Comments on: Teachers not happy with pay commission report

By: Manjari Sharma

Manjari Sharma — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:28:33 +0000

Retirement age if has been increase than basic entry age limit into te post of Lecturer/Assistant Professor should be relaxed as at least 40 years. At the same time to bring the women who have their family responsibility as priority during initial duration of employment should be given age relaxation as mentioned by DST/CSIR. Additionally Publishing a paper in International Journal also takes long time which may also be made as basis and priority should be given accordingly. Consider this during implementation of new schemes. Thanks.

By: Suresh Andhare

Suresh Andhare — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:42:37 +0000

ASSOCIATION OF LECTURERS IN GOVERNMENT COLLEGES (MES.GROUP-B)
(Recognized by Government of Maharashtra vide G.R.-RGA-1003/C.N.4/2003/16-A Dt.3.3.03)
(Affiliated to M.S.Federation of Gazetted Officers)

Secretary President
Dr.H.A.Hudda S.S.Andhare
———————————————————————————————————–
Address: Vidyut Nagar, V.M.V.Road, Amravati-444604
E-mail-sureshandhare@rediffmail.com
———————————————————————————————————–
Date: 22.11.2009

TO,
MHRD, UGC AND HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS OF ALL STATE GOVT.
Subject-Amendment of Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding Incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil.

Reference-

1) Government of Maharashtra Higher & Technical Education Department, Resolution No.NGC 2009/(243/09)-UNI-1, Mantralaya Annex, Mumbai–400032. Date: 12th August 2009.
2) Government of India Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi. Letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I (i) dated 31.12.2008.

Respected Sir/Madam,

G.R. and Letter at 1 and 2 above variously extended the benefit of advance increments for possessing Ph.D./M.Phil and other higher qualifications.
Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding ‘incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil and other qualifications’ in above reads as under.

The above clause is unjust, insufficient and ambiguous in the light of following. Persons on any post other than Assistant Professor who acquired Ph.D./M.Phil degree either before entry in service, or during service, are appointed either by nomination or promotion with due permission of UGC, on the post of Assistant Professor and the benefit of protection of pay is extended to them as per rules of State. But consequent upon protection in pay, no benefit of 5/2 advance increments for Ph.D/M.Phil. is accorded to them on the assumption that they are not freshers and therefore their pay is not fixed on lowest (initial) pay in the pay scale meant for the post due to limited coverage (shortfall) of clauses I and II of para-7 of G.R./Letter cited in reference.
Similarly they are not entitled for 3/1 advance increments as per clauses IV and VIII, as Ph.D/M.Phil.degrees are not acquired during their service career as Assistant Professor.
Though the clause XXII a little bit covers the interests of said class of persons, but it leaves so many things unexplained therefore it appears to be unjust, insufficient and ambiguous. In order to cover the said class of persons undoubtedly under the umbrella of clause XXII it is requested to amend the clause XXII to give it the following shape and sense.

“For persons holding any post in previous (past) service cadre where the provision of award of advance increment for possessing Ph.D/M.Phil.was not available either at entry level or in-service career, under any earlier scheme i.e. Pay Commission, the benefit of 5/2 advance increments for possessing Ph.D/M.Phil respectively, shall be available to only those appointments either by nomination or promotion which have been made on or after the coming into force of this scheme.”

If the clause XXII is amended to this effect as mentioned above, it would benefit all the concerned persons including the members of this Association who have been promoted from junior college lecturer to Assistant Professor after 01.01.2006.Further it would be crystal clear leaving no room for doubt in future.
Thanks.
Amravati Yours faithfully
Date-22.11.2009
(S.S.Andhare)

By: Suresh Andhare

Suresh Andhare — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:36:25 +0000

Secretary President
Dr.H.A.Hudda S.S.Andhare
———————————————————————————————————–Address: Vidyut Nagar, V.M.V.Road, Amravati-444604 E-mail-sureshandhare@rediffmail.com
———————————————————————————————————– Date:19.11.2009

TO,
MHRD, UGC AND HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS OF ALL STATE GOVT.
Subject-Amendment of Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding Incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil.

Reference-

1) Government of India Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi. Letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I (i) dated 31.12.2008.

Respected Sir/Madam,

G.R. and Letter at 1 and 2 above variously extended the benefit of advance increments for possessing Ph.D./M.Phil and other higher qualifications.

Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding ‘incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil and other qualifications’ in above reads as under.

“For posts at the entry level where no such advance increments were admissible for possessing Ph.D/ M.Phil. under the earlier scheme, the benefits of 5 advance increments for possessing Ph.D./ M.Phil. shall be available to only those appointments which have been made on or after the coming into force of this Scheme.”
The above clause is unjust, insufficient and ambiguous in the light of following. Persons on any post other than Assistant Professor who acquired Ph.D./M.Phil degree either before entry in service, or during service, are appointed either by nomination or promotion with due permission of UGC, on the post of Assistant Professor and the benefit of protection of pay is extended to them as per rules of State. But consequent upon protection in pay, no benefit of 5/2 advance increments for Ph.D/M.Phil. is accorded to them on the assumption that they are not freshers and therefore their pay is not fixed on lowest (initial) pay in the pay scale meant for the post due to limited coverage (shortfall) of clauses I and II of para-7 of G.R./Letter cited in reference.

Similarly they are not entitled for 3/1 advance increments as per clauses IV and VIII, as Ph.D/M.Phil.degrees are not acquired during their service career as Assistant Professor.

Though the clause XXII a little bit covers the interests of said class of persons, but it leaves so many things unexplained therefore it appears to be unjust, insufficient and ambiguous. In order to cover the said class of persons undoubtedly under the umbrella of clause XXII it is requested to amend the clause XXII to give it the following shape and sense.

Amravati
Date-19.11.2009

Yours faithfully (S.S.Andhare)

By: Dr Narasimha Swamy Chennojwala

Dr Narasimha Swamy Chennojwala — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:50:05 +0000

The fact that the UGC Pay report approved by the Government does not incorporate the fitment table is strange and defies all logic. It is still more puzzling how the Teachers Unions have not pointed out this glaring blunder in a report. While the employees of the Central Government could have their first instalment of arrears, the UGC is yet to present a fulfledged report enabling the UGC teachers enjoy the new package, even after a lapse of six months.

Even more puzzling is the fact that the MHRD has introduced a strange philosophy of applying an illogical principle of classifying the Readers/Associate Professors into (a) those who have completed 3 years of service and (b) those who have not competed 3 years of service in the cadre as on 01.01.2006. No Pay Commissions have in the past made such a wonderful(!) classification, as adopted above, and thus depriving a just and equitable treatment to this hapless cadre “Readers/Associate Professors” which is the middle position between Lecturer and Professor. It is imperative on the part of the Government to set right this anomaly and do justice to this important cadre among UGC teachers.

Indifference in this regard will only complicate the matters resulting in discrimination and injustice meted out to this cadre.

Let the UGC, the MHRD and Government act and rectify the blunder committed.

By: balasubramanian

balasubramanian — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:56:15 +0000

It is really Pinching that Associate Professor/Reader/Asst.Prof. (Selection Grade) would be placed in 15600 with AGP of 8000 if they did not complete three years of service in the pay scale of 12000-420 though they completed 9-12 years of total service. However, the peple who got direct recruitment as Assoc. Professor with simply putting 5-6 years service are eligible to get pay of 37400 with AGP of 9000. So, it should be revised and whether direct recruitment or CAS, all Assoc.Professor/Reader should be treated on par with Directly recruited Assoc. Prof. and be placed in the pay of 37400 with AGP of 9000. I hope that Teachers’ union will fight for the justice.

By: CRRAVI

CRRAVI — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:36:00 +0000

The recent announcement by the Human Resources Minister of State on 16.12.2008 on the floor of the Lok Sabha lacks clarity on several vital issues:
1. At the entry level for Assistant Professors, the Academic Grade Pay(AGP) has been claimed to be hiked to be Rs.6000 in the first stage. But the fact remains that Chadha Committee had recommended Rs.6600 for Assistant Professors cadre, which must have been approved and recommended by the UGC.
2. One does not know whether the three categories of Assistant Professors, viz., Assistant Professor, Assistant Professor(Senior Scale) and Assistant Professor(Selection Grade) as recommended by Chadha remain or they have been replaced by different AGPs (6000, 7000 and 8000) with the same nomenclature.
3. If the Assistant Professors are to be promoted as Associate Professors after requisite numbers of years of service(12 or 13 or 14 for Holders of Ph.D.,, M.Phil., and those who hold neither respectively), is it automatic or they have to undergo a process of selection ?
4. In the case of incumbent teachers in the Selection Grade/Reader grade as on 1.1.2006, para viii. Envisages that they will continue to be designated as such till they are selected as Associate Professors. Para xiv envisages that certain procedures of selection would be applicable, but the speech of the Minister does not mention any of the conditions.
5. Normally in any fixation of pay in the revised scales, existing teachers with a given number of years of service would be placed in a cadre automatically. But the announcement is devoid of such a practice but says that there would be a selection process. Does it mean that for retrospective fixation on 1.1.2006, will a selection process be reasonable and justifiable ? while for new entrants after 1.1.2006 it is found to be automatic in the announcement.
6. The grant of unconditional Pay Band 4 for existing teachers in the Selection Grade/Reader grade which has been the demand in one voice by all teacher organizations across the country, the announcement by the Minister that it will be conditional and by a selection process is sickening and retrograde in nature. Everyone hopes that the HRD would come out its order clarifying these points which are the genuine aspirations of lakhs of teachers.
7. Though Chadha Committee had recommended 100% financial assistance for 10 years, the announcement has been a set back, in that only 80% grant for 51 months has been envisaged. This is likely to make State Governments to think twice before they embark upon revising pay scales for college/University teachers in the respective States.
8. The rationale behind distinguishing teachers on the one hand and Physical Directors and Librarians(who have also been recognized as teachers) in the matter of age of retirement is beyond one’s comprehension.
9. Grant of advance increments only w.e.f. 1.9.2008 is another measure which would dampen the spirit of teachers who have hard-earned their research degrees.
10. In the matter of qualification for new appointment, it has been stated that NET shall become an essential requirement with the benefit of exemption for Ph.D., alone. I think the recommendations of Dr.Balachandra Munkekar(final recommendations) Committee has not caught the eyes of the ‘powers that be’. As such the said NET Exemption Committee has recommended exemption for M.Phil holders who acquire the degree upto 30.6.2009 and the same is pending with MHRD for the last 6 months. One wonders what will happen to the final report of Dr.Munkekar Committee. The hopes of scores of young teacher aspirants would be annihilated by the withdrawal of the exemption for M.Phil., from passing NET/SLET

The irony in this regard is that the announcement of the Minister envisages grant of
2 advance increments for holders of M.Phil., at the entry level and one advance
increment if they acquire while in service. On the one hand M,.Phil is recognized
and on the other hand it is dumped. The announcement in this regard also lacks
clarity of thought and application of mind.

One hopes that all these vital issues would be addressed by the MHRD before any order is issued, rendering justice, unlike in the earlier pay revision when the order of 27.7.1998 created a problem which remains unrectified yet.

By: Debashish Chakrabarty

Debashish Chakrabarty — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 16:14:58 +0000

6th. CPC didn’t consider the University DY. Registrar neither the Chadha Comm, nor the UGC nor the MHRD. IS the Academic Administrators so unimportant ?

By: kartik

kartik — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:06:29 +0000

mr prasad ji kya aap direct reader ban jate hain?
first you have to add the incr you get as lecturer . more over you can become a reader in 5 years of service also. so you mean to say that you want pb4 in 5 years where as ias gets it in 12 years.
do you think they’ll let it happen. please jara logic improve karke point put up kijiye shayad koi sune.

By: R L. Prasad

R L. Prasad — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:57:40 +0000

Discripancies in Prof. Chadda committee report (Panishment/humilation to Associate Professors/Readers)

There is clear panishment/discrimination of Associate Professor/Readers in Prof. Chadda Committee Report. Prof. Chadda have degraded/humilated the Reader in light of following.
1. The basic salaries of Lecturer, Reader and Professor was in ratio of 1.0 : 1.5 : 2.05 and 1.0 : 1.68 : 2.045 in 5th Pay commission implemented w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and 4th Pay commission implemented w.e.f. 1.1.1986, respectively.

Basic salary on 1.1.2006 (As per Prof. Chadda’s Report) will be
Lecturer/Assistant Professor 15600 + 6600 = 22200
Reader/Assistant Professor 15600 + 8000 = 23600
Professor 37400 + 1100 = 48400
in the ratio of 1.0 : 1.06 : 2.16 for the Lecturer, Reader and Professor, respectively.

Have Prof. Chadda done justice with Readers in his report or he has humiliated them?

2. Govt. of India have put the following scales of 5th pay commission
(i). 8000 – 275 – 13500/
9000 – 275 – 9550/
10325 – 325 – 10975/
10000 – 325 – 15200/
12000 – 375 – 16500/
12000 – 375 – 18000/
into Pay band 3 where the yearly increment was less than Rs. 375/= PM and end salary was maximum of Rs. 18000/ and below.

(ii). 14300 -400- 18300/=
15100 – 400 – 18300/=
16400 – 450 – 20000/=
16400 -450 – 20900/=
14300 – 450 – 22400/=
18400 – 500 – 22400/=
All into new Pay band 4 where annual increment was Rs.400/= PM and above.

Readers/Associate Professors were in scale 12000- 420 – 18300/=
having higher annual increment of Rs. 420/=
Thus, Readers/Associate Professors scale does not match exactly with pay scales of Central Govt. Employees in 5th Pay Commission. Readers/Associate Professors scale has similar end pay and higher annual increment (Rs. 420/=) than those pay scales which have been put into Pay Band 4 ( as in cases of Rs.14300 -400- 18300 and 15100 – 400 – 18300}. Only their starting basis was little less.
So Prof. Chadda have considered the negative points and omitted the positive point of the Readers/Associate Professors scale and have bunched them in Pay Band 3.
Consequence: Reader with longer experience will be getting salaries equivalent to new lecturers and ratio of basic salary of Reader and Professor will be 23600 : 48400 i.e. 1.0 : 2.05 whereas this ratio was 1.0 : 1.37 and 1.0 : 1. 21 in the 5th pay commission implement w.e.f 1.1.1996 and 4th pay commission implemented w.e.f. 1.1.1986.
In view of above, Readers/Associate Professors are feeling humiliated.

Request with Government (Chairman UGC, Hon’ble Minister HRD, Prime Minister and UPA chair person, Secretary of concerned Departments)

1. In light of above, please honour your own revision of 6th Pay commission recommendation and put the Reader/ Associate Professors in Pay band 4 as you have done in case of Central Govt. Employees inorder to save the humiliation of Teachers.

By: Professor A. Vaishampayan, UGC Career Awardee

Professor A. Vaishampayan, UGC Career Awardee — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 05:35:23 +0000

Professor A. Vaishampayan, UGC Career Awardee said…
Professor Chaddha and his associates need to be heartily thanked for creating the post of Senior Professor in a university for those who have spent 10 years as a Professor. I request, however, that with this legitimate honour a small incentive of few extra increments may also please be granted by the UGC, MHRD and Cabinet, if missed to have got a mention by Prof. Chaddha, and this should be extended to all those who have completed 10 years consistently as a Professor and nothing is known against their character and academic conduct, since Professors who are selected or promoted following UGC norms are already crossed through a rigorous screening of their outstanding record of eminence. This will be the minimum courtesy from the MHRD to honour this highest qualified position under the Govt. of India who builds up and shapes the able human resources with ultimate conclusive advice through this noble profession to carefully and graciously command different spheres of the whole nation.
I further feel indebted to the PRC for the redressal of previous PRC anomalies and granting CAS promotions from the date of eligibility with arrears from 01.01.1996. This has been a long due justice to the sufferers, as their redressed salary arriving at on 01.01.2006 will now be considered for fixation under the new UGC pay scale under the Sixth Pay guidelines. Explicit orders to this effect may please be issued in order to avoid any confusion/inadvertent discrepancy in this context at the local level.
Further, I do agree with Professor Chaddha that teachers’ periodical appraisal and emphasis on the maintenance of discipline, morality and sense of integrity should be the part and parcel of the new pay package.
Thanks for a historically remarkable recommendation by true academicians for true academicians.