Why the 7th Pay panel report made some people unhappy

There are quite a few who feel the financial edge is justified only for the Indian Administrative Services and Indian Foreign Services officers

The recommendations on pay and position parity in bureaucracy was met with dissent from former Indian Administrative Service officer and member of the 7th Central Pay Commission Vivek Rae, who argued that financial edge was justified only for the Indian Administrative Services and Indian Foreign Services.

The chairman of the committee, A K Mathur, sought abolishment of the two-year edge accorded to the IAS officers for empanelment, compared to other services, saying it was an ‘archaic concept’.

Currently, an IAS and IFS officer are accorded a pay advantage or financial edge at three promotion stages from Senior Time Scale, Junior Administrative Grade and the Selection Grade in the form of two additional increments of three per cent each, over and above the promotional increment.

While the pay panel’s chairman A K Mathur recommended the financial edge be extended to the Indian Police Service and Indian Forest Service as well, committee member Rathin Roy was of the view that the edge accorded to the IAS and IFS should be removed altogether.

The chairman was of the view that the fundamental principle for determining the remuneration for any position is that it should be based on the complexity and difficulty of the duties and responsibility of the job in question.

“Therefore, some additional remuneration, in the early stages of their career indeed is justified, not only for the IAS but also for the IPS and IFoS,” the chairman said in the report.

Rae, on the other hand argued that the removal of the financial edge for the IAS will only further weaken command and control mechanisms at the field level.

On empanelment too, the chairman and Roy were of view that the IAS officers should not enjoy the ‘two-year edge’ over others services and All India Service officers and Group ‘A’ Central Services officers, who have completed 17 years of service, should be eligible for empanelment. Former Petroleum Secretary Rae did not agree with the view.

PAY COMMISSIONS: A BRIEF HISTORY

1st
Chairman: Srinivasa Varadachariar
Appointment: May 1946
Filing of report: May  1947
Implementation*: January 1946
Financial impact  (Rs cr): NA

2nd
Chairman: Jagannatha Das
Appointment: August 1957
Filing of report: August 1959
Implementation*: July 1959
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 39.62

3rd
Chairman: Raghubir Dayal
Appointment: April 1970
Filing of report: March 1973
Implementation*: January 1973
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 144.6

4th
Chairman: P N Singhal
Appointment: June 1983
Filing of report:3 Reports - June & December, 1986, & May 1987
Implementation*: January 1986
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 1,282

5th
Chairman: S Ratnavel Pandian
Appointment: April 1994
Filing of report: January 1997
Implementation*: January 1996
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 17,000

6th
Chairman: B N Srikrishna
Appointment: July 2006
Filing of report: March 2008
Implementation*: January 2006
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 22,000

7th
Chairman: A K Mathur
Appointment: February 2014
Filing of report: November 2015
Implementation*: January 2016
Financial impact  (Rs cr): 1,02,100

*Implementations predate filings of reports as recommendations were implemented retrospectively.

Source: Cabinet Papers