1. Grant Rs 10000 as minimum wage as per 15 ILC Norms.
The Demand of the Central Govt. employees before the wage revision Commissions, when such a Commission had been set up was for the grant of minimum age as per the formula made by 15th ILC to which the sovereign Govt. was a party. The 15th ILC as early as in 1957 had suggested that the workers in the country was entitled for a need based minimum wages, if not a fair or living wage as enshrined in the constitution itself. Once such a need based minimum wage is determined on the basis of the computation formula prescribed by Dr. Aykroyd and accepted by all concerned, the wage structure for all categories and cadres is to be constructed on the basis of a pre-determined ratio between the minimum wage so determined and the desirable level of maximum wage in the bureaucracy.
Before the 6th CPC too, the staff side had formulated the minimum wage on the basis of the said need based minimum wage formula.. .. The successive pay commissions had been considering this demand and rejecting the same on the specious plea of the incapacity of the Govt. to afford such a wage structure. The underdeveloped state of economy, the financial constraints on account of ridiculously low tax resources, the huge outlay required for the development of key infrastructure facilities, the need for setting apart funds for the upliftment of poor etc. had been often cited as reasons for the illegitimate denial of the need based minimum wage.
The 6th CPC well knowing that such being not the state of Indian economy presently and a parrot like repetition of the phraseology employed by the earlier Commissions shall not hold water resorted to mutilation of the formula itself, whereby retail prices of essential commodities of day to day consumption were manufactured (not obtained from the retail market) by a presumptive addition of just 20% over the whole sale prices and removing the 25% addition prescribed and later approved by the Supreme Court as essential for human sustenance and reducing the10% addition stipulated as a necessary ingredient for making the housing requirement of an employee. The commission thus arrived at an absurd amount of Rs 5479 against Rs 9730 computed on a scientific basis in application of the Dr. Akroyd formula. While this became the premise for the construction of wage structure in respect of the Gr.C and D employees and even to a great extent for Gr. B Officers too, a different yardstick was adopted for determination of salary for Group A Officers, with the result the wage differential between the employees and others widened.
Any discernible observer could find that the wages determined by the 6th CPC is thus lower than even what had been decided upon by the 5th CPC. Rejecting the demand for the Need based wages on the plea of incapacity to pay on account of lack of tax revenue resources, the 5th CPC had stipulated that the minimum wage in Civil service should be computed on the basis of a percentage average increase of the Net National Product over a period of 10 years. The NNP increase over a decade ending in 2003 was 56.2% above what it was in 1992, to which the 5th CPC minimum wage had been related to. Had that been the principle of wage determination, the minimum wage ought to have been Rs 7400/ as against Rs 5479 determined by 6th CPC and finally raised to Rs 6606 by the Govt.
Once the imaginary feel good factor arising from the disbursement of the accumulated arrears of salary, withheld for the past two and half years, on account of the denial of the interim relief, the grim reality of depressed wage structure and stark fact of a factual wage reduction shall emerge. The correction required in the computation and determination of minimum wage cannot be denied on any valid ground and deserves to be fought out.
2. Grant minimum fitment benefit of 2.625 times of pre-revised basic pay to bring about uniform rise of 40% in emoluments and raise grade pay to 50% of the maximum of the pre-revised scales in respect of PB 1,2 & 3 as has been done in the case of PB 4.
The point to point fixation, a methodology adopted by the 2nd CPC for fixation of wages of individual employees in implementation of the Commission's report had been the constant demand of the employees before all successive commissions. The inability to realize the demand, the denial of which was not only illegitimate but also depriving the benefit of wage revision for the senior employees, had been the curse continuously heaped upon the employees who do not belong to the officer category in organized Group A or All India Services. The tragic exposure of this phenomenon with no attempt to address or rectify gave rise to the widespread discontent amongst vast sections of senior employees in 1986. A repetition of it in 1997 by the 5th CPC became the central point for agitation forcing it to be the focal point of negotiation. Alternative formulation had to be presented, for the demand for point to point fixation was rejected right at the beginning on the ground of huge financial outlay. The application of multiplication factor of 3.25 universally applied for the construction of Pay scales by the 5 CPC itself was presented as an effective alternative to the point to point fixation. During the discussion the employees organization put fourth alternatively a uniform addition of 50% of the pre-revised basic pay, the conceding of which would have brought about near total uniformity in the financial benefit if not equivalent to point to point fixation. It has to be stated in this context that point to point fixation is the demand constantly negotiated and settled in the wage negotiations of all PSU workers. Ultimate settlement of 40% rise in pre-revised basic pay after a four day long procrastinated negotiation with the Group of Ministers in 1997 brought about a great amount of satisfaction amongst the widest section of employees in 1997. Having rejected the point to point fixation by the 6th Pay Commission for no genuine or valid reasoning the consensus emerged at the meeting of the Staff Side was to strive for the dispensation of atleast a minimum benefit of 40% rise in emoluments on the lines of the settlement brought about in 1997. The conceptual formulation of incorporation of the clause "subject to a minimum of 2.625 time of the pre-revised basic pay" into the fitment formula evolved by the 6th CPC was the product of the thinking process to ensure that the senior employees do get justice. The replacement of the multiplying factor of 1.74 by 1.86 has not brought about the desired and required uniformity in the dispensation of financial benefit on revision of Pay. It continues to be at variance between 23% to 87%, the top echelons in PB 3 enjoying the top crest in the percentage elevation. We know our demand for a minimum rise in emoluments is not a substitute for the point to point fixation a benefit negotiated and settled at all times by our comrades in the Public Sector undertaking. What is attempted is to ensure that no employee gets lesser than 40% rise in his emoluments while recognizing the fact that the top officials do benefit by double of it even under the existing dispensation.. This therefore, does not brook denial or delay and needs to be focused and fought out.
3. No abolition of Gr.D. Posts and functions. Lift ban on recruitment, fill up all vacant posts and scrap screening Committee.
The VI-CPC has recommended for the abolition of Gr. D. posts numbering about 9.4 lakhs in the Government of India.. The CPC raised all the Gr. D employees existing in the Govt. sector to the status of a skilled worker and placed them in Gr. C pay scale. The suggested pay scale of the upgraded personnel is a pre-revised pay of Rs 2750-70-3800-75-4400. In fact the said pay scale was the fourth grade of pay suggested by the V-CPC for the unskilled workers. In para 3.7.7 of the Pay commission recommendations the commission has observed that:
"Increasingly' basic work relating to cleaning, sweeping, maintenance etc. is being outsourced. This is a welcome trend that needs to be encouraged by bringing about systematic changing in the existing scheme so that the employees in Govt. are only utilized for requiring a certain levels of skills".
It is a fact that majority of the functions presently carried out by the Gr.D. employees across the Board is unskilled. What had actually been done by the Commission is to abolish the unskilled functions in the Governmental sector and pave way for more and more contractorisation of these jobs while the existing employees (whose working strength has become less than 50% of the sanctioned strength) might be classified as Gr.C. and assigned to do functions which are of skilled nature with lesser emoluments than what it could have been even as per the V-CPC recommendations. It is therefore, a disastrous recommendation. In the days to come the unskilled nature of jobs would be either outsourced or would be contractorised. This recommendation therefore, is not for the benefit of the existing employees who are recruited as unskilled workers. Now the recruitment will hereafter become unavailable in the Governmental sector for those who are in the lower strata of the society who could not afford or who are not provided even the primary education even though the universal primary education is stated to be the objective and goal of a welfare Government as per our constitution.. In fact they are being punished for the social inability or abdication of the responsibility on the part of the Government to provide them with a decent standard of living or the nascent requirement of primary education. The recommendation is therefore, a by-product of the neo-liberal economic policies pursued by the Govt. since 1991 which we have been fighting against all these years alongwith other segment of the working class.
4. Grant 10% of pay+ Grade pay as minimum benefit on promotion or financial up gradation.
The financial benefit on promotion is presently governed by FR 22. As per the extant provisions of the said rules a person who is promoted/appointed on regular basis to a post which carry higher responsibility will have the benefit of fixation of pay at the rate of one increment and fixation at next higher stage in the scale of pay of the post to which he is promoted. This is subject to the grant of a minimum benefit of Rs 100/- in all cases of such promotions. The present dispensation as per the recommendations of the VI CPC is only to grant a 3% increase in the pay and grade pay to persons who are promoted to a post with higher responsibility. Since most of the employees in Gr. C & D do get their promotion after a long waiting period exceeding even 10 years, they usually do not get their pay fixed at the minimum of the pay scale or pay band of the cadre to which he is promoted whereas the personnel in Gr. A services being assured of time bound promotions do go into a different pay scale and placed at the minimum of the pay scale of the promoted grade, the financial benefit of which would be far in excess of the increase of 3% of the pay. It was to ensure that everybody gets a reasonable rise in emoluments on promotion; the demand for a minimum benefit of 10% rise in the pay was placed by the staff side. This was in fact in consonance with the extant provisions in the fundamental rules. Rejection of this particular demand has no valid or genuine reason. In the absence of any explicit reason, it is unreasonable. In the cases where such promotions are accompanied by transfer It was pointed out by staff side during discussions that often employees are transferred from one station to another on promotion and for various reasons, they are to suffer drop in emoluments on such transfer on promotion. This is therefore, an issue on which settlement has to be brought about.
5. Fix the date of effect of all allowances as 1.1.2006.
The word 'Pay' connotes pay and allowances. Naturally, Pay revision has to invariably involve revision of pay and allowances. But separating these pay and allowances the 4th CPC proposed different dates for the implementation of its report – 1.1.86 for revised pay and a later date from all allowances. The Board of arbitration to which this was referred to after disagreement was recorded in the National Council, JCM awarded in favour of employees – the date of implementation of the report with respect to pay as well as allowances has to be from the same date, i.e. 1.1,986. The Government accepted this arbitration award in 1990 and implemented it.
Despite this development, 5th CPC also adopted the same dichotomy- separating allowances from pay (where as Dearness Allowance is revised from the date pay is revised). Again the matter was referred to Board of Arbitration and the board of arbitration gave a verdict in favour of the employees – that HRA & CCA to be paid in old rates, but on new, revised pay scales. This award is yet not implemented.
The 6 CPC has given scant regard to the two awards given in favour of the employees as regards grant of allowances from the day the pay revision comes into effect. In the present case, it will have to be from 1.1.2006.
6. No performance related pay or bonus scheme
The Commission has recommended to replace the present scheme of Productivity Linked Bonus (PLB), as also the adhoc bonus system (where productivity was either described to be not measurable or for the non evolution of the parameters) with a new system called the Performance Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS). In Chapter 2.5 of the CPC report the PRIS has been detailed. The Commission has quoted extensively the study that has been made by the IIM, Ahmedabad in this regard. However, no concrete proposals to objectively assess the performance of either individuals or groups have been evolved. It has ordained the concerned organizations to bring about a scheme immediately to replace the PLB within a stipulated time frame and in the case of adhoc bonus it is to be immediately dispensed with paving way for PRIS. It is in fact the inability of the Govt. to prescribe certain well defined parameters for the evolution measurement of productivity that the system of adhoc bonus remained as it is despite the recommendations to do so by the IV & V CPCs. A glance through the recommendations made in the chapter 2.5 gives the impression that the Departments are supposed to make considerable savings through out-sourcing, right sizing, re-engineering, delayering, simplification of procedure etc. and such savings so generated are to be used for the payment of the PRIS to its employees and those in the management too It in other words, the commission wanted to replace the incentive bonus scheme presently available to the workers and savings so generated to be shared by those who are charged with the responsibility of management. This apart, no where in the CPC report the word performance has been attempted to be defined in clear and unambiguous terms to make it understandable. The incentive bonus in Governmental sector has been a product of struggle and negotiation. The inbuilt infirmity if any is the product of an inefficient evolution of a formula. The correction or amendment of which lies in the lap of management. An abrupt closure of a scheme evolved through the process of negotiations and discussions backed up by a prolonged struggle to be replaced by an ambiguous or vague formulation couched in a high sounding phraisography cannot be the method of going about either increasing the performance or productivity of any organization. The CPC recommendation therefore is unacceptable and if attempted to be implemented by force of authority will have to be resisted with all the powers at command of the organized movement of the workers.
7. Revise the Transport and daily allowances as demanded by the staff side JCM National Council.
As per OM No 19030/3/2008-E.IV date 19th November 2008, Daily Allowance in monetary terms is no longer admissible to central government employees on tour. The OM further states that only the actual expenditure incurred with in the prescribed limits will only be reimbursed.
This will put vast majority of touring personnel into financial loss as it is near impossible to get receipts for meals and conveyance.
It is therefore a must that self certification be accepted to the extent of claims on food and conveyance expenditures.
Further, the DA rates may be revised with regard to those drawing Grade pay of 4200 to 4800 and below 4200 in the following manner as the rates prescribed by the 6 CPC and accepted by the government quite insufficient and unscientific.
Rs. 4200 to 4800 – Reimbursement of hotel accommodation of upto Rs 1000/- per day; reimbursement of travel charges upto Rs 150 per diem for travel with in city and reimbursement of food not exceeding Rs 200 per day. The reimbursement of travel and food charges may be made on self certification.
Below Rs. 4200 - Reimbursement of hotel accommodation of upto Rs 700/- per day; reimbursement of travel charges upto Rs 150 per diem for travel within city and reimbursement of food not exceeding Rs 200 per day.
Transport allowance. The recommendation of the Commission is to subsume the CCA in the Transport allowance and raise the existing Transport allowance by 4 times. This has reduced the proportionate benefit to certain grades and categories of employees. It is therefore necessary that no condition should be imposed for the grant of this allowance since the CCA has been subsumed in this allowance. It is also necessary that taking into account that some of the employees might get reduced benefit due to the 'across the board rise at the rate of 4 times' the rates need to be revised as under:.
Employees Drawing Grade Pay
A-1 / A Class Cities
5400/- & Above
4200/- to 4800/-
8. Remove the condition of 6 months for applying the uniform date of 1st July as increment dates.
The CPC recommendation to bring about a uniform date of increment is not per se objectionable. The only demand placed by the employees had been that in respect of those whose increment date falls between 1st Feb. 2006 and June 2006 as per the extant stipulation will suffer a postponement of their increment beyond 12 months. It cannot be the conscious stipulation of the commission but can only be an accidental outcome of rationalization of a scheme. The suggestion made was to provide a one time benefit of awarding of an increment for all those whose increment date falls between Feb. and June 2006 consequent upon which postponement of increment could be avoided and whatever financial outflow emerges shall only be a one time phenomenon and not a recurring feature. This is the only methodology to address the difficulty that emerged in the exercise of a rationalisation.This suggestion has been turned down obviously not for any sound or logic reason.
9. ACP to be on hierarchical system obtaining in each department.
The scheme of Assured career progression was demanded by the Confederation in a separate memorandum before the 5 CPC to compensate and assuage the employees who have no chance of regular promotion in their long career spanning nearly 35 years. The 5 CPC had accepted this contention and proposed ACP. Before 6 CPC Confederation had demanded 3 ACPs.
The decision of the Government to grant 3 ACPs but not on hierarchy has taken away the charm of the ACP itself and it defeats the very purpose and spirit behind ACP. Further, it would accentuate the feeling of discrimination of those who did not benefit out of the 2 ACP scheme as they would still be placed below – even if they are seniors – what their juniors have drawn.
Also, granting a pay that does not even exist in one's department actually defeats the very purpose of ACP ie to compensate for the absence of promotional avenues
10. Retain and improve CGHS and make insurance scheme optional
The Central Govt. Health Scheme with all its difficulties and infirmities, is considered to be the best available health care system both by the serving employees and pensioners. The urge for its closure on the ground of increasing financial out-flow has often been raised by the Government and became a strident proposal after the recommendations of the Expenditure Reforms Commission. Insurance scheme was thought of an alternative for its replacement. The pensioners who are not covered by the CGHS and who have settled down in towns and places beyond the ambit of CGHS do feel that they do not have a viable system of inpatient treatment when such exigency arises. They feel that the insurance coverage might bring about a certain amount of improvement in the situation where no facility exists presently whereas the CGHS beneficiaries rightly assumes that a better existing benefit is bring replaced by a subsidiary and less beneficial system. It is in this context that the employees demanded the retention of the CGHS system and making the insurance scheme optional. No decision has been taken or is being taken and the said indecision either as a means of design or a product of inefficiency debilitate the health care scheme for the CG Employees. It is therefore, necessary that the Govt. should come to a finality in this matter as early as possible.
11. Implement flexitime working hours for women/disabled employees as recommended by the 6 CPC and remove clause (iv) of OM No.13019/2/2008-Estt.(L) dated 18th Nov. 2008 on Child Care Leave.
The provision of flexi time facility for women employees was a recommendation made in the right direction by the VI-CPC. The resolution of the Govt. of India in not accepting the recommendation is sans a cogent argument. Had it been accepted it would have gone a long way in providing the required relief for women employees in discharging their natural responsibility of looking after their children and family without compromising the requirement of an efficient functioning of the organization in which they are employed.
The order in acceptance of the recommendation for the grant of Child Care Leave (CCL) was issued by the Department of Personnel on 11th Sept.. 2008 enabling the women employees to avail the said leave. However, vide OM No. 13019(2)/L/Estt/ dated 18.11.2008 the Govt. imposed certain condition for the grant of such leave. Condition No. iv of that OM reads as under:
"CCL can be sanctioned only if the employee concerned has no Earned Leave at her credit".
The very purpose for which the Child Care Leave (CCL) was conceived would be defeated if above condition is insisted upon. The accumulation of Earned Leave is meant for meeting certain exigencies that happen in the service career of an employee. If such leave is not allowed to be accumulated or exhausted the concerned employee will be in dire difficulties. It is therefore, incomprehensive why such a condition is imposed by the Govt. It appears to be an afterthought. It is a fact that due to the depletion of the No. of employees on account of continuous ban on recruitment, a blanket ban imposed without any rhyme or reason by the DOPT with the sole objective of reducing the manpower, the work load would further increase for the employees if the women employees are allowed to go on leave. The denial of the leave cannot be a solution to the problem which has actually been created by the insensitive decision on the part of the Department of Personnel. What is needed is that the DOPT should immediately withdraw the arbitrary mposition on ban on recruitment and simultaneously withdraw the condition No.iv in the OM cited to enable the women employees to avail the CCL who are in dire need of it.
12. Direct all the Departmental Heads to settle 6th CPC related department specific demands/problems within a stipulated time.
As result of the implementation of the 6 CPC report, one will find numerous anomalies – common to all central government employees and specific to certain departments. The anomalies common to all CG employees will come up for discussion the National Council, JCM.
The departmental level anomalies have to be settled at the departmental levels, through the appropriate forums. The experience after 5 CPC was that majority of the Departments did not take any step to settle these anomalies as the JCM at that level was made non functional. Even today in many departments, the meting of the Departmental Council of the JCM either do not take or convened at irregular interval. Not only the anomalies are to be settled within a time frame and in case of disagreement between the official and staff side a mechanism should be evolved to bring about resolution to the issue.
13. Grant civil servant status and Pension to 'Gramin Dak-Sevaks.'
The Government constituted Natraja Murti Committee [a retired Postal Officer] to go into the pay and allowances and other issues of three lakhs of Gramin Dak Sewaks in the Department of Posts as against the demand of constitution of a Judicial Committee. The Report of the above GDS Committee contains a lot of negative recommendations. Not only the Status of a Civil Servant is denied to them but several other established procedures like fixing the pro-rata wages on comparison with the related category of regular employees like Mail Overseer Postman for GDS Postmasters; Postman for GDS Mail Deliverer; Minimum scale of pay in CG Services for the Group D type of GDS is denied this time. The demand for statutory pension as recommended last time by the Justice Talwar Committee is also diluted this time and a service discharge benefit scheme is recommended with certain conditions. There are recommendations to cut the strength of existing GDS in a drastic manner through various recommendations for abolition, relocation, tightened standards etc. The GDS Committee had gone out of its terms and references and recommended various curbs on the trade union rights of this cadre. The GDS Union went on an indefinite strike supported by the NFPE and the department has assured adequate opportunity for discussion before proposals are finalized to be sent to Cabinet after the Senior Officers Committee constituted to finalize the stand on the recommendations of GDS Committee. The NFPE and the GDS Union have before the Senior Officers Committee and discussed on their Note submitted seeking modifications and improvement. By the time we go on strike, this issue would be very clear as to whether the Senior Officers Committee and the Department would agree to modify the recommendations of GDS Committee as demanded by the Staff Side including Civil Servants status and statutory pension. Since modifications are very essential to avoid serious attacks on the existing rights and privileges of three lakhs of GDS, this demand attains very much significance.
14. No reduction in the commutation value and restoration of full pension after 12 years.
The 5th CPC had indicated that the Government should review the period by which the commuted value of pension is returned to the pensioner. This was due to the fact that the commuted value of pension is fully recovered along with interest by the Government within a period of 10 years. There is, therefore, no justification for restoration period being 15 years. The 6th Pay Commission has recommended that the table of commutation should be revised taking into various factors. The Government has decided to implement the said decision without lowering the restoration period. While the official side had been eloquent on the need for the revision of the table they had no response for the justified plea for the reduction of the restoration period, when the matter was subjected to discussion first with the Secretary Personnel and later with the Cabinet Secretary. There had been hardly any justification for the reduction in the commutation value. Having reduced the commutation value it is but necessary that the Government issue orders for restoration of the commuted value after 12 years.
15. Compute the pension entitlement on the basis of notional pay as on 1.1.1996
The 5th pay commission had accepted the principle of parity in pension between pre 86 and post 86 retirees. This principle is required to be extended to pre-96 retirees. For this purpose the pay of the pre 96 retirees may have to be first be fixed in the revised pay scales of 5th CPC. The notional pay thus arrived at has to be treated as emoluments and pension determined accordingly for those who retired from service prior to 31.12.2005. The very principle of parity in pension brought about by the Supreme Court judgment has been violated by the denial of acceptance of this demand.
Demands pending settlement for long in the National Council JCM.
The demands included in this part has been the subject matter of discussion and campaign on many occasions in the past. Therefore, no attempt is being made to elucidate these issues in detail, except in a brief manner.
- No outsourcing or Contractorisation of Govt.. functions.
Even though we could make the Group of Ministers of the UF Government of 1997 agree for the non implementation of the 5th CPC recommendations on outsourcing, privatization, contractorisation etc, the subsequent Govt. which came to power appointed the Geethakrishnan Committee, which you are aware made recommendations for the closure of many departments and outsourcing of very many functions hitherto carried out by the Government employees. In one way or other most of the Departments were affected adversely in implementation of the said committee's suggestion. The 6th CPC suggestions are to accentuate this process and coupled with the ban on recruitment, the situation in most of the organizations is bound to be precarious.
- Grant statutory defined pension scheme to the employees recruited after 1.1.2004 and withdraw the PFRDA Bill from Parliament.
Pension is earned by an employee by rendering service and therefore there is no requirement of any payment by the employee for earning pension. This statutory right of the employee is enforceable through courts.. The supreme court has declared pension as one of the fundamental rights. The government should therefore retrace from its avowed position, which is detrminetal to the interest of the employees and ensure that the employees recruited after 1.1.2004 is covered by the existing statutory defined benefit scheme by withdrawing the PFRDA bill from the Parliament.
- Implement the Board of Arbitration Awards.
The Joint Consultative machinery was concerned as a forum for meaningful discussion and negotiation of the day to day problems and issues of the Government employees to ensure that industrial peace exist. The arbitration was conceived in the scheme as a measure to resolve the issue on which agreement could not be reached between the staff side and official side through discussion. The Board of Arbitration is chaired by an High Court Judge assisted by a representative each from the Staff and official sides. It is agreed upon that the awards of the Board of Arbitration are binding on both the parties and are to be implemented. That had been the case till 1992. There are sixteen awards of the Board of Arbitration given in favour of the employees while scores of references made to the Board had been rejected and thus reached finality as the employees have no forum for appeal. However, the Govt. has chosen to approach the Parliament to get these awards given in favour of the employees under the sovereign power of the highest legislative forum of the country. Even the Parliament is entitled to reject the same only on extreme financial implication which affect the National economy . None of these awards deserve such rejection. In the wake of the strike notice, the Government decided to review its earlier decision and withdrew the resolution from the Parliament and the matter has been discussed on several occsasions in the Standing Committee without reaching any settlement even after the Staff side indicating its readiness to forego the arrears in order to reduce the financial outflow for the Govt. may be implemented in the light of disscussions held and modifications proposed by the staff side.
- Remove the arbitrary 5% ceiling and 3 years condition on compassionate appointment and withdraw court cases and absorb all waitlisted RRR .
On the pretext of the directive of the Supreme Court, Govt. introduced the concept of a 5% ceiling on the compassionate appointment. The fact was that there had been no such directive from the Honourable Supreme Court. There had been no rhyme or reason for this stipulation. Despite the repeated discussion on the subject at the National Council and its Standing Committee and the solemn assurance given by the Cabinet Secretary in the wake of the last strike action, nothing has been done in this regard to resolve the issue. It is pertinent to mention in this connection that the compassionate appointments in the Railways continue to be operated without any such ceiling. Moreover in the Department of Posts hundreds of compassionate appoinement candidates selected by Selection Committee are being denied jobs and attempt to oust them is on. Through legal stay orders these candidates known as RRR Candidated are fighting the battle. The Government should withdraw the SLP filed against them and absorb them all as regular employees.
- Implement the revision of bonus ceiling @ 3500/- in the case of all personnel employed by the Government including casual/contingent and daily ratedworkers and Grameen Dak Sewaks. Replace adhoc bonus with the PLB and remove the 60 days ceiling.
Even after the amendment to the Bonus Act and despite the issuance of orders raising the computation ceiling of Rs. 2500 to 3500 for regular employees in Governmental organizations, the casual and daily rated workers and the Gramee Dak Sewaks of the Postal Departments continue to be discriminated against. Their bonus is still being calculated at the old ceiling limit of Rs. 2500. The Government should issue necessary clarification to cover these employees within the ambit of its orders raising the ceiling limit to Rs. 3500.