Monday, 3 April 2017

Odisha Circle Union submits its suggestions / comments to CHQ / NFPE on review of Transfer Policy for onward submission to the Directorate




No. P3 NFPE – Odisha / 04 – 04 / 2017
Dated at Bhubaneswar the 3rd  April, 2017
To
      1.    Com. R N Parashar
General Secretary, AIPEU, Group-C, CHQ
Dada Ghosh Bhawan, New Delhi-110 008

      2.    Com. R N Parashar
Secretary General, NFPE, CHQ
North Avenue P O Building, New Delhi – 110 001

          Sub:-   Review of Transfer Policy Circulated vide Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31.01.2014 – Invitation of suggestion / comments


Ref.-    Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 28.03.2017

Respected Comrade,
This has a reference to the Directorate’s letter referred to above inviting suggestion / comments for review of Transfer Policy already circulated vide Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 which was just a compilation of earlier orders/instructions omitting the orders which are redundant.  

While this Circle Union appreciates the proposed modification for transfer under Rule-38 suggested vide Directorate letter under reference, we have the following additional suggestions.

      1.    Clear definition of “Station Tenure” specifying the cadre to which applicable:

      a.    As per instructions contained in DG P & T letter No.69/49/72-SPB, dated 29.08.1973 and No. 69/49/71-SPB I, dated 2 12.1971, the station tenure for non-gazetted staff has already been abolished and instruction has been issued to transfer such officials to some other post in the same station on completion of tenure and the tenure for non-gazetted Postmasters including HSG is 4 years (DG P & T Letter No. 69/15/79-SPB-I, dated 14.02.1980).

      b.    But while Para 4.2.IX of the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 specifies Station Tenure for Gazetted officers to be four years with provision of extension to six years  in individual cases,  Para 4.2.XIII of the said letter specifies not to enforce the provision of Station Tenure  on the cadre of Postal Assistant / Sorting Assistant.

Since the order is not quite specific on applicability of Station Tenure to non-gazetted staff including LSG, HSG-II, HSG-I Postmasters, such officials are being transferred with incorrect interpretation of the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014.

Therefore, the proposed revised order on Transfer Policy should clearly define the “Station Tenure” categorizing the cadres to which the same to be applied.

It may be noted that non-gazetted LSG, HSG-II, HSG-I Postmasters in Odisha Circle have been transferred recently on the plea of completion of station tenure in clear contravention to instructions contained in DG P & T letter No.69/49/72-SPB, dated 29.08.1973 and No. 69/49/71-SPB I, dated 2 12.1971 which has already been intimated to CHQ/NFPE. If such rule is still in force without any supersession, there should be a mention in the proposed revision of Transfer Policy.

      2.    Placing officials in the choice stations :

As specified in Para 4.2 of the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014, the broad principles of rotational transfers are;

          a.          Matching of human resource with requirements of posts and placing officials in the choice stations may be considered in the overall context of administrative requirement and austerity measures.

          b.          Inter-station transfers should be restricted to minimum in view of the austerity measure.

Further Para 4.2.I states that all officials due for rotational transfers on completion of post tenure / station tenure may be asked to give at least three options to be considered subject to administrative convenience and availability of posts.

But the reality is far from truth. The posts of LSG/HSG-II/HSG-I postmasters/supervisors are being managed by TSPAs for years together with complete mismatch of human resource. Even the LRPAs are manning the posts of the SPM of Single / Double Handed post offices at the sweet will of the administration. Options exercised by the officials are hardly acceded to. The austerity measure has never been implemented firmly though the ruling position was same prior to Transfer Policy issued vide Directorate letter dated 31-01-2014.

Secondly consequent upon implementation of Cadre Restructuring proposal of Group-C postal employees, now the P As working as S As / B E s / Trainers / CBS and PLI CPC Supervisors who are promoted to LSG and likely to be transferred from such posts not yet identified as LSG, there will be huge mismatch of human resource. There is also huge inter-station transfers due to such implementation.

Thus, the proposed revision of Transfer Policy,

            i.              Should contain specific guidelines to minimize the inter-station transfer and matching of human resource with requirements of posts for smooth implementation of Cadre Restructuring proposal for Group-C Postal employees.

            ii.             Should emphasize to accommodate the officials in their choice places even calling for additional options. The condition that their requests will be considered subject to administrative convenience which is always going against the interest of the officials needs to be deleted.

      3.    Clear guidelines for transfer and posting of Women / Physically handicapped employees, employees selected under sportsman quota and Union / Association Office bearers.

      a.    Although Para 5 of the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 clearly specifies to transfer  women employees only after ensuring that basic and essential amenities are available, nothing such happens in reality and women employees are seen to be transferred in clear violation of Postal Directorate letter No. 137-10/2011-SPB.II, dated 18.01.2011 instructing  all Circle Heads to identify post offices where basic amenities are not available and take action for providing them immediately.  

      b.    Similarly, in spite of clear and repeated instructions to post the physically handicapped officials near their native places, such officials are seen to be posted  inhumanely in far off places  and there is nothing mentioned in the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 regarding transfer of such officials.

      c.    The Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 is also silent about transfer of employees appointed under sportsman quota and eligible for availing suitable off for regular practice.  

      d.    Though concession of immunity from transfer from the headquarters of recognized service unions/associations is applicable to their office bearers, the same has not been incorporated in Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 for which these office bearers are unnecessarily put into troubles.

      e.    Since the instructions contained in the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 is often treated as the final order for transfer by most of the Divisional / Unit heads, all other rulings/guidelines specified for transfer and posting of women / physically handicapped employees, employees selected under sportsman quota and Union / Association Office bearers are often seen to be sidelined by the administration.

Therefore, for better staff welfare, the proposed revision of Transfer Policy should contain specific clauses for the above category of employees in supersession of all other rulings and guidelines with mandatory implementation without any deviation.

      4.    Frequent  transfer on the plea of administrative necessity / public interest:

Though Para 4.5 of the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 states that transfer may not be effected in the middle of the academic session, it is often witnessed that transfer and posting orders are being issued by the authorities frequently throughout the year on the plea of administrative necessity / public interest.

The above condition acts as a nice tool to threaten the employees when he/she does not succumbed to the ill will of the authority.

This flexibility of transferring officials at anytime on the plea of administrative necessity / public interest needs to be deleted in the proposed revision of the Transfer Policy for better staff welfare and fair play of justice.

      5.    Rotational transfer from Sensitive to non-sensitive posts:

Although in compliance to CVC Circular dated 17.04.2008 issued vide No.004/VGL/90 dated 01.05.2008, the Department of Posts has already identified the Sensitive and Non-sensitive posts vide Letter No.4-7/2009-Vig dated 13.09.2010, nothing has been mentioned in the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014.

Since the Directorate Letter No.141-141/2013-SPB-II dated 31-01-2014 is the latest compilation of transfer guidelines without any mention therein on rotation of Govt. servants from sensitive to non-sensitive posts, this has given an ample scope to avoid all other guidelines issued in this regard so far. Viz. DoPT OM No. C-11020/1/2015-Vig, dated 14.09.2015, Dte.’s letter No. 141-141/2013-SPB-II, dated 29.10.2016 etc.

Therefore, the proposed revision of Transfer Policy should be a compilation of all the latest rulings/guidelines on transfer and posting in force omitting all the orders which are redundant in nature. The compilation needs to be transparent and unambiguous as far as possible without creating any confusion in any manner. 

With regards.
Comradely yours,

No comments:

Post a Comment