MCM Grade Pay Issue in Ordnance Establishments – Granting of 4600 Grade Pay to Master Craftsman (MCM) on 3rd MACP for Defence Civilians Employees
INDWF General Secretary Shri.R.Srinivasan writes to DOPT Secretary regarding the matter of granting 4600 Grade Pay to MCM on 3rd financial upgradation on MACP Scheme in Defence Establishments. He explained about the status of MCM cadre in the 5th CPC and he also appealed to grant of 4600 Grade Pay to MCM on 3rd MACP as per the Dopt clarification of 2001… The text of the letter is reproduced and given below for your information…
Granting of Rs.4600 to MCM on 3rd MACP for Defence civilians
Brief about Master Craftsman granting MACP – III to Rs.4600/- Grade Pay in Defence
Master Craftsman in Defence were drawing the pay scale Rs.4500 – 7000 prior to 01.01.2006.
Through Fast Track committee on the recommendations of 6th CPC, Master craftsman (MCM) were upgraded to Rs.4200/- Grade Pay w.e.f. 01.01.2006 at par with Railways – vide M of D letter No.11 (5)/2009-D(Civ-I) dt 14.06.2010 and the re-structuring of Artisans were implemented by introducing 4 grade structure i.e., Skilled, HS Grade – II, HS Grade-I and MCM with a ratio of 45 : 20.625 : 20.625 : 13.75% respectively.
Principle Controller of Accounts Fys (PC of A(FYS), Kolkatta vide their letter No.Pay/Tech-II/04/2011/15 dated 26.10.2011 and 12.12.2011 clarified that the Industrial Employees who become MCM before 01.01.2006 is eligible for 3rd MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-.
|Whether an Industrial Employee who was placed to MCM before 01.01.2006 and promoted to MCM on 01.01.2006 is eligible for 3rd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4600 after 30 years on the plea that he was granted only two up-gradations in his entire service i.e. Skilled to HS and HS to MCM||YES, such MCM is eligible for 3rd MACP with Grade Pay Rs.4600/- after 30 years of service if found otherwise eligible, as they got two promotions prior to 01.01.2006 i.e. Skilled to HS and HS to MCM. But those Industrial Employees who were not placed to MCM before 01.01.2006 are not eligible for 3rd MACP because such persons have got or shall get promotion from Skilled to HS –II, from HS II to HS I and HS I to MCM, so there is no scope for 3rd MACP upgradation.|
After issue of the above clarifications by the PC of A (FYS) Kolkatta, Master Craftsman (MCM) who became MCM before 01.01.2006 were granted 3rd MACP to Rs.4600/- Grade Pay on completion of 30 years of service.
Subsequently the DOP&T vide their letter DOP&T I.D.No.7680/12/CR dated 13.07.2012 and M of D I.D. No.11 (5)/2009-D (Civ-I) Dated 23.07.2012 clarified.
a) Para 8 of Annexure-1 of DOP&T OM No.35034/3/2008-Est(D) dt. 19.05.2009 of MACPs provides that promotion earned in the post carrying same grade pay in the promotional post carrying same grade pay in the promotional hierarchy as per recruitment rules shall be counted for the purpose of MACP
s. Financial up-gradation under MACPs in respect of Master Craftsman will be in the same Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- as that of the Promotional post of Chargeman.
b) ACP/MACP schemes have been introduced by the Government in order to mitigate stagnation faced by employees due to lack of promotional avenues. Financial up-gradation under ACP/MACP scheme cannot be more than what can be allowed to an employee on his normal promotion. It may be classified that placement of Highly Skilled Grade as Master Craftsman prior to 01.01.2006 is to be treated as one Promotion for the purpose of MACP benefits.
After issue of the above clarifications, the IEs who became MCM prior to 01.01.2006 and who were granted Rs.4200/- Grade Pay were denied the 3rd MACP and the up-gradation of Pay was considered as promotion. Similarly, MCM who got Chargeman which is also having identical pay were also counted as promotion and the Grade Pay Rs.4600/- granted have been denied. Now, accounts authorities have fixed pay be revising to Rs.4200/- Grade Pay accordingly, MCM employees on their superannuation, pension and all other terminal benefits have been re-fixed and paid on the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-.
Representation was sent by the Federations and by Ordnance Factory Board to M of D which was forwarded to DOP&T in which we have submitted that:
As per clarification No.35 of DOP&T OM F.No.35035/1/97-Estt(D)(Vol-IV) dt 15th July 2001 which is being reproduced.
|Sl.No||Point of Doubt||Clarification|
|35||Whether Placement/ Appointment in higher scales of Pay based on the recommendation of the Pay commissions or committees set up to rationalize the cadre is to be reckoned as Promotion/Financial up-gradation and offset against the two financial up-gradations applicable under the ACP Scheme?||Where all the post are placed in Higher scale of Pay, with or without a change in the designation, without requirement of any new qualification for holding the post in the higher grade, not specified in the Recruitment Rules for the existing post and without involving any change in responsibilities and duties, then placement of all the incumbents against such upgraded posts is not be treated as promotion/upgradation|
a) As per DOP&T
OM of 2001 mentioned above, it is clear that all the posts of MCM as on 31.12.2005 were enbloc upgraded to higher pay scale, the higher pay scale granted to MCM w.e.f 01.01.2006 cannot be treated as promotion. Accordingly the MCM who are placed in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 w.e.f 01.01.2006 are entitled for their next ACP/MACP in PB2 +Grade Pay Rs.4600/- by ignoring the higher pay scale granted to them w.e.f. 01.01.2006.
b) The post of MCM was not a post of hierarchy prior to 01.01.2006 and it was part of HS Grade. The ratio which was introduced for Industrial Employees in M of D w.e.f. 20.05.2003, the ratio was 45:55 between Skilled and HS Grade respectively 25% of 55% was placed as MCM which is a part of hierarchy till 31.12.2005. Therefore MCM placed from HS Grade was not treated as promotion only after 01.01.2006; it was treated as a separate grade.
c) The post of MCM, is part of hierarchy w.e.f.01.01.2006 but not a feeder post to Chargeman and as such any movement from MCM to Chargeman cannot be treated as promotion in the identical Grade Pay.
|From 20.05.2003||w.e.f 01.01.2006|
|Skilled – 45%||Skilled – 45%|
|HS Grade – 55%||HS Grade II – 20.625%|
|MCM – 25% of 55%||HS Grade I – 20.625%|
|Only two grades were there till 31.12.2005||MCM – 13.75%|
Thus, till 31.12.2005, MCM was part of HS Grade and it was treated as part of HS Grade and was treated as placement and not counted for ACP.
Skilled ——– HS Grade I Promotion/ I ACP
HS Grade — MCM II ACP
MCM ——— was granted 3rd MACP w.e.f. 01.09.2008
Further, ACP – II to the erstwhile pay of Rs.5000-8000 was granted prior to the promotion of MCM and subsequently they were promoted to Rs.4500 – 7000 but they continue to draw the ACP scale Rs.5000 – 8000 prior to 01.01.2006.
They were also denied the benefit of 3rd MACP after 01.09.2008 which is unfair.
MCM to Chargeman is not a feeder post only as per SRO HS I is the feeder post thus MCM to be treated as re-designation and not as promotion.
Therefore, denial of 3rd MACP is not as per the DOP&T clarification of 2001.They should be allowed to continue in Rs.4600/- Grade Pay as was granted.
General Secretary/INDWF & Member National Council (JCM) Standing Committee
Reference Dopt order is given below for your ready reference…
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
(Department of Personnel and Training)
New Delhi 110001
July 18, 2001
Subject: – ASSURED CAREER PROGRESSION SCHEME FOR THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES – CLARIFICATIONS REGARDING
The undersigned is directed to invite reference to the Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum of even number dated August 9, 1999 regarding the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACPS) and subsequent Office Memorandum dated February 10, 2000 clarifying the various points of doubt received from various quarters.
2. Some more situations in which a doubt persists in various organizations in regard to applicability/implementation of ACP Scheme have been brought to the notice of this Department. These have been duly examined and appropriate advice has been conveyed in individual cases. However, as it is observed that similar doubts are being received from various other Ministries/Departments/Organizations, it has been considered appropriate to issue a second set of clarificatory orders containing point-wise clarification to the additional points of doubt.
3. Cases where the ACP Scheme has already been implemented shall be reviewed/rectified if the same are not found to be in accordance with the scheme/clarifications. 3. All Ministries/Departments may give wide circulation to these clarificatory instructions for general guidance and appropriate action in the matter.
4. Hindi version would follow.
DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA
[Reference: Office Memorandum No. 35034/1/97-Estt(D)(Vol.IV) dated 18.7.2001]
Point of doubt
An employee was promoted from Grade ‘A’ to Grade ‘C’. Grade ‘B’ was introduced in the hierarchy in between Grade ‘A’ and Grade ‘C’ subsequent to such promotion. Will he be entitled to any more financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme (ACPS) considering that he is already placed in the third level of the hierarchy?
The reply is in the affirmative. The employee has got only one promotion in his career as per the hierarchy existing at the time of his promotion. The subsequent creation of the post in Grade ‘B’ will not, therefore, make any material difference in the situation in relation to the case of this employee for the purpose of grant of second financial upgradation under ACPS The newly created Grade ‘B’ would, as such, need to be ignored in his case. However, persons in Grade ‘A’, who become entitled to financial upgradation only after introduction of Grade ‘B’ in the hierarchy, will be entitled for grant of financial upgradation only in Grade ‘B’ subject to fulfillment of the other stipulations and conditions specified in the ACP Scheme introduced on 9.8.1999.
An employee has superannuated after 9.8.1999, i.e. the date from which ACPS was introduced. He had completed the required eligibility service as on 9.8.1999 for grant of financial upgradation but he retired on superannuation before the Screening Committee could meet to assess his suitability for grant of benefits under ACPS. Will he be entitled for financial upgradation under ACPS?
In terms of condition no. 3 of the ACP Scheme introduced vide O.M. dated 9.8.1999, the financial benefit under the ACPS shall be granted from the date of completion of the eligibility period prescribed under the ACPS or from the date of issue of the instructions whichever is later. Therefore, in respect of employees who had completed eligibility service as on 9.8.1999 but retired prior to meeting of the first Screening Committee meeting, if the assessment to decide grant of financial upgradation is based on ACRs and other service records, the employees who retired after 9.8.1999 may also be considered by the Screening Committee and, if recommended for grant of financial upgradation, such employees may be allowed the benefit of ACPS from the due date. If, however, the assessment also includes passing of a trade test/skill test/written examination (as prescribed for regular promotion) under ACPS and the employee had not qualified in such tests already, then it may not be possible to consider the retired persons, as assessment based on such tests is not possible after the date of superannuation.
Whether placement/appointment in higher scales of pay based on the recommendations of the Pay Commissions or Committees set up to rationalise the cadres is to be reckoned as promotion/financial upgradation and offset against the two financial upgradations applicable under the ACP Scheme?
Where all the posts are placed in a higher scale of pay, with or without a change in the designation; without requirement of any new qualification for holding the post in the higher grade, not specified in the Recruitment Rules for the existing post, and without involving any change in responsibilities and duties, then placement of all the incumbents against such upgraded posts is not be treated as promotion/upgradation. Where, however, rationalisation/restructuring involves creation of a number of new hierarchical grades in the rationalised set up and some of the incumbents in the pre-rationalised set up are placed in the hierarchy of the restructured set up in a grade higher than the normal corresponding level taking into consideration their length of service in existing pre-structured/pre-rationalised grade, then this will be taken as promotion/upgradation.
If the rationalised/restructured grades require possession of a specific nature of qualification and experience, not specified for the existing posts in pre-rationlised set up, and existing incumbents in pre-rationalised scales/pre-structured grades, who are in possession of the required qualification/ experience are placed directly in the rationalised upgraded post, such placement will also not be viewed as promotion/upgradation. However, if existing incumbents in the pre-rationalised grades who do not possess the said qualification/ experience are considered for placement in the corresponding rationalised grade only after completion of specified length of service in the existing grade, then such a placement will be taken as promotion/upgradation.
Where placement in a higher grade involves assumption of higher responsibilities and duties, then such upgradation will be viewed as promotion/upgradation.
Where only a part of the posts are placed in a higher scale and rest are retained in the existing grade, thereby involving redistribution of posts, then it involves creation of another grade in the hierarchy requiring framing of separate recruitment rules for the upgraded posts. Placement of existing incumbents to the extent of upgradations involved, in the upgraded post will also be treated as promotion/upgradation and offset against entitlements under the ACPS.
For any doubts in this regard, matter should be referred to the Department of Personnel and Training (Establishment ‘D’ Section) giving all relevant details.
An employee was initially appointed on deputation in a grade higher than the grade of the post held on regular basis and was subsequently absorbed against the ex-cadre post. Will such initial period of deputation in the higher grade prior to date of absorption be counted towards residency period/ ‘regular service’ for purposes of ACPS?
In reply to points of doubt No. 4 to 6 in DoP&T O.M. dated 10.2.2000, it has been stated that where a person is appointed on direct recruitment/transfer basis from another post in the same grade, then past regular service as well as past promotions, in the earlier post, will be counted for computing regular service for the purpose of ACPS in the new hierarchy. The reason being that so long as service is in the same scale during the period in question, it is immaterial whether he has been holding different posts in the same scale. However, if the appointment is made to a post in a higher grade, then such appointment , whether by direct recruitment or by transfer or initially on deputation followed by absorption, will be treated as direct recruitment and past service/promotion (which was in a different scale) will not be counted
In the case where a person is appointed to an ex-cadre post in higher scale initially on deputation followed by absorption, while the service rendered in the earlier post, which was in a lower scale can not be counted, there is no objection to the period spent initially on deputation in the ex-cadre post prior to absorption being counted towards regular service for the purposes of grant of financial upgradation under ACPS as it is in the same scale of pay and same post.
Whether it is necessary to have SC/ST members in the Screening Committees set up for grant of ACPS?
As clarified vide condition no. 12 of ACP Scheme (vide DoP&T O.M. dated 9.8.1999), reservation orders/roster shall not apply to the ACP Scheme. Consequently, it is not necessary to have an officer from SC/ST communities on the Screening Committee constituted for deciding the suitability of the employee for upgradations under ACPS.
A person has refused a vacancy-based promotion offered to him prior to his becoming eligible for financial upgradation under ACPS, on personal grounds. Will he be eligible for financial upgradation under ACPS? A person had refused a regular promotion for personal reasons. He has since completed 24 years’ of service. Will he be entitled for 2nd financial upgradation?
The ACP Scheme has been introduced to provide relief in cases of acute stagnation where the employees, despite being eligible for promotion in all respects, are deprived of regular promotion for long periods due to non-availability of vacancies in the higher grade. Cases of holders of isolated posts have also been covered under ACPS, as they do not have any promotional avenues. However, where a promotion has been offered before the employee could be considered for grant of benefit under ACPS but he refuses to accept such promotion, then he cannot be said to be stagnating as he has opted to remain in the existing grade on his own volition. As such, there is no case for grant of ACPS in such cases. The official can be considered for regular promotion again after the necessary debarment period.
In the second case also, since in terms of condition No. 10 of the ACPS, on grant of ACPS, the employee shall be deemed to have given his unqualified acceptance for regular promotion on occurrence of vacancy, the officer will have to give in writing his acceptance of the regular promotion when offered again after the debarment period before he can be considered for grant of second financial upgradation under ACPS.
An employee is appointed to a lower grade as a result of unilateral transfer on personal request in terms of FR 15(2). Will the period of service rendered in the higher post count for the purposes of ACPS?
Condition no. 14 of the ACPS (DoP&T O.M. dated 9.8.1999), inter-alia, states that in case of transfer including unilateral transfer on request, regular service rendered in previous organisation shall be counted along with regular service in the new organisation for the purposes of getting financial upgradation under the Scheme. This condition covers cases where a unilateral transfer is to a lower post. However, financial upgradations under the ACPS shall be allowed in the hierarchy of the new post.
An employee drawing pay in the scale of Rs.800-1150 (pre-revised) was declared surplus and was re-deployed as Peon in a Ministry through the Surplus Cell in the scale of Rs.750-940 (pre-revised). However, he was allowed to draw pay in the scale of Rs.800-1150 as personal to him even after redeployment in the lower grade. What shall be his entitlements under ACPS?
As the employee has remained in the scale of Rs.800-1150 all along and has not availed any promotion, he is entitled to two financial upgradations in a scale higher than Rs.800-1150 (pre-revised) irrespective of the post actually held after redeployment. Since in the Ministry, a Group ‘D’ employee is eligible for promotion to the grade of LDC provided he is a matriculate and as a post in the scale of Rs.825-1200 (S-4) is not in the normal hierarchy in the Secretariat, such an employee can be considered for two financial upgradations in the grades of LDC and UDC provided he is a matriculate Otherwise he will get only one financial upgradation in the revised scale of Rs.825-1200 (Rs.2750-4400 revised). Cases of other persons re-deployed to lower posts through the Surplus Cell may also be regulated accordingly.
A cadre consists of 4 Grades – ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ (in ascending order). Upon restructuring of a cadre, Grade ‘B’ is abolished from a date subsequent to 9.8.1999. Employees recruited in Grade ‘A’, who are eligible for financial upgradation on or after 9.8.1999 but before the date of effect of restructuring, get first/second financial upgradation in Grade ‘B’ and Grade ‘C’ respectively but those who become eligible for financial upgradation after the restructuring has been effected are entitled to first financial upgradation in Grade ‘C’ and second financial upgradation in Grade ‘D’. This is anomalous. The cases of earlier set of employees should be reviewed and they may be allowed financial upgradations as applicable to the latter category of employees.
The benefit of ACP Scheme is to be allowed as per the hierarchy existing, as on the date the employees become eligible for financial upgradation under ACPS. . Cadres/hierarchical structures are never static and are always subject to review based on recommendations of Pay Commissions/Expert Committees or otherwise and it is not possible to review the entitlements under ACPS already earned every time a cadre is reviewed. ACPS is only a temporary solution to provide relief to stagnating employees and the lasting solution for stagnation lies in review of cadre structures, as regular promotions will be earned in such restructured grades. All the employees will benefit from such cadre restructuring.
An employee in Grade ‘A’ is eligible for promotion simultaneously to Grades ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ (in ascending order) with varying requirements of length of service in the present grade. In other words, he has multiple channels of promotion. What shall be his eligibility under the ACP?
Provisions in the existing Recruitment Rules in various organisations providing for multiple channels for promotion are not consistent with the guidelines on framing of the Recruitment Rules. All such Rules should be reviewed immediately so as to provide only a single channel of promotion. However, till such a review is undertaken, the first financial upgradation in such cases shall be allowed with reference to the lowest promotional Grade which is Grade ‘B’ If he does not earn any promotion in 24 years, his second financial upgradation will be as per the hierarchy of Grade ‘B’. However, if he has already earned one regular promotion, then his second financial upgradation shall be as per the hierarchy of the Grade to which he has been promoted.
Whether service rendered in an autonomous body/statutory body/ State Government prior to appointment in Central Government as a direct recruit prior to appointment in the Central Government will be counted while computing regular service for the purpose of grant of financial upgradations under the ACP Scheme?
ACP Scheme is applicable to Central Government Civilian employees and for the purpose of financial upgradations under the ACP Scheme, only the regular service rendered after regular appointment in a Central Government civilian post is to be counted. Therefore, service rendered in an autonomous body/statutory body/State Government is not to be counted for the purpose. Correspondingly, promotions earned in these bodies prior to appointment in the Central Government are also to be ignored. The clarification in reply to point of doubt no. 4 to 6 in DoP&T O.M. dated 10.2.2000 providing for counting of past service in another organisation in the same grade is only in relation to past service in a civilian post held in the Central Government.
On the basis of recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission, a uniform pay structure has been introduced for Stenographers in the non-Secretariat organisations whereby the posts have been distributed in the ratio of 40:40:20 in the grades of Stenographer Grade-III (Rs.4000-6000), Stenographer Grade-II (Rs.5000-8000) and Stenographers Grade-I (Rs.5500-9000) However, in a particular non-Secretariat organisation, there is only an isolated post of Stenographer in the scale of Rs.4000-6000. Will he be entitled to financial upgradations in the scale of Rs.4500-7000 and Rs.5000-8000 as per Annexure II to O.M. dated 9.8.1999 or can he be allowed financial upgradations in the grades of Stenographer Grade-II and Stenographer Grade-I ?
In reply to point of doubt No. 10 in DoP&T O.M. dated 10.2.2000, it has been stated that the scales of pay for ACPS for isolated posts shall be same as those applicable for similar posts in the same Ministry/Department/Cadre except where the Pay Commission has recommended specific pay scales for mobility under ACPS. Such cases may be specifically examined by respective Ministries/Departments in consultation with the Department of Personnel and Training. In the case of remaining isolated posts, the pay scales contained in Annexure-II of O.M. dated August 9, 1999 shall apply. Thus, hierarchy in Annexure-II of O.M. dated August, 9, 1999 applies where Pay Commission has not made any specific recommendation regarding scales to be allowed under the ACPS and where it is not possible to identify similar posts in same organisation. In the case of stenographers in non-Secretariat organisations, which is a common category post, the Pay Commission has recommended a uniform grade structure for which has been accepted by the Government. Since the isolated post of Stenographer in scale of Rs.4000-6000 in a subordinate office is comparable to corresponding posts of Stenographer Grade-III in other non-Secretariat organisations under the same Ministry, the uniform pay (grade) structure for Stenographers may be adopted for the purpose of allowing financial upgradations to the said isolated post. In the instant case of an isolated post of Stenographer (Rs.4000-6000) in a non-Sect organisation, first and the second financial upgradations may be allowed in the scales of Rs.5000-8000 (Steno Grade-II) and Rs.5500-9000 (Stenographer Grade-I) respectively provided he is otherwise eligible. A similar approach can be adopted in respect of all other isolated posts belonging to common categories for which Pay Commission has similarly recommended a uniform grade structure which has been accepted and notified in part ‘B’ of the Ministry of Finance notification dated September 30, 1997 or agreed to by the Government subsequently. If such an isolated post is in a Central Ministry/Department, then the structure as recommended and accepted for similar common category posts in the Central Ministry/ Department may be adopted. If the isolated post is in a non-Secretariat organisation, then the uniform hierarchy as recommended for similar posts in the non-Secretariat organisations may be followed.
In certain organisations, an employee after his selection on direct recruitment basis or even on promotion is required to undergo an induction training before he is given a functional post. Whether such induction training shall count towards the eligibility service for ACPS?
If under the relevant Recruitment/Service Rules, the induction training counts towards eligibility service for regular promotion, the same will also be counted towards the 12-years/24 years residency period/regular service required for financial upgradations under ACP Scheme.
A person is working in the immediate promotional grade on ad-hoc basis. Is he eligible for financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme? Will his pay be refixed.?
An ad-hoc promotion is made only in an exigency of work where the post cannot be kept vacant and such appointment is to be discontinued as soon as a regular incumbent is appointed. In terms of existing guidelines, continuation of such arrangement beyond one year is also subject to prior concurrence of DoP&T. Thus such an employee can be reverted to the original regular post at any moment. Therefore, case of an employee holding the higher promotional grade/any other post on ad-hoc basis, for grant of financial upgradation under ACPS cannot be ignored. Upon being recommended for grant of