IRTSA Forums

Full Version: Open Discussion
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.



Promotion without improved status is like ‘Crumbs without the Soup’

IRTSA has been continuously seeking Career Planning of Technical Supervisors on Railways for the last nearly 45 years – ever since its inception. While some relief was provided over the years through the Cadre Restructuring in 1979, 1984, 1993 and 2003 – when a varying % age of posts were upgraded in different cadres. This did help in reducing the stagnation in lower pay scales, to a certain extent. But neither there was uniformity in the revised %age between various cadres nor did it bear any relativity with the duties and responsibilities or the increase thereof over the years.

But the worst part of it is that the entire exercise was separately done for the various Groups of Posts in Group A, B, C and D – thus taking away the basic thrust for simultaneous Career Planning. As such, IRTSA recently conducted a special Seminar on “Career Planning of Technocrats on Railways” and also submitted Memoranda to the Railway Board on the issue. But while the response of MM was positive on the issue, AMS felt that the MACPS (Modified Assured Career progression Scheme) will provide the requisite Financial Upgrading – ignoring all together that MACPS did not provide for improvement in status & power – which were equally important for effective Management.

There has been no upgrading or Cadre Restructuring of the Apex Grade of Group ‘C’ (Rs.840-1040 / Rs.2375-3500 / Rs.7450-11500) ever on the Railways – (either in 1979, 1984, 1993 or 2003). Consequently there is extreme stagnancy & resultant frustration amongst the incumbents of the Apex Grade ‘C’ – especially amongst the Technical Supervisors on the Railways.

There has been substantial increase in the duties and responsibilities over the years of the Technical Supervisors (JEs, SEs & SSEs) ¬due to modernisation and advancement of technology on the Railways – but this has not been recognised or remunerated in any manner whatsoever – especially in the case of Senior Section Engineers.

Only about 2 to 3% of Technical Supervisors – (entering with Diploma or Degree in Engineering) - reach Group ‘B’ level and only a small fraction thereof reach Group ‘A’ level – due to very meager number of Posts in Group ‘A’, ‘B’ vis-à-vis Group ‘C’ and non-implementation of DOPs orders regarding Classification of Posts – issued after the last 4 Pay Commissions on the Railways. Large majority of Technical Supervisors (with Diploma in Engineering at JE level and with Graduation in Engineering at SE/SSE level) do not get any promotion except in a very few cases and that too at the fag end of their careers. Even after acquiring long years of experience and expertise they remain and mostly retire in the Supervisory cadre itself.

In the new scenario of modern liberalized economy; and the management requirements thereof, it is imperative that Combined “Cadre Restructuring” of posts in Group ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’ may be considered to upgrade adequate number of Group ‘C’ posts to Group ‘A’, ‘B’ – to fully meet with the job requirements of the posts of Technical Supervisors on Railways. Most of the employees in other cadres get 3 or 4 promotions or even more in their service in Railways - except the JEs & SE/SSEs. It is pertinent that JEs with Diploma in Engineering and one & a half year of training as well as SE/SSEs with Graduate in Engineering and one year of on the job training - are getting stagnated in the Apex Group ‘C‘ scale without any further avenue of promotion except in rare 2 to 3% cases. JEs who enter in the Grade Pay of Rs.4200 get only one promotion to the Grade Pay of Rs.4600. SE/SSE with Graduate in Engineering qualification enter in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 - remain stagnant in the entry grade itself.

The JEs & SE/SSEs rot at the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 throughout their career since there are very meager number of posts in Group-B.

In the Technical Departments of Engineering, Mechanical, Electrical, Signal & Telecommunications and Stores, only 4274 Group-B posts are available for 5,72,191 Group-C employees, i.e. just 0.74% posts are available in Group-B. After abolition & Up-gradation of Group-D to Group–C the availability of Group-B posts will further dip to very meager i.e. just 0.47%.

In spite of higher nature of duties and responsibilities on account of requirements of Safety & modernisation, Railways have the lowest %age of Gazetted posts in Group A & B vis-à-vis Group C & D - in comparison to all other Departments of Central Government (as cited in the highlights of Power Point Presentation – reproduced in this issue).

With the huge investments and fast coming-up of new projects, more number of posts in the Group-A & B are essentially required, so that decision making and accountability can be broadened in the administrative hierarchy.

Sixth Central Pay Commission in its recommendations and thereafter the Government has made the right decision of abolishing the Group-D posts and upgrading them as Group-C. But similar functional and career improvements (made at the bottom level) have not been carried over to the middle tier in the apex Group-C and Group-B.

Large number of Posts have been upgaraded over the years in Group ‘A’ & ‘B’ to ensure the career planning of the Officers in those cadres but no such upgrading had been allowed in case of Apex Scale of Technical Supervisors – to improve their career prospects or in view of the increase in their duties & responsibilities due to modernisation on the Railways.

All these are not only the root cause of frustration amongst the Technical Supervisors on the Railways - these are also an impediment in effective execution of administrative polices & plans due to lack of executive powers of the Technical Supervisors who are the ‘On-the-Spot Managers. This is bound to have an adverse impact on the efficiency and safety on the Railways, as has been mentioned variedly by all the Railway Accident Inquiry Committees and Railway Reforms Committee.

Combined cadre strength of Technical Departments including all posts in Group - ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ on Indian Railways, should therefore be Restructured – so as to be comparable with - if not higher than - the All India Average % age of Group ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’ of Central Government employees in other Departments – as cited and fully justified elaborately by IRTSA in its Memorandum to the Railway Board.

Harchandan Singh

Voice of Rail Engineers - July-August, 2010 Issue


The direct recruits of Group C Section Engineers are Engg. Graduates similar to the direct recruits of Group B and A Technical Officers(including Spl. Class Apprentices) who are also Engg. Graduates. The difference is that Section Engineers are selected by RRBs whereas Tech. Officers are selected by UPSC. But, it is most alarming that Section Engineers, the Field Managers, having equal qualification are suppressed to rot in Group C itself(with few exceptions) whereas the Tech. Officers grab all means to raise many levels and usurp all facilities to themselves.
MACPS is only a dubious way of the Administration to solace the frustrations of Group C Engineers.
Our renewed efforts for Career Planning with combined Cadre Restructure will only fall on deaf ears. Negotiable means of resolving issues have not yielded results for decades together and only vigorous means seem to be the alternative.
The JEs of CPWD joining in 5000 grade will be eligible to get a grade pay of 7600 through MACP. They do not have store accountabilty or management of same grade employees problems and also have well-efined manuals, codes etc. The same JEs of Indian Railways with more responsibilities and EXCLUDED from all labour laws, without any standard manuals or codes have to retire with a grade pay of 5400. Understand the difference between a respectable organisation and a colonial slavery system. Shall we continue to sleep blaming our fate or awaken against this discrimination and oppression.


(i) I do not understand what is the benefit of promotion in the current scenario as ONLY 3% increment will be admissible at the time of promotion.
(ii) What will be the benefit if Pay band will change no body knows?
(iii) Carrier planing with just 3% increment ?
(iv) What is the basis of testing of staff of Group C at every stage But their is no rule , in the same organisation, for Group B & A why why?
(v) Now Group C staff will also came through all over Indian Railways Competitive examination (RRBs) then what is the need of retesting the personnel? whether Policy maker think that staff become dull while working ? or No proper training structure available in India Railways for Group C staff
(vi) The Most important things is Staff seeking promotion are tested the knowledge through written examination which he already proven in the RRBs examination.
(vii) Why there is one policy for the promotion i.e. ACR similar to Group A & B



MACP is not alternate for carreer planning which is responsibility of management. stating that MACP is alternate is like shrugging off that responsibility.

following for format may be prepared by some of our competent members of our Association

2.entry grades (one by one)
3.qulification for every entry level.
4.No. of promotion available for every entry level without selction procedure.
5.after how many levels they have to face selection for promotion.
6.the ratio of posts for the selection level

a. this can be prepared to every dept of Railways.
b. technical dept of other Govt. establishments.

---this table will clearly show the how scarce our promption opportunities are. the Rly board has to demanded comparable ratio for us like other depts.

----being technical dept. career growth has to mre compare to nontechnical people.

-----simply, 1.hirearchy, 2.posts ratio & 3.qualification for each level of public sectors like BHEL, BEML, BEL, ONGC, HPCL, NTPC etc may may 10% adopted in Railways. justification is: this is also technical sector, pulic sector model is proven and some of them are enjoying superior role in the market both in terms of commercial and HR aspects.
Reference URL's