‘RailSamachar’ seeking amendments to the MACP Guidelines

Because this important scheme is misused by some employees

If an early action has not been initiated on this issue, no employee will be willing to shoulder higher responsibilities and gives them a way for escaping from the duties with higher responsibilities

The main reason for refusing the regular promotion after getting the MACP is only to escape from shouldering the higher responsibilities as there was no further financial benefit or promotion to these employees or as they do not have to move away to other places on transfer

Seeking amendments in the MACP guidelines on getting financial up-gradation through MACP in view of refusal by many of the staff of Indian Railways, for shouldering higher responsibilities through regular Promotions, while enjoying higher salaries through MACP

Ref: – (i) RBE No. 233/2009, Dated: 01.10.1999 regarding ACP
(ii) RBE No. 101/2009, Dated: 10.06.2009 regarding MACP

During the submission of 5th Central Pay Commission, the Commission in its report has recommended a scheme with some of the conditions circulated vide RBE No. 233/1999 called Assured Career Progression (ACP) for the Central Government civilian employees in all Ministries/Departments with an intention to deal with the problem of genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the Central Government Employees due to lack of adequate promotional avenues. However, during its implementation, some of the doubts raised by the organized unions were also clarified by the government.

In the 6th Pay Commission, the name of the scheme has been changed from ACP to MACP with the same terms and conditions as specified and followed in 5th CPC.

The government has implemented the scheme of MACP only to the non-gazetted staff to compensate the financial loss incurred due to lack of promotional opportunities through financial up gradation, with a good intention that every employee should be benefited for completion of a good period of service through the promotion or through financial up gradation. But, this scheme is misused by some employees, by way of refusal to regular promotions after getting the same financial status through MACP and thus, avoiding higher responsibility, while enjoying higher financial benefits.

Moreover, the given MACP is non-functional meaning the staff will continue to retain their existing designations only until they are absorbed against a regular vacancy and the employee while accepting the financial up-gradations under ACP/MACP scheme are deemed to have given their unqualified acceptance for regular promotion on occurrence of vacancy subsequently, which clearly speaks that the employee who got MACP should not refuse his regular promotion, while receiving higher financial benefit.

The clear-cut guidelines for implementation of MACP are furnished in Para-10 of RBE No. 233/2009 which may kindly be referred, for realizing the need for the issue further amendments.

For implementing MACP, the same rule is applicable the 6th CPC also.

MACP-25: “If regular promotion offered is refused by the employee before becoming entitled to financial up-gradation, no financial up-gradation shall be allowed as such an employee has not been stagnated due to lack of opportunities. If, however, financial up-gradation has been allowed due to stagnation and subsequently refuses promotion, it shall not be a ground to withdraw financial up-gradation. He shall, however, not be considered eligible to be considered for further financial up-gradation till he agrees to be considered for further promotion.”

However, the above guidelines issued by Railway Board are highly by the employees of Indian Railways and it is not understood how an employee who refuses to shoulder higher responsibility can be given a higher financial benefit.

It is observed in three cases recently, some staff were awarded financial up-gradation to the higher GP of Rs. 4,600 (which is the GP of Ch.OS in ministerial cadre) during the month of 2013 through MACP.

Subsequently, in the normal procedure, they were promoted to the regular post of Chief Office Superintendent (same GP of Rs. 4,600) in April-July of 2016 for shouldering the higher responsibilities. The leftover service for these staff is more than 10 years at the time when they refused their regular promotion. Two of them were offered a promotion at the same station but refused to accept the regular promotion. Again they have been promoted as a Chief Office Superintendent in January-February of 2018 but the result was same. The process of promotion, refusal, again and again, is a mere wastage of manpower.

However, it is regretted to inform that all the staff had refused to shoulder higher responsibilities as Chief Office Superintendent, for the simple reason that they were already enjoying the financial benefit of GP Rs.4,600 (which is the GP of Ch.OS in ministerial cadre) and there is no need to shoulder higher responsibilities. In the ministerial cadre GP of Rs. 4,600 (which is the GP of Ch.OS in ministerial cadre) is the highest Grade, for those recruited in GP Rs.1900 as deliberated in detail below:

The Railway servant appointed as Junior Clerk in PB-I in the Grade Pay of Rs.1900 gets his 1st regular promotion as Sr.Clerk in PB-I in Grade Pay Rs.2800 and gets his 2nd regular promotion as Office Superintendent in PB-2 in Grade Pay Rs.4,200. They may be due for third regular promotion as Chief Office Superintendent in Grade Pay Rs. 4,600. But, if they do not get promotion within 10 years of duration after their second regular promotion due to lack of promotional opportunities, they may get MACP in PB-2 in Grade Pay Rs. 4,600, which is financially equivalent to the financial benefits of the Chief Office Superintendent (GP Rs. 4,600).

At present, if the employee refuses to accept the regular promotion, the administration is simply debarring for the first and second time and again empanelling for selection after one year. It purely wasting of manpower and employees working in the lower grades are losing the promotional opportunities.

Benefiting the financial up-gradation through MACP and subsequently, refusing to shoulder higher responsibilities through regular promotion should not be entertained the financial benefits should not be continued further and the financial benefit already availed by the employee should be recovered to avoid misuse of money of public exchequer. Further, it may also be noted that the employees benefiting under MACP are also eligible for getting all the benefits like HRA, NDA, NHA, TA, Privilege passes, PTOs, Railway Quarter on the basis of Grade Pay and these benefits are enjoyed on par with the employee who got regular promotion and shouldering higher responsibilities.

“The Financial Up-gradation for the Railway employee is implemented for those who are losing promotion prospects due to lack of opportunities only.”

This became a bad practice by the employees to refuse the promotions after getting monetary benefits through MACP scheme. In this regard, modification in MACP guideline may be issued to avoid some of the employees getting a higher payment, but shouldering lower responsibilities. If an early action has not been initiated on this issue, no employee will be willing to shoulder higher responsibilities and gives them a way for escaping from the duties with higher responsibilities, after getting up-gradation through MACP which will finally lead to deteriorating the quality of the working system in the esteemed organization like Indian Railways.

The main reason for refusing the regular promotion after getting the MACP is only to escape from shouldering the higher responsibilities as there was no further financial benefit or promotion to these employees or as they do not have to move away to other places on transfer.

The employee benefited through MACP and enjoying all the benefits of regular promotion holder equally, should also shoulder higher responsibilities offered through regular promotion whenever it is awarded and should not be allowed to refuse. If he regrets to shoulder promotional responsibilities in a regular manner, the financial up gradation awarded through MACP should be withdrawn and recover all the financial benefits he has enjoyed under the scheme up till that time.

It is highly appreciated and it also avoids misuse of money of public exchequer, if amendments to the MACP scheme to this effect are issued at an early date.

Hence, it is requested to deeply considere the same by the Railway Board with this ‘Rail Samachar’s proposal to amendments to MACP scheme at an early date which will be benefit Indian Railways as well as railway employees at large.