30 Sep Latest News

CHQ News: Joint committee recommendations on implementation of CPSE cadre hierarchy in BSNL

Details

Published Date

Joint committee recommendations on implementation of CPSE cadre hierarchy in BSNL to streamline the promotional avenue of executives which is presently at stand still due to thousands of litigation on seniority issues, has finally signed by the committee members, of course with the dissent note of two members who are master in lingering and criticizing the decisions sitting on the decision taking chair. They have not only given dissent note but raised various hypothetical questions on the recommendations of the joint committee signed by the majority of the members. Click here for recommendations on implementation of CPSE cadre hierarchy

This association is highly thankful to our Chairman of the committee Sh Mohd. Ashraf Khan for taking bold and much required decision in the best interest of the company as well as executives. This issue was studied and highlighted only by AIGETOA but we extend heartiest gratitude to all executives association for recognizing and supporting this very basic demand of AIGETOA.

After going through the longer dissent note of the GM (Establishment) than the actual recommendations any one can realize her lack of knowledge about the field working of the BSNL and her negative approach towards the career of internal executives of BSNL. It may be because she had never worked in field and she is still living in DOT era where only ITS officers are recognized as owner of the company and JTO was Group-C. Go through her long dissent note and following observation of this association on her dissent note. Dissent Note of GM(Estt)& Dissent Note of GM(EF)

• As per her dissent note one JTO working on E4 cannot handle the responsibility of AGM without soldering the role and responsibility of SDE, Sr.SDE. she must know that the JTO who is working on E4 has worked about 15-16 years out of which he has actually worked more than 10 years as SDE or Sr. SDE in field and also sometimes DE/AGM in the name look after, officiating or on any other compulsion. Moreover in present scenario there is no difference in working of JTO, SDE and Sr. SDE in field. If one JTO will confine his working at the level of JTO only, complete working of BSNL will collapse just within month. She is one among who is very much advocating the external recruitment in the name of MT and DGM. As per her opinion one external candidates with 12 years of post qualification experience in any field and at any level having no idea of BSNL and have never worked at the level of JTO, SDE , Sr. SDE and DE/AGM in BSNL, can well work in BSNL as DGM but one JTO of BSNL who has worked at all the level and in all the field of telecom cannot work as AGM. This completely shows her lack of knowledge in field working and negative approach towards the career of internal executives.

• She also pointed out that if this policy is implemented performance orientation in the company will be compromised. We can only pray for madam to “Get well soon” if she believes that existing promotion of executives are based on performance and talent and executives are getting functional promotion on account of their performance and talent in BSNL.

• She has also pointed out that existing promotion policy where one JTO remain JTO for more than 20 years is time tested hierarchy to meet the BSNL requirement and if recommendations are accepted one JTO will be promoted to SDE just in 5 years and there will become zero JTO in next five years. She must have realized the fact that BSNL has recruited professionally qualified executives at JTO/JAO not the bounded laborer. Feeder level post is not filled by stopping the promotion but it is filled by making regular induction. Every executive have the right of promotion to next grade at par with similarly placed CPSEs so that their social parity can be maintained and to attract the loyalty. Existing promotion policy of BSNL is not time tested but has become complete outdated 15 years before on the day of formation of CPSE. As per her mentioning she has studied the various HR policies of different CPSE, it would have been better if she had named one CPSE where direct recruits executives are not promoted to next grade just in 3-4 years. DOP&T said one candidates having diploma cannot become Engineer before 10 years of service but she is pleased to propose TTA (Diploma at NE9) to be promoted to JTO ( Engineer at E2) just in five years i.e. one non-executives (diploma qualification) virtually got one promotion to JTO (Engineering Graduate) but he actually get five promotion just in five years as he jumped E10, E11, E0 and E1 pay scale but she proposed one JTO (E2) to SDE (E3) promotion in 12 years and then in 10 years.

• She has no objection if all ADET (now proposed MT) recruited at E3 level will cross the outer wall of pay scale i.e. E9 before his retirement but she is unable to digest if one JTO/JAO recruited at E2 level will reach to E5 level. She has advocated the LICE as a tool to measure the talent but rejected the actual performance in field which can be measured through APAR only. Instead of advocating LICE/LDCE she should have advocated the monitoring of APAR w.r.t. actual performance of the executives in field rather forcing the executives to show their performance on paper. We know various such JTO who could not qualify the LDCE just because they are performing in field and many such JTO have qualified the LDCE just because they don’t perform in field but have sufficient time to study.

• All CPSE of the country promote their all direct recruits executives functionally at least up to E7 level irrespective of their performance and some good performer will reach up to E9 scale and Directors but here she has proposed that most of the direct recruits executives must get retire at the level AGM (E4) and some can reach up to Directors by passing the exams based on academic syllabus. She must know that executives are working more than 20 years on single post not because of their performance and talent but because of complete HR failure for which she is one of the responsible officers.

• There is no doubt when one outdated promotion policy will be replaced belated by new one there will be number of issues but all such issues will be resolved over the time. Does it mean we should live in outdated era? What we can say that the person who is sitting on the chair of decision making must take decision and must be confident enough to handle the consequences rather she stop the decision in the fear of consequences. Our CMD and Director (HR) must ensure that any person who is sitting specially on such chairs must belong to BSNL and must have worked at least 15-20 years in filed so that informed and unbiased decision can be expected in the best interest of the company.