MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 01.07.2011WITH THE STAFF SIDE TO DISCUSS ISSUES RELATING TO POSTMAN.
Sub: Meeting of the Committee held on 01.07.2011 to consider issues relating to the Postmen- Circulation of minutes;
D.G. Posts No. 1/2/2010-SR dated 25th August, August, 2011.
Please find enclosed a copy of Minutes of the meeting of committee constituted under Chairpersonship of CGM (MB) to discuss issues relating to Postmen, which was held on 01.07.2011, for information and necessary action.
2. Action Taken Report on the decisions taken may be furnished at the earliest.
Minutes of the Meeting held on 01.07.2011with the staff side to discuss issues relating to Postman.
A meeting was held on 01.07.2011 in the office of CGM (MB) in Dak Bhawan, New Delhi to discuss various issues relating to postmen. The following officers/Union representatives were present:
i)Ms.Kalpana Tiwari, CGM (MB)
ii)Shri V.K.Tiwari, DDG (Establishment)
iii)Shri Rishikesh, Director (MailManagement)
iv)Shri Surender Kumar, ADG (GDS)
v)Sh.M.Krishnan, Secretary General,
National Federation of Postal Employees
viSh. D. Theagarajan, Secretyary General (FNPO)
vii)Sh.K.V. Sridharan, General Secretary,
AIPE Union, Class III
viii)Sh. I.S. Dabas, General Secretary,
AIPE Union Postmen & Group D/MTS
(ix) Sh. T.N. Rahate, General Secretary,
NUPE Postmen & Gr. D /MTS
2. During the discussion, the following issues were discussed.
a) It was agreed that the designation of sorting postmen, which was done away with the recent orders issued by the Establishment Division of the Directorate, may be resorted. The post of the sorting postmen, which might have been diverted, redeployed or abolished by the Circles in the wake of the said orders, may also be restored. It was also agreed that based on the quantum of mail, the need to complete beats sorting activity at least an hour before departure of the postmen for their respective beats and existing norms, concerned Divisional Head/Postmaster may decide the number of sorting postmen/postmen required for the purpose of beat sorting. Further, all postmen may be involved in beat sorting by rotation. Establishment Division may issue necessary clarifications in this regard.
b) Regarding extraction of data entry work from postmen, it was agreed to assess the work currently being taken from postmen by calling a report from Circles and considering a study for this purpose. Establishment Division may call for the requisite report from the Circles.
c) Regarding irregular computation of working hours for postmen in the field units, the staff side was informed that the work study report will be once again studied by Establishment Division and Mails Division to assess if all areas of work were covered and if deviations were in the recommendations by Work Study unit and orders of revised norms issued by Establishment Division. Any further action will be taken after going through the work study report and orders of Establishment Division.
d) On renewal of minimum cycleable distance for grant of cycle maintenance allowance to postmen, it was informed that the matter has been taken up with Ministry of Finance.
e) Regarding payment of incentive to postmen for delivery of Speed Post, it was agreed that the work load may be assessed in order to further understand the issue.
f) It was agreed to assess the average beat length of postmen for the purpose of deciding the maximum beat length after calling for the details of existing beat length as the staff side informed that in some Circles the beat length stretched up to 40 KMs or more. It was also agreed by the staff side that postmen will carry all articles in each beat(first class, second class, Speed Post, registered post, money orders etc.) After receipt of information from the Circles, the need for a revised work study can be assessed. Establishment Division may take necessary action in this regard.
g) The staff side also raised the issue of combination of beat/double duty In case postmen staff goes on leave. It was assured that the issue will be looked into.
==============================================================
PENSION PRODUCTS: PANEL FOR GUARANTEED RETURNS
A parliamentary standing committee has favoured offering minimum guaranteed returns to subscribers of the New Pension System (NPS) and recommended a 26% foreign direct investment (FDI) cap in the pension sector through a legislative process.
The parliamentary standing committee on finance which submitted its report on the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) Bill on Tuesday, said that "as any effective pension scheme needs to be underpinned by stability of returns and reasonable post retirement incomes, it is imperative that the government should provide for minimum guaranteed return and not the mere camouflage of market-based guarantee."
The committee, headed by former finance minister and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Yashwant Sinha, recommended that the minimum rate of return on the contributions to the pension fund of the employee should not be less than the rate of interest on the Employees Provident Fund scheme. In the absence of such a guarantee, the NPS cannot justifiably claim to provide old age income security," it said.
The government had introduced the Bill in the Lok Sabha in March.The PFRDA is yet to get statutory powers and the interim PFRDA is functioning since 2003 through an executive order.
The NPS was made mandatory for all new recruits to the government except armed forces with effect from January 1, 2004. It was opened to all citizens of India from May 1, 2009 on a voluntary basis.
As many as 27 states governments have notified and joined the NPS for their employees. As of now, its subscriber base has crossed 1.1 million with a corpus approaching Rs7,000 crore. The government is of the view that FDI in the pension sector should be capped at 26%, but the standing committee said the ceiling should be specified in the legislation itself and not through an executive order
.
- Hindustan Times, New Delhi, August 31, 2011
========================================================================
ALL INDIA POSTAL SBCO EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION:RECOGNITION RESTORED
MP NO. 1/2011 IN WA NO. 1262/2011 FILED IN MADRAS HIGH COURT BY ALL INDIA POSTAL SBCO EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION V/s UOI AND OTHERS AGAINST WITHDRAWAL OF RECOGNITION OF THE PETITIONER UNION.
D.G. Posts No. 16/75/2010-SR dated 26th August, 2011.
I am directed to refer to the Department's letter of even No. dated 29.6.2011 vide which the recognition granted to All India SBCO Employees Association was withdrawn, in compliance with the order of the Hon`ble High Court at Calcutta passed on 14.3.2011 in the W.P.No. 3769(W) of 2011.
2. The High Court of Madras passed an order dated 26.7.2011 in WA No. 1262/2011 filed by All India Postal SBCO Employees Association, granted interim stay of operation of the instructions contained in Department's letter No. 16/75/2011-SR dated 29.6.2011.
3. In the light of the above, the instructions contained in the Department's letter dated 29.06.2011 ibid may be held in abeyance.
Sd/-
(Subhash Chander)
Director (SR & Legal)
=======================================================================THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF ORGANIZATIONS OF CENTRAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND TEACHERS ORGANIZATIONS AGAINST PFRDA BILL HAS MET AND TAKEN SEVERAL DECISIONS TO INTENSIFY THE STRUGGLE DEMANDING WITHDRAWAL OF THE SAID BILL FROM PARLIAMENT. THE MINUTES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE IS PLACED HEREUNDER WITH THE DIRECTION TO ALL STATE COMMITTEES AND ALL AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS TO INTENSIFY THE PROGRAMMES:
Minutes of the meeting of the Steering Committee of Government Employees Organisations on PFRDA Bill held at AIRF Dead Quarters (4, State Entry Road, New Delhi)
The Steering Committee of Government Employees Organisations on PFRDA bill met today ie 29th August 2011 at 14 hours I n the AIRF Head Quarters (4, State Entry Road, New Delhi).
The following were present
1. Com Shiv Gopal Mishra, General Secretary,
All India Railwaymen Federation (AIRF)
2. "SK Vyas, President,
Confederation of Central Govt Employees
& Workers & Convener, NCCPA
3. " SN Pathak, President,
All India Defence Employees Federation
(AIDEF)
4. " C. Sreekumar, General Secretary, AIDEF
5. " Sukomal Sen, Sr Vice President,
All India State Govt Employees
Federation (AISGEF)
6. " R. Muthusundaram,
Secretary General, AISGEF
7. " M. S. Raja, Secretary,
Confederation of Central Govt
Employees & Workers
8. Shyam Sundar, Secretary General,
Bharat Central Pensioners Confederation
9. " K. Rajendran, General Secretary,
School Teachers Federation of India
(STFI)
10. " Kartik Mandal, President, STFI
11. " N. Narayana, Vice President, STFI
After a detailed review of developments following the National Convention, the Steering Committee took the following decisions:
1. There should be a joint committee in all stations consisting of the field formations of the participating organisations in the Steering Committee.
2. It was decided to obtain mass signature on the petition to the PM. This mass signature campaign has not picked up. It was therefore decided that all organisations should be asked to get this petition printed in each station so that it could be distributed amongst all the members of all Federations/Confederation. They have to be requested not only to put their own signature but also to obtain the signature from their family members, neighbours etc. (Copy of the draft petition for signature campaign attached)
Local joint committees of the participating organisations should ensure visits to Railway Stations, Hospitals and other public locations to obtain signature from people at large.
The entire campaign conducted jointly by all local leaders may continue upto 31st October 2011.
3. It has been decided that March to Raj Bhawan in the each state capital should organised jointly by the affiliates of participating organisations - ie AISGEF, Confederation of Central Govt employees and Workers, AIRF, STFI, AIDEF, NFIR, BSNLEU, AIFUCTO,BCPC & NCCPA – ON 6TH September 2011 to submit copy of petition to Prime Minister to the Governor for onward transmission to Prime Minister.
After implementing this programme a detailed report may be sent to the Head Quarter of Steering Committee as also to the respective Head Quarter of their Federation/confederation.
4. As per another decision taken in the Convention on 22nd July 2011, joint convention was to be held in every state capital. As per reports, such conventions have been held only at some state capitals. Wherever such joint convention has not been held steps may taken by forging a joint committee to convene the conventions at the earliest – latest by 30th September 2011.
Formation of joint committee may be intimated and date of the convention to be held may be intimated to Steering Committee Head Quarter as well as Federation head quarter. This will enable Steering Committee/Federation/Confederation to depute their representative to parliament in the Convention. A detailed report on the Convention held or to be held giving the names of organisations with number of participants may be sent to the Steering Committee Head Quarter as well as to the respective Federation/Confederation Head quarters.
5. The Steering Committee has decided that the March to Parliament to submit the petition to Prime Minister shall be held on 29th November 2011.
Joint Committees constituted in each station may kindly intimate number of the persons who will be joining the March latest by 15th November 2011.
6. The Steering Committee has also decided that the date on which the PFRDA bill is taken up for consideration all government employees should organise 2-hour long demonstrations in their office premises.
All participating organisations are requested to convey these decisions to their units, copy of the circular issued by the participating organisations may be forwarded to Head Quarter of Steering Committee.
The Steering Committee will meet again at 11.30 hours on 15th October 2011 in the AIRF Head Quarter at 4, State Entry Road, New Delhi.
We shall defeat PFRDA Bill!
We shall fight till we succeed!
Enquilab Zindabad!
============================================================
1. All Heads of Circles
2. Addl. DG APS West Block III. Wing No. 5, R. K. Puram, New Delhi – 110067
3. BD and PLI Directorates
4. Directors, Postal Staff College India Ghaziabad and Postal Training Centres
Sub: - Holding of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LGO) and Inspector of Postal Examination, 2011
Sir/Madam,
I am directed to refer to this office letters No. A-34012/02/2011-DE and No. A-34012/04/2011-DE dated 26.04.2011 wherein the dates of Examination were notified as 4th September 2011 for LGO and 3rd & 4th September 2011 for Inspector of Posts.
2. It is informed that the above mentioned two Examinations have been postponed until further orders. The dates of both the Examinations will be intimated very soon. Please inform all concern candidates.
3. Receipt of this letter may please be acknowledged.
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
(L. Mohan Rao)
Assistant Director General (DE)NOTE SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTORATE ON SPEED POST HUBS & L-1,L-2 MAIL HUBS
Sub: Secretary (P)'s meeting with Postal JCA on 27.06.2011,29.06.2011, 30.06.2011 & 01.07.2011 –item no. 1 dealing with Mail Network Optimization Project- Constitution of Committee.
Ref: Directorate letter No. 28-4/2011-D dated -8-2011 and 16 .08.2011.
No.JCA/AGTN/2011 Dated: 29th August, 2011
With reference to your above cited letters the following note is submitted.
The following is the note submitted by our Federation regarding the issues related to MNOP to be discussed in the Committee constituted by the Directorate as a fall out of the negotiations held on June-July, 2011:
- The Department has not supplied the original recommendations of the consultancy agency McKinsey on the issue of changes warranted from the existing system of sorting and mail conveyance done by RMS and the rationale behind the changes.
- This Federation having access to some RTI materials on related issues is of the opinion that the Postal Board, which is the top policy making body of administration, has not debated in any Board meeting about the recommendations of McKinsey and not reached any consensus decision on their implementation. We learn that such a serious issue involving structural changes of RMS was directly placed in a meeting of Circle Heads where some of the Board Members were also present. The Board Members would not have the opportunity to open their minds on many issues in such a meeting because of the presence of many other officers due to protocol etc. Even all the Chief PMsG was not apparently participated in that meeting. A meeting of Postal Board would have been the place for the Postal Board Members to discuss their views. We therefore apprehend that the decision taken about implementation of McKinsey recommendations on MNOP was autocratic without backed by the Postal Board decisions to that effect. If our above contention is wrong then this Federation may kindly be supplied with the materials substantiating the claim of the Department.
- This Federation also further learns that the MNOP project may lead to a further erosion of traffic including speed post articles in the long run, if not with immediate effect for the reason that the new system is not scientifically analysed for its success. The Staff Side is not supplied with any material by the Department about the results obtained by the Department through any Pilot Project undertaken on the lines of MNOP. With our field level observations, we can cite the under-mentioned discrepancies or draw backs in MNOP:
[a] Areas involving Metro and Non-Metro areas: Transmission of speed post articles from Metro to Non-Metro areas as well as Non-Metro areas to Metro Cities suffer additional delay because of unwarranted additional handling by the Hubs. For example, a Speed Post Article posted in New Delhi GPO and meant for delivery at Dindigul HPO [Tamilnadu] was earlier sent to Palam APTMO and then to Chennai APTMO. Chennai APTMO closed the bag directly to Dindigul HPO. Similarly a speed post letter posted at Dindigul HPO and intended for delivery at New Delhi HPO was sent to Dindigul RMS, which closed it to Chennai AP TMO. Chennai APTMO closed it to Palem APTMO, which sent it to New Delhi GPO. In the whole process it was normally expected to be delivered on D+2 basis. Now with the introduction of Hub System, the same article is expected to pass through the Hubs causing the process to be D+3 and some times D+4. We find that Metro to Non-Metro and Non-Metro to Metro are facing additional delay. This will slowly but surely lead to loss of customers, even though the fall in traffic is not immediate. (Details of Circle wise cases will be submitted separately)
[b] Areas involving Intra-circle areas: The study by us has led to the conclusion that the MNOP's weak link is the intra-circle operations. The conditions preventing L2 Offices close bags directly to different Offices except to those other L2 Offices under the same L1 jurisdiction; as well as the condition that the L1 Hubs will close letters only to other L1 Hubs and not to any L2 Offices other than those L2 offices under its own jurisdiction is causing unnecessary back routing. This has increased the time of transmission and causing one day additional delay in delivery at the least, if not more. The Department knows very well that more than 75% letters are meant for other districts and the closing of bags only through L1 Hub will only cause delay in transmission and delivery.
[c] Our experience at Hyderabad and Bangalore Cities, where certain experimentations were made by the Department despite our stiff resistance, clearly show that the MNOP was a failure. In fact no one can say as to how much volume of mails is in deposit and from which date the bags are lying unopened. The Administration was forced to open temporary sorting offices to clear the accumulated mails. In addition to that move, thousands of bags are being dumped to major DSOs like Vijayawada etc by engaging private transportation incurring huge and wasteful expenditure as freight charges because there are no spaces available in the Sections in Hyderabad. We find no accountability at all.
[d] The Department is aware that in the past also certain measures of centralization of mails was undertaken but after experimenting failures reverted back to DSO system. Now once again going back to Regional Hubs in the name of MNOP is not going to improve the efficiency at all levels. May be Metro to Metro area may witness some improvement but even there some problems are witnessed.(List will be submitted separately)
[e] The existing system permits closing of direct bags by any DSO at times of bulk booking to some addressees like Recruitment of Jobs or Application for Medical or Engineering College admission etc. Recruitment Boards will get thousands and thousands of registered or speed post articles. The new system under MNOP involves unnecessary extra handling involving delay in delivery. This is totally unscientific. The motto has to be quicker and efficient delivery at the earliest and not following some rigid routes prescribed by MNOP.
[f] Areas involving delivery within the same Metro City also not above board. For example hundreds of speed Post articles posted in various Post Offices of Metro Cities like Chennai, Bangalore, Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Pune etc is not being delivered to addresses in the same Metro Cities within the same day. If Speed Post Articles booked in Business Post Centres in Metro Cities can be delivered on the same day and speed post articles booked at Post Offices cannot be delivered like that, then there is only one reason for that. The BPCs are closing direct bags and Post Offices are routing through Hubs. This is to show that closing direct bag system is more efficient than routing through blindly to Hubs.
[g] Even selection of L1 offices are inadequate and unscientifically kept very limited in number in many circles. More number of revenue districts is brought under a single L1 Hub that causes delay inevitably due to unnecessary back routings through Hubs.
[h] There is a tendency seen at the time of discussions in June-July that the department should care more for metro to metro mails only since that constitutes more than 70%. This is a disturbing trend. Unlike profit motive Couriers, India Post is wedded to Universal Service Obligations that insists transmission of letter mail communication at affordable cost to poor people living everywhere. The recent approach of the Administration shows a bias in favour of metro customers and ignores or sidelines the customers in non-metro areas. This type of discrimination cannot be shown by the DoP and it can be seen that MNOP encourages this type of discrimination between the urban and rural customers.
4. The staff side was told during June-July negotiations that the existing Bulk Mail Centres [BMCs] and Business Post Centres [BPCs] will be fully brought under RMS. This Federation further wants to elicit as to how this fusion is being planned? Whether the mails handled by these BMCs and BPCs will go directly to L1 or will go to L2 according to the places? Moreover we want to know as to how the pre-mailing work being carried out in BPCs will be looked after? At present the contractorised workers are being used to do all such work in BPCs and BMCs and what will happen to the pre-mailing work in particular in future? If pre-mailing is given up it may result in loss of customers and steep reduction of traffic.
5. The Staff Side was already assured during the June-July discussions that all the Speed Post Hubs will function only under the control of RMS and any existing speed post Hub under the control of the SSPOs will be transferred to RMS Control. However, we find that no action in this direction to bring all Speed Post Hubs under the RMS control has been initiated.
6. This Federation is also apprehensive that consequent on introduction of MNOP, the Department will slowly violate the understanding given out during June-July discussions to the staff side as in the past. There was an assurance that no L2 Office will be closed but all existing RMS Sorting Offices either L1 or L2 will be in existence. But there is a wide spread apprehension that once the L1 and L2 system is entrenched, then slowly the L2 offices will be closed down one by one by resorting to dubious methodology of diverting the mails to L1 instead of L2 offices. Such method was used in some places to bring down the traffic below 10,000 deliberately to facilitate closing of those offices in the past to circumvent the agreement reached by the Department with the Staff Side.
7. This Federation is aware of the modus operandi of McKinsey through our international experience. In many industries McKinsey recommendations resulted in large scale outsourcing etc. Similarly the MNOP for RMS and similar such proposal for Delivery Hubs etc in the Postal Side will result in destruction of RMS offices in particular. Large scale closure or merger of offices may result in large scale surplus of RMS staff causing hardships to them. This Federation therefore wants to know the reaction of the Department as to whether it is considering our earlier understanding of keeping 10,000 volume of mails offices in-tact is revisited with a revised target of 5000 mail volume and that only those offices where the reduction will be below 5000, the men and materials will be merged with the nearest RMS office and under no condition the men and material of RMS will be shifted to Post Offices. The approach of the Department to this question will show light on the nature of actual recommendations of McKinsey, which is not made available to the staff side so far.
8. This Federation therefore suggests that the staff side may be taken into confidence before going ahead with the disastrous M.N.O.P. experiment and till such time the whole sale operationalization of Hub System be kept in abeyance.
Thanking you
Yours faithfully,
(M. Krishnan)
Secretary General
pP POSTED BY:ABDUL RAHIMAN TP, SECRETARY,PIII.
No comments:
Post a Comment