Record Note of the Second Meeting of the Joint Committee on MACPS
Record Note of the Second Meeting of the Joint Committee on MACPS held under the Chairmanship of the Joint Secretary(E), DOPT on 15th September, 2010
MOST IMMEDIATE
NO. 11/1/2010-JCA
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel , Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
(JCA Section)
North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 6th October, 2010
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject:- Record Note of the Second Meeting of the Joint Committee on MACPS held under the Chairmanship of the Joint Secretary(E), DOPT on 15th September, 2010.
The undersigned is directed to enclose herewith Record Note of the Second Meeting of the Joint Committee on MACPS held under the Chairmanship of the Joint Secretary (Establishment), DOPT on 15th September, 2010 for information and further necessary action.
Director (JCA)
RECORD NOTE OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON
MACPS HELD UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE JOINT SECRETARY
(ESTABLISHMENT), DOP&T ON 15TH SEPTEMBER 2010
****
The second meeting of the Joint Committee constituted to examine the anomalies pertaining to the MACP scheme was held under the Chairmanship of Joint Secretary (Estt.) Department of Personnel & Training on 15th September, 2010. All the members of the Committee were present in the meeting. In addition, Ms Urvilla Khati, Executive Director, Ministry of Railways was also present.
2. The Chairperson welcomed the representatives of the Official Side and the Staff Side and referred to the first meeting of the Joint Committee held on 25th May, 2010. The staff side was informed that clarifications had since been issued with regard to item numbers 4 & 7 which were discussed during the first meeting of the Joint Committee. She also informed that item No.6 stood transferred to the agenda of the National Anomaly Committee. The staff side was also informed that many of the 57 agenda items submitted by them represented common issues and therefore, similar items had been clubbed together for the present meeting.
3. Thereafter, the three options submitted by the staff side during the first meeting of the Joint Committee with respect to agenda item number 1 and other similar items regarding grant of MACP in the promotional hierarchy were discussed. The official side expressed its inability to agree to any of the options suggested by the staff side. The official side stated that the Government has already improved upon the recommendations of the 6th CPC regarding MACPS and therefore, any further improvement in the same may not be feasible.
4. Thereafter, agenda items were taken up. A statement indicating gist of the decisions taken on the agenda items is enclosed.
5. The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
Get Free Email Updates
Follow us on Telegram Channel, Twitter & Facebook and Whatsapp Channel for all Latest News and Updates
please change the grade pay of LDC after 10 years of upgradation from 2000 to 2400. 2000 is too less after a hard labour of 10 years.
thanks
sanjay
I was appointed as LDC on 10th Sept 1984 and got the promotion as UDC on 4th March 1999 and after completion of 24 years of service I was granted 2nd ACP wef 9th Sept.2008 in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 (pre-revised)PB-2 with Grade Pay Rs. 4200. Unfortunately the MACP applicable wef 1-9-2008 and my pay was re-fixed in PB-1 with Grade pay Rs.2800. The MACP has put the employees in a disaster position and huge financial loss. There is disparity among employees who are granted ACP before and after 1-9-2008 in the same cadre. The employees granted ACP before 1-9-2008 is getting GP of Rs. 4200/- and I will get GP of Rs.2800/-after operational MACP. I request this matter may be taken up in the next NAC meeting to remove the disparity between the same cadre.
I was appointed as LDC on 12th October 1984 and got the promotion as UDC on 4th May 1998 and after completion of 24 years of service I was granted 2nd ACP wef 12th October 2008 in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 (pre-revised)PB-2 with Grade Pay Rs. 4200. Unfortunately the MACP applicable wef 1-9-2008 and my pay was re-fixed in PB-1 with Grade pay Rs.2800. The MACP has put the employees in a disaster position and huge financial loss. There is disparity among employees who are granted ACP before and after 1-9-2008 in the same cadre. I may cadre the employees granted ACP before 1-9-2008 is getting GP of Rs. 4200/- and will get GP of Rs.2800/-after operational MACP. This disparity should be removed immediately at least within the cadre by virtue of equal work being done by every one. Other wise option should be given to all employees for opting to go with ACP or MACP which is beneficail to the employees. I request this matter may be taken up in the next NAC meeting (15-2-2011) to remove the disparity between the same cadre.
Sir,
As per para 12 THE LIST OF DECISIONS TAKEN DURING
THE SECOND MEETING OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON MACPS
HELD ON 15.09.2010 the MACPS is for the employees of the Central Government and therefore services rendered in a State Government / PSU cannot be reckoned for MACPS.
It was noted that this will harash the employees who had served the Central Govt. this statement will stop further movement of employees from stste to central Govt. This may please be revised and the service rendered in the states should be counted for the purpose of acp.
Many Seniors in the same cadre are not getting higher grade pay though the juniors in the same cadre are getting higher grade pay. Therefore, stepping up of grade pay of seniors should also be considered with reference to the grade pay of the junior.
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT SHOWING ANOMALY ARISEN DUE TO MACP SCHEME IN CASE OF EAD(HM) IN CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION.
I hereby give one illustration how the senior employee feels frustration. Consequent upon merger of pre-revised grades, providing identical replacement grade pay, there have been a number of situations where the seniors who were promoted on regular basis much before their juniors and the juniors who could not get promotions due to non-availability of vacancies in higher grades and are granted financial upgradation under MACP Scheme, pay of the juniors becomes higher than their seniors. A number of such examples are quoted as under:
Mr.X
Joined as Senior Computor
Got 1st Promotion as PA(HM)
Got 2nd Promotion as Sr.PA(HM)
Got 3rd Promotion as EAD(HM)
Mr.Y
Joined as PA(HM)
Got 1st Promotion as Sr.PA(HM)
Got 2nd Promotion as EAD(HM)
In the seniority list of EAD(HM) Mr.X is senior most and Mr.Y is junior to him.
During 6th Pay Commission the posts of PA(HM) with scale of pay Rs.5000-8000 and Sr.PA(HM) with scale of pay Rs.5500-9000 was merged and renamed as Scientific Assistant and Grade was given Rs.4200.
The EAD(HM) was given Grade Pay of Rs.4600.
Mr.X got 3rd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4800
Mr. Y got 1st MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4600, 2nd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4800 and 3rd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.5400
Mr.X and Mr.Y both are EAD(HM) and still in service. Mr.X being senior will be getting less Grade Pay in comparison to Mr.Y though both are in the same cadre as EAD(HM).
On tour Mr.X will be traveling by train and Mr.Y junior will be traveling by air. Moreover Mr.X being senior will be drawing transport allowance of Rs.1600 whereas Mr.Y being junior will be drawing transport allowance of Rs.3200. I fail to understand where is the justice and why concerned authorities do not give ear to this problem. How Mr.Y will pay respect to his senior Mr.X.
This is certainly a grave anomaly. To rectify this anomaly it is proposed that as has been done in the case of section Officer of Central Secretariat, EAD(HM) (Mr X) may also be granted the PB-3 Grade Pay of Rs.5400 on completion of 4 years of service.
ATLEAST THE EAD(HM) WHO ARE STILL IN SERVICE THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN EQUAL GRADE PAY AS OF HIS JUNIOR IN THE SENIORITY LIST.
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT SHOWING ANOMALY ARISEN DUE TO MACP SCHEME IN CASE OF EAD(HM) IN CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION.
I hereby give one illustration how the senior employee feels frustration. Consequent upon merger of pre-revised grades, providing identical replacement grade pay, there have been a number of situations where the seniors who were promoted on regular basis much before their juniors and the juniors who could not get promotions due to non-availability of vacancies in higher grades and are granted financial upgradation under MACP Scheme, pay of the juniors becomes higher than their seniors. A number of such examples are quoted as under
Mr.X Mr.Y
Joined as Senior Computor Joined as PA(HM)
Got 1st Promotion as PA(HM) Got 1st Promotion as Sr.PA(HM)
Got 2nd Promotion as Sr.PA(HM) Got 2nd Promotion as EAD(HM)
Got 3rd Promotion as EAD(HM)
In the seniority list of EAD(HM) Mr.X is senior most and Mr.Y is junior to him.
During 6th Pay Commission the posts of PA(HM) with scale of pay Rs.5000-8000 and Sr.PA(HM) with scale of pay Rs.5500-9000 was merged and renamed as Scientific Assistant and Grade was given Rs.4200. The EAD(HM) was given Grade Pay of Rs.4600.
Mr.X got 3rd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4800
Mr. Y got 1st MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4600, 2nd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4800 and 3rd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.5400
Mr.X being senior will be getting less Grade Pay in comparison to Mr.Y though both are in the same cadre as EAD(HM).
On tour Mr.X will be traveling by train and Mr.Y junior will be traveling by air. Moreover Mr.X being senior will be drawing transport allowance of Rs.1600 whereas Mr.Y being junior will be drawing transport allowance of Rs.3200. I fail to understand where is the justice and why concerned authorities do not give ear to this problem. How HOW ADN WHY Mr.Y will pay respect to his senior Mr.X.
This is certainly a grave anomaly. To rectify this anomaly it is proposed that as has been done in the case of section Officer of Central Secretariat, EAD(HM) (Mr X) may also be granted the PB-3 Grade Pay of Rs.5400 on completion of 4 years of service.
Benefit of stepping up in grade pay.
Staff that have completed 10 years service in grade pay may be given the next Grade pay without counting the no. of promotions/upgradation. This has resulted in serious anomalous situation causing deep sense of frustration amongst the seniors. Therefore, pay of the seniors is required to be stepped-up at par with their juniors to do away with this serious anomaly.
ATLEAST THE EAD(HM) WHO ARE STILL IN SERVICE THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN EQUAL GRADE PAY AS OF HIS JUNIOR IN THE SENIORITY LIST.