Status of MACP in the 7th pay commission
Newspapers continuously update us with news about the recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission which holds the highest expectation levels at present. From such sources, we come to know that the recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission are going to be submitted on 31st of October and they may come to force from 1/4/2016.
Pay structure is very important and equally important is the promotion policy.
Assured Career Progression (ACP) which was introduced in the 5th Pay Commission, provided some comfort for the employees who suffered from lack of promotions for long years. Before this, promotion was just an illusion. Labour Unions and Federations of the Central government employees got these benefits for us after much struggle.
In the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, which came after this, ACP was changed to MACP (Modified Assured Career Progression) and it provided an opportunity for employees who were not promoted for the last ten years to enter the next Grade Pay.
In this, the benefit was very small as 1800, 1900, 2000, 2400, 2800, 4200, 4600, 4800 (excluding 2800-4200). Many issues in this method of Grade Pay still lie unresolved before the National Anomaly Committee.
Hence, lakhs of Central Government employees expect a favourable change in MACP at least through 7th Pay Commission. During his or her service period, an employee must have at least five promotions. This has been an important plea of the Central Trade Unions.
The benefit of the first MACP has to be given after 8 years of continuous service and the benefit of the successive MACP has to be given after 7,6,5 and 4 years of continuous service.
If the benefits of MACP were such, certainly all the central government employees will be highly encouraged and will work hard to make all the Central Government plans and activities a great success.
This will definitely increase the productivity of the Central Government and the associated industries. Due to this, the relationship between the government and the employees will become more harmonious and there will be a peaceful working environment.
Amit
This is on the issue of MACP for administrative posts.
The MACP system should be changed into Promotional Basis instead of just increase in grade pay. The seniors who have already put more than 10, 20, 30 years, they are still in the same designation getting only minimum increase in the grade pay and retire without getting promotion to the next higher position.
If 7th CPC and the government agrees for change of MACP system into promotional basis, its effective date, Commission’s / Government’s FOREMOST DUTY IS TO PROTECT THE SENIORS FIRST. THAT MEANS, THE SENIORS SHOULD BE GIVEN PROMOTION FIRST, THEN ONLY THE JUNIORS SHOULD GET PROMOTION. OTHERWISE, JUNIORS WILL GET PROMOTION TO THE NEXT HIGHER POST FROM THE DATE OF EFFECT OF MACP IN 7TH CPC AND THE SENIORS WILL BE IN THE SAME OLD DESIGNATION. Already the seniors are not benefitted in 6th cpc, atleast they should be benefitted by getting promotion BEFORE THE JUNIORS GET.
THIS HAS TO BE TAKEN CARE BY THE 7TH CPC AND THE GOVERNMENT.
JAGDAMBA PRASAD HEAD CONSTABLE
RESPECTED SIR,
AFTER COMPLETED 33 YEARS SERVICE ONLY ONE PROMOTION, NO OTHER BENEFIT(PROMOTION/ACP/MACP). WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?
YOURS FAITHFULLY
binod sinha
I joined in Bihar Police as Sub-Inspectorof Police on 30.06.1973. Awarded with Police Medal for Gallantry w.e.f.21 Nov.1984 . But promoted as Inspector in April , 1986 .Later on basis of Police Medal seniority was given with date of encounter i.e. 21.11.1984.Promotion was due from back date ,deptt. gave promotion w.e.f. Nov.1982 in regular way not on the basis of Gallantry Medal.After division of Bihar I came under Jharkhand Govt.Juniors and my batchmets to me who remained in Bihar got promotion in 2002/2004/2005.Persons who came to Jharkhand from Bihar (juniors to me)were adjusted and became seniors to me . On basis of Hon!ble High Court. Jharkhand I was promoted to Dy.S.P. w.e.f. 01.07.2008 .I was not given consequential benefits i.e. seniority/ pay arrear etc in spite Hon!ble High Court!s order. I retired on 31./01/2012 . My grade pazy was Rs. 5400/-. I was not given MACP.I remained in service more than 38 years and served a very long period as INSPECTOR(24yrs). Juniors to me got grade pay Rs. 6600/- and 7600/- How diaparity and injustice to me . Courrt~!s order has no value in Government here .It is not possible for a honest /sincere employee to knock court time and again.
kishore kumar
I totally agree with Mr. Dutta. This long pending anomaly has not been settled.
kishore kumar
Gagan
Sir what is the current status of LDCs / UDCs Grade Pay court case?? Kindly inform.
D.C.GANGULY
IF GOVERNMENT IS PREPARING 33 YEARS COMPLETION OF SERVICE OR AGE 60 YEARS THIS IS GOOD AND OK IT SHOULD BE FOR ALL NOT ONLY KARMACHARY,DO NOT DOUBLE GAME OR PARTIALITY FOR PROFESSOR OR HIGHER LEVEL OFFICER IN 7TH PAY COMMISION.ALL SHOULD BE 33YEARS OR 60 YEARS AGE. THANKS.
SARBANI DUTTA
What will happen to the JEs / AEs who have failed to get hierarchy based pay and grade pay for not completing 24 years of service on 1st September 2008.
Despite of having equal responsibilities and charter of duties, the predecessors are enjoying hierarchy and ACP based pay and further 3rd MACP based pay on completion of 30 years of service, whereas the unfortunate successors have to remain satisfied with MACP based pay only. The senior JEs and AEs who were earlier getting AE scale under 5th CPC policy have started getting EE scale (with Grade Pay Rs 6600/-) on completion of 24 years of service and further Rs 7600/- Grade Pay on completion of 30 years of service under 3rd MACP. And the successor JEs / AEs who could not complete 24 years on 1st September 2008 are placed in the same position but with Grade Pay of Rs 4800/- (on completion of 20 years or 1st September 2008 whichever is later under 2nd MACP) and lastly Rs 5400/- (on completion of 30 years under 3rd MACP). This anomaly of 6th CPC has caused a considerable financial loss to the juniors who could not complete 24 years of service on the magic date of 1st September 2008. This pay difference will further be compounded on finalisation of 7th CPC orders if the pay anomalies of 6th CPC are not cleared now. The pay difference is also in contradiction to fundamental rights (equal work – equal pay).
Has anybody thought for a solution of it? Has this anomaly come to the notice of our Prime Minister and other policy makers? Who is responsible for this kind of inconsistency? Can anybody answer please?