance is secondary and that is too a by product of the first one. Britishers took their “good governance” into India, because we were technical-backward and not organized.
The report cites some report/study conducted by some institute based in Jamshedpur on the salary standards for middle class employees, particularly technical manpower in government. Which says that they are already over payed if all the benefits are taken into account. Same is true with IAS, if you add everything a IAS man enjoys, good office, some three/four peon, clerks etc, luxury house, official car for full family, lots of training-cum-outings in and out-side India, I think that there is a re-look needed when compared with private sector jobs. (Why compare with Ambani's ?) But where is said that there are alarm bells ringing that IAS people are leaving for greener pasture? But that is true for (DRDO) scientist, Doctors, Engineers, Pilots (in forces), and other technical staff in government/owned agencies.
Hint for Government: Government may go ahead and make IAS officers more responsible, and fire at will same as in private sector when deliverable are delayed and not served in time. Government may even experiment by reducing salaries for IAS personnel, dilute the luster of the cadre by liberally inducting personnel from other streams. (Look UP IAS association selects “most corrupt” among them)
Hint for an IAS: Don't worry, only redundant discussion, if you are really feel choking in government, you may easily leave government since you have very lucrative jobs waiting at your door step.
Mr P Chidamabaram was Finance Minister at the time of the 5th PC. Mr MK Kaw was the Member-Secretary. Mr Kaw came up with the eminently logical concept of rewarding govt employees for the per capita growth in GDP for the previous 10 years ie 1986 to 1996. This reflected both the rise in per capita income levels and the ability of the government to pay. Even though it was fair, reasonable and affordable, it caused a sudden jump in the government's outgo. This jump in outgo was cushioned by the increase in retirement age from 58 to 60. Mr Chidambaram was opposed to granting the large increase to govt employees but his hand was forced by Left leaders.
ReplyDeleteAs things turned out, the increase given by the 5th PC has been smoothly absorbed by the govt on account of the subsequent rise in per capita GDP. Govt expenditure on salaries as a percentage of revenues and as a percentage of GDP has actually come down.
Between the 5th and 6th PC, the country has prospered and per capita GDP has more than doubled. This increase has been particularly marked among the salaried middle class. Thanks to globalisation and liberalisation, the salaried middle class has seen their income jump tenfold or more. And it is not just salary. Easy home loans have led to capital formation which, in turn, leads to increased income. The officer cadre of the armed forces comes from the same pool and have seen their siblings and cousins enjoy unprecedented prosperity.
Under the circumstances, it was only expected that the 6th PC would apply the same formulae of compensating for inflation and per capita rise in GDP. However, it is widely believed that the 6th PC was influenced by Mr Chidambaram and the pendulum swung to the other extreme. The 6th PC has not recommended any benefit to the employees on account of rise in per capita GDP. Surprisingly, none of the employee organisations has represented against this point. Nevertheless, all sections of government employees, barring the IAS, have expressed dissatisfaction with the recommendations of the 6th PC. The longstanding demand of Defence pensioners for "One Rank One Pension" (OROP) has also been ignored.
Feedback is that the Committee of Secretaries has recommended "no change" except one: change the effective date from 1.1.2008 to 1.1.2007.
The Group of Ministers will begin their deliberations now. But the secretarial assistance will be provided by the same people.
In all fairness, the government employees have contributed very much to per capita GDP growth in the country. Therefore, government should apply the Kaw formula of passing on the benefits of per capita GDP growth to the government employees.