Tag Archives | Pay

Guest Post: Afterthoughts — Pay Commissions & Omissions

By on July 14, 2009 in Uncategorized

It was about central pay scales, not about military and its personnel.

[This guest post has been penned by this blog's favourite guest blogger, BeeCee. His earlier guest posts on the SCPC imboglio are here, here and here.]

The debate on the Civil vs Military aspects of the VI CPC report, it seems, will continue to simmer, but, to me, the most interesting development on the debate this time around has been the Cabinet Secretary’s public admission that the Military will not be paid at the same levels as the Civil Services (parity was the term used). Some years ago, when it was suggested that India was probably the only democracy in the world that paid less to its military than the civil services, there were many denials, even in the military. The tragedy of the Indian Armed Forces has been that they seem to pick up these very nay-sayers to project their pay proposals to the government/ CPCs.  Little wonder then, that military has a relative reduction in pay/ status with every CPC.

The bureaucracy of course had found a simple, ingenuous way of showing that the armed forces were paid more. Unilaterally declare equivalence between the military and the civil services personnel by issuing a memo elevating the junior civil service guy two steps above his logical military counterpart and ergo, the claim that level for level, the military is paid higher seems right. This was the argument followed so far, but when the debate turned nasty this time, the Cabinet Secretary has let the cat out of the bag.

While completely disagreeing with the logic of the Cabinet Secretary, I must appreciate this rare honesty (I think for the first time on the subject) on the part of the bureaucracy. Shorn of the niceties, he has merely reiterated the factual position that the armed forces in India will continue to be discriminated against, in matters of pay and allowances. I hope the armed forces take this candidness forward and highlight it in their advertisements asking youngsters to don uniform. As important, allow those who are not happy with their situation, to leave when they choose. Thereafter, it becomes an informed choice by those joining and they would have little reason to complain.

But the disconcerting development in the lead up to this admission was that a straightforward case of discriminatory (or non-discriminatory) pay-determination was being made out as some civil-military confrontation by some in the media and also bloggers who have little or no idea of compensation packages available either to the civilians or the military personnel, or of military service conditions for that matter. They also seem to have forgotten that the debate was about central pay scales and not about the military or its personnel.

If only the media had sought out the logic applied for pay determination, by the CPC or the Committee of Secretaries, this debate would have been more meaningful and the CabSec’s admission would have been self-evident. Actually you don’t need a debate; a simple graphical presentation will make it obvious even to the densest observer that the career/ pension earnings of the average military officer in India are much less that that of the average Gp A civil service officer.

We are not the only country in the world with civil and military services. A comparison with any other democratic country could be revealing. I think the very fact that it was blown up into this confrontation revealed that the GOI had no defence for what the CPC and the Committee of Secretaries did. The injection of civil-military relations into the discussion was a crude attempt to side-track the core issue. The Service Headquarters also do not appear to have highlighted the contradiction between what the CPC said (we have given parity), dishonest though it was, and what the CabSec admitted (parity is difficult) later.

An interesting sidelight was also an attempt to pitch the officers of the Central Police Organisations against the Armed Forces and some of the poor guys (who are victims of even worse discrimination) bought the bait; hook, line and sinker. The irony that the CPOs’ delegation which went to apprise the political class of their problems did not have even a single member from the CPOs seems to have been lost on the media. How on earth can the lot of the CPOs improve, if their problems become their very spokesmen?

I also found the application of CTC concept for the military amusing. Extending the logic, is the individual also expected to do a CTH/F (Cost to himself/herself/family) analysis when faced with a life-threatening situation? In any case, it is good to remember that for the Tommy on ground, CTC is like the defence budget to Sad Sack, the 60s cartoon character. The bigger the budget, the bigger the gun he gets to clean. Those not familiar with the subject will do well to remember that.

Colin Wilson, in his classic, ‘A criminal History of Mankind’, comments thus about the Roman rule in Britain. The incompetent resident procurator imposed impossible demands on the locals. Queen Boudica, who protested was stripped and flogged and her daughters raped, by order. She in turn, rallied the locals in protest and ransacked the Roman garrison. A bout of murderous attacks and counterattacks followed. After days of fighting, massacre and destruction, including the burning down of London, Boudica and her daughters committed suicide to avoid capture. The scale of Roman retribution shocked even Nero, the emperor, who replaced the Governor and military commander. Pax Romana was reestablished and the unbearable demands withdrawn.

“It is not clear”, he writes, “what became of Catus Decianus, the man who caused the whole thing by ordering the floggings and rapes; no doubt he continued to rise in the Roman Civil Service” ( unaffected by all that transpired around him)

I cannot find a closer analogy than this, to the imbroglio visited on the nation and the armed forces in particular, by the VI CPC and the Committee of Secretaries, in recent times. The pay anomaly may or may not be resolved, but it has done great harm to inter- departmental cooperation, and what is certain is that those responsible for the entire sorry episode will continue to inflict their incompetence on the country and retire (if at all) with a comfortable pension.

Comments { 36 }

An Aesop’s tale

By on October 24, 2008 in Uncategorized

…and lessons for the Indian government.

In his speech during Zero Hour in the Rajya Sabha, Jaswant Singh asked the government to “consider very sympathetically and attentively the questions that have been raised or the aspects that have got underscored by the Sixth Pay Commission’s treatment of the Services”. His opening gambit in the speech, however, was a tad out of tune with his image of a perspicacious statesman.

…it is unusual for the Chiefs to have gone to the extent of voicing that discontent in public. It is an unusual step, but it is an unusual circumstance that has compelled them to do so…

“Unusual circumstances” can not justify this public display of disaffection by the service chiefs. The same excuse was put forth by Mrs. Indira Gandhi to impose emergency and military chiefs in Pakistan — from Ayub to Musharraf — have also taken recourse to this weather beaten alibi to justify their military coups.

Simply put, this sets a wrong precedent in this country. The excuse of “unusual circumstances” can henceforth be conveniently exploited by any military leader to defy legal and constitutional orders of the government. The recent actions of the service chiefs need to be condemned, not condoned, and their renegade tendencies nipped in the bud.

If this sounds overly alarmist, it is time to remember the moral of this parable in Aesop’s Tales — The Thief and his Mother.

Comments { 56 }

Officer shortage — some facts

By on February 18, 2008 in Uncategorized

We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. –Daniel Patrick Moynihan

The constant refrain of the Indian Army and its top brass, which is faithfully parroted by the mainstream media, has been the recency and quantum of officer shortages. A commenter on this blog had questioned the authenticity of my contention that the shortage of officers in the Indian Army is not a recent phenomenon. It helps to look at what the then Defence minister, Pranab Mukherjee told the Rajya Sabha on 15 December 2004. This was in response to a question by Mr. Vijay Darda. [Rajya Sabha unstarred question number 1324]

Q: whether it is a fact that in 1992 there was shortage of 8,000 officers in Indian Army and presently the shortage has gone up to 13,000 although an assurance was given to Estimates Committee in 1992 that the shortage of 8,000 officers would be made up very soon;

A: Vacancies in the Army have existed since 1950. The deficiency in officers cadre was 10570 in the year 1992. At present there is a shortage of 11709 officers. The shortage is in the rank of Major and below.

Q: what are the reasons for increase in shortage by another 5,000 officers since 1992 and when it would be wiped out and how;

A: The increase in shortage is due to raising of new units to fulfill operational requirements. The risk factor involved in soldiering and increased availability of attractive alternative employment opportunities, add to the shortage. Sustained efforts, like periodic Image Projection Campaigns and seminars and lectures in schools and colleges, are made to motivate the youth to join the Army.

Q: whether there is any time-frame for this?

A: Shortage of officers has been existent in the Army in varying degrees since 1950. It is not feasible to specify any time frame for liquidation of the shortage.

A little scouring has unearthed the statistics for officer shortages in the Indian Army over the last decade.

December 1996 — 12972

February 1997 — 12972

July 1998 — 13323

July 2000 — 12853

November 2000 — 12155

July 2002 — 12554

April 2003 — 11943

March 2005 — 11709

July/ August 2005 — 10650 (11650?)

December 2005 — 11691

January 2006 — 11256

August 2007 — 11238

These figures ought to be authentic, as they were placed as answers to the questions raised in both the houses of the Parliament. If one discounts the figures for July/ August 2005 [which seem to be incorrect, if one looks at the comparable figures for March and December 2005], the current level of officer shortages in the Army is at its lowest, at least since 1996. So much for their recency and quantum!

There is no doubt that the members of the Indian military deserve a better deal from the Pay Commission. Pranab Mukherejee’s answer and the succeeding facts only lend credence to the beliefs of this blogger — clamouring for more pay from the pay commission is nothing more than a populist gimmick from the Army top brass. The figures for shortages didn’t change much after the previous pay commission report. It is unlikely that they will change with the next pay commission as well. This singular focus on pay commission, to the exclusion of everything else, is a ruse employed to divert attention from the real problems plaguing the defence services. The real problems lies elsewhere — an outdated institution living in the past, disconnected from the larger civil society, unable to introspect and not open to any change.

The Army’s response to this is its own hoary, bureaucratic version of painting white lines around how and where the dead body was found. If we stare at it long enough, perhaps it will help us solve the problems that engulf the organisation. Rather than focusing on a wholesome institutional response, beginning with an immediate reform and restructure plan, the Army and its generals are treading on dangerous ground in their tango with the media.

Needless to say, the unintended consequences of these misplaced priorities will be grave for the military and the nation to bear in the long run. The government needs to wake up, heed the warning signals and stem the rot before it is too late. The time is indeed ripe for a Blue Ribbon Commission.

Comments { 14 }