Welcome to the official website of All India Postal Employees Union Group 'C'- अखिल भारतीय डाक कर्मचारी संघ वर्ग 'सी' की आधिकारिक वेबसाइट में आपका स्वागत है

Monday, November 17, 2008


Dear Comrades! NFPE Federal Secretariat meeting was held on 8.11.2008. In addition to the Federation Office Bearers in Headquarters, the General Secretaries of P3, P4, R3, R4, Admn as well as GDS unions / associations attended. It was unanimously decided that a Note seeking modifications of negative recommendations shall go from us with the demand for discussions with the Staff Side. The GDS Union has submitted its Note on 10.11.2008. NFPE held wide discussions within and with leaders of FNPO and finally our Note seeking modifications of all negative recommendations and improvements without prejudice to our basic demand for Status and Statutory Pension is submitted to Secretary, Department of Posts today.
We have requested for a discussion with the Staff Side now and also before taking a final decision to implement the recommendations of GDS Committee. The full Note submitted today is reproduced below for the information of our comrades. All Comrades are requested to take a print out of the 9 pages and circulte the same:




Email: nfpehq@gmail.com

Web: www.nfpe.blogspot.com



1st Floor, North Avenue Post Office Building, New Delhi - 110001



PF/15/2008                                                                          Dated 17th November 2008 




The Secretary 

Department of Posts

Dak Bhawan

New Delhi – 110001



Sub: Modifications sought over the recommendations of the Report of Nataraja Murti GDS Committee – Request for discussion with the Staff Side - reg.




This Federation seek the following modifications and improvements  in the GDS Committee Report without prejudice to the demand for grant of Status and Statutory Pension etc and would highly appreciate if a discussion with the Staff Side is held by you. Our submission is divided into three segments viz., Conceptual issues; Wages and Allowances; and other issues including Trade Union related issues.


1. Conceptual Issues:


  1. Concept of Part Time: The concept of the GDS Committee mentioned in several places in the Report that the GDS is like a part time is unjustified and contrary to facts. We record our strong resentment over the comparison of GDS to Anganwadi Helpers and Vetti, thalaiyari type of workers under local bodies by the GDS Committee. In fact the GDS were called as extraneous departmental agents with departmental status since 1858 and they were brought under provisions of FR&SR up to 1959. Less than 8 hour employment could not be the justification for terming them as Part Time. They are permanent workers employed for less than 8 hours of work recruited under relevant rules for rendering service up to their reaching 65 years of age. The Supreme Court gave judgment that EDAs are holders of civil posts. Several Court judgments are there denying categorising GDS/ED as part timers. The Department also had accepted this judgment at least to the level of extending the protection of law for disciplinary cases. Justice Talwar Committee also elaborately concluded with the decision that they are holders of civil posts. Therefore terming the GDS as part timers is an erroreneous understanding of the GDS Committee.


  1. Concept of comparison with regular employees: The GDS Committee time and again repeats in its report that the nature of job performed by the GDS is unlike the regular postal employees. The reason that certain type of work performed by HOs or Departmental SOs are not performed in BOs cannot be the reason to reach a conclusion that the job of GDS is not the same to that of the regular staff. Even certain type of work performed by earmarked HOs/SOs is not done by other HOs or departmental SOs. We do not therefore differentiate the Postal Assistants of one HO and another HO or other SOs. The fact is that the nature of those work performed by departmental or a Branch Post Office are one and the same and the attempt of GDS Committee to distinguish the nature of job of a regular and a GDS is unscientific and unjustified observation. The Rules and Manuals applicable to departmental offices are applicable to BOs in respect of all the transactions being carried out. The comparisons earlier arrived at by Madan Kishore, R.R.Savoor and Justice Talwar Committee equating BPMs with Mail Overseers; Delivery Agents with Postmen and other categories with the Group D is based on scientific approach. That has not been denied with valid arguments by the present GDS Committee. Therefore this concept of contrasting the GDS job profile with that of the regular is to be totally rejected.


  1. Franchisee outlets in rural areas: The GDS Committee has recommended under Para 3.23 in Chapter III - Systems in vogue in other countries that in case the Post offices do not generate the minimum income but there is need to improve access, the department needs to look into franchisee/Out reach arrangements. The franchisee arrangement is not a viable alternative to the GDS System due to so many reasons. We are totally opposed to the expansion of Franchisee System. We therefore request that this recommendation should not be accepted.


  1. GDS Stamp Vendors: The GDS Committee recommends for abolition of GDS SV categories. GDS SVs are more economical than PAs which was the reason for expansion of GDS SV system. To avoid congestion in counters the GDS SV stamp selling counters were separately opened. The time factor for selling stamps for GDS SV is more stringent than for the PAs. Abolition or non-filling up of GDS SV posts based on the tightened and impracticable time factor will adversely affect the services. Therefore recommending abolition or non-filling up of GDS SV category is not a justified step and so we request that this recommendation should not be accepted.


  1. GDS MM: The GDS Committee in its report under Para 5.21.4 last line has misrepresented our request. We only requested to implement the recommendations of R.R.Savoor Committee about non-employment of GDS MM in metro and larger railway stations and regularise them as Group D by clubbing the vacant posts of Group D and casual and GDS MM. The Department of Posts already ordered during July 1989 to regularize the GDS MM in Metro Cities and larger platforms by converting all GDS MM posts into regular Group D posts. Despite our bringing this fact during our oral evidence, the GDS Committee omitted the whole point. We request that all GDS MM should be observed either by combination or by upgradation to regularise them as multi-skilled Group C.


  1. ED SPM: The recommendation to abolish the ED SOs in urban areas is not acceptable to us. Upgradation of ED SOs into Departmental SOs is welcome in urban areas as and when the incumbents are absorbed in regular stream. But abolition of EDSOs resulting in withdrawal of postal services will be a negative step and not acceptable to us. Similarly conversion of EDSOs into EDBOs in rural areas is a retrograde step recommended by the GDS Committee resulting in reduction of existing services to the customers. We oppose this and request to reject this recommendation.


  1. Opening of new BOs: The recommendation reiterating Savoor Committee for radial distance instead of road distance for existence of BOs is unscientific. The public are not going to jump the distance by air but travel by road only for reaching the offices. We oppose this concept of radial distance and request the Department of Posts to continue to reject the same as was done before. The Government also did not accept the above recommendation of Savoor Committee consciously but vested the powers to relax conditions for opening BOs in Heads of Circles on public demand or by Peoples representatives. The suggestion for closure of BOs in one place to relocate in another place to meet the direction of the Planning Commission for opening 3000 BOs is also to be therefore rejected. The GDS Committee has pointed out that a total of 27326 out of 54652 BOs reportedly located within 3 KMs radial distance are to be relocated. Such a step would tantamount to dislocation of thousands of families of GDS from the village they have settled down on their employment as per the conditions. Huge financial strain would be befalling on them. We are opposed to any such move and request non-acceptance of this recommendation by the Government.  


  1. PSSK: The GDS Committee itself observes that only 6.5% of PSSKs could generate the prescribed booking of RLs which was as low as one or two RLs a day. The Scheme was given up due to the stiff opposition from the Staff Side after the initial launch of the Scheme. The performance of the Scheme is also proved to be dismal. This fact has already been acknowledged by the Government which abandoned any expansion of this scheme in the recent past. The recommendation therefore for further expansion of PSSK Scheme should not be accepted.


  1. Time factor: [1] The GDS Committee has recommended application of treasury time factors applied for Treasurer exclusively dealing cash transaction is departmental HOs and bigger SOs where lakhs of rupees are being handled. In respect of BOs even 1/20th of the cash handled could not be ensured and most of the currency notes are in smaller denominations including coins. The comparison is not a fair one and it is pertinent to note that the treasury revised norms formulated are not been insisted for implementation due to its impracticality. [2] Moreover the recommendation to continue with the time factor of 14 points fixed at the time of C.V.Rajan Committee when limited transactions only were available with BOs for preparation of accounts including closing of account bag and remittances require revision. The accounting work is ever increasing due to introduction of multifarious work in BOs and more time factor should be granted for this work. In addition the recommendation under Para 9.16 – 5 stating that the cash received and remitted to account office should be excluded for computing work load since this will cover within the 14 points granted for accounting work is arbitrary and unacceptable to us. This is a time consuming work which should be included in the cash handled while computing the work load. [3] We welcome the approach of the GDS Committee for grant of time factor for all work like RPLI, PLI, NREGS, OAP through SB Account etc under Para 9.16 and request that such time factor should be included for calculating the actual work hours for grant of higher TRCA on Prorata basis. The time factor for GDS Mail Deliverer shall continue to be compared with the time factor of Postmen. 


  1. GDS Mail Deliverer: The introduction of new services in rural areas to be performed by GDS Mail Deliverer would cover any shortfall in quantum of work and therefore there is no need for introduction of a new 3 Hours element for GDS Mail Deliverer. It is apprehended that though not now; such an introduction might in future be extended to the existing GDS also causing reduction of TRCA. We request that the status-quo to continue and the recommendation under Para 10.17 should not be accepted.


2. Wages and Allowances:


a)      Annual Increase: GDS Committee has recommended annual increase ranging from 1.74% to 1.96%. This is too low. The percentage of annual increase shall be at least 3% of TRCA as like regular employees. The quantum of DA will be any way less than the regular employees but the percentage of DA should not be different. We request that this recommendation of GDS Committee under Para No.10.19 should be modified accordingly.


b)      Benefit of 5% TRCA: The GDS Committee has stated under Para 10.20 (c) that the 5% TRCA granted in lieu of 50% DA Merger to regular employees may be absorbed / adjusted in future after 1.1.2006 in the new TRCA structure. This is most retrograde. As the 50% merged quantum been taken into account by the Government for Government Employees, We request that the GDS also should be given a 1.86 times fixation benefit in lieu of the 5% additional TRCA granted from 1.1.2004. More over there is no recommendation from the GDS Committee for granting weightage for senior GDS resulting in large number of bunching. We request that one increment per two year service as bunching increment as was made available by the 6th CPC be granted to GDS to offset this anomaly.


c)      Computation of TRCA: The TRCA computed for different categories of GDS by the Committee negates Prorata fixation on par with corresponding regular employees. This comparison evolved historically by various ED Committees in the past including Justice Talwar Committee and implemented by the Government has been summarily rejected and modified by the present GDS Committee. This is not acceptable to us. We propose that the existing formula should be continued and the TRCA accordingly recomputed as follows:


1.      GDS SPM / BPM: Prorata TRCA of GDS SPM/BPM should be compared with the pay scales of Mail Overseers.  In the background of large scale computerisation of BOs during the 11th Five Year Plan period and the recommendation of the GDS Committee for giving preference to +2 Candidates in the recruitment of BPMs in future the elevation of TRCA on par with PA is justified. Even by the standards of comparison with the Mail Overseers the BPMs shall be granted Prorata with the pre-revised 4000-6000 pay scale only. The recommendation of the GDS Committee in recommending a lower TRCA is unacceptable. Therefore we request that the Prorata be worked on the basis of 5200-20200 + 2400/- Grade Pay only as follows:



No.of Hours


Minimum TRCA Proposed based on Hourly rate


3 Hrs





3 Hrs – 3.30 Hrs





3.30 – 4 Hrs





4 Hrs – 4.30 Hrs





4.30 Hrs – 5 Hrs





2.      GDS MD/SV: The Prorata TRCA of GDS Mail Deliverer and Stamp Vendors should be fixed in comparison with the implemented pay band + Grade Pay of Postmen staff. This has been changed by the GDS Committee and a comparison with that of the upgraded Group C [old Group D] has been made. This is unacceptable. The upgraded Group C is a new concept recommended by Pay Commission for elevating the Group D into a Group C scale and extending that scale to the GDS MD/SV who is always compared with the Postmen is not correct. We request that the historical comparison of computing Prorata of GDS MD/SV with the corresponding Postmen Scale should continue and accordingly the TRCA shall be computed based on the Pay Band 5200-20200 + Grade Pay 2000/- on Prorata basis.




Minimum TRCA proposed


Up to 3 Hrs




3 – 3.45 Hrs



3.45 – 5 Hrs




3.      Other GDS categories: The other GDS Categories which were compared with the Group D for computation of Prorata wages shall be extended the benefit of upgraded scale as like their counterpart regular Group D employees by imparting training as suggested for the regular Group D by the Pay Commission. We feel that denial of this upgradation and computing on the basis of 1S pay scale that is going to be obsolete is an injustice. There is not going to be any scale in the Government Services below Rs.7000/- and therefore no Prorata can be computed less than 7000/-  prescribed as the Minimum Wage for Central Service. We propose the following TRCA based on the proportionate pay of upgraded Group D:




Minimum TRCA proposed





Up to 3 Hrs






3 – 3.45 Hrs





3.45 – 5 Hrs






D. Dearness Allowance: It is seen that the GDS Committee has suggested computation of a new Rural COL Index for grant of Dearness Allowance in future. This is an attack on the hard won benefit of GDS over years of negotiations. There cannot be a separate COL Index for GDS and regular employees. Both are working in urban as well as rural areas. The vagarities of price rise and inflation affect both equally. Even the 6th CPC has not recommended any rural and urban COL Indexes. Therefore we request that the recommendation made by the GDS Committee vide Para 11.9 should not be accepted.


E. Productivity Linked Bonus: The GDS Committee has recommended that the Incentives for GDS should be considered as PRIS as recommended by the 6th CPC which will replace the PLB. The Government has not accepted this recommendation as the Staff Side JCM is opposed to any such replacement or PLB with PRIS. The question therefore doesn't arise at present. Moreover the other recommendation of the GDS Committee for limiting the average TRCA plus DA to 50% of the ceiling fixed for lowest category of regular employees is an attempt to deny the existing benefit on PLB to GDS. There is no different ceiling for the regular and GDS under PLB. Moreover the Bonus Act of the Government fixed the ceiling as 3500/- and irrespective of actual monthly salary or wages, all are restricted to the same ceiling. Consciously cutting the benefit by fixing another ceiling as against the Bonus Act will not be acceptable to us. Therefore we request that the recommendation of the GDS Committee vide Para 12.15 should not be accepted.


F. Other Allowances: It is most unfortunate that the GDS Committee instead of recommending Prorata allowances as recommended by its predecessor Justice Talwar, has excluded the GDS from the benefit of all such allowances by just stating that these are denied on the basis that they are only part timers. The rationale is totally unscientific. When GDS are entitled for DA on par with regular employees, what justification can there be to deny other allowances too on Prorata basis. The whole approach of the GDS Committee is untenable. We request that the Government should reject the inhuman and unscientific approach of the GDS Committee and should grant all allowances on Prorata basis.


G. Combined Duty Allowance: Resorting to combination of duty on large scale with the approach of granting some allowances but not for converting the post into a regular post for regularisation of the GDS is not acceptable to us. This is nothing but exploitation of labour and having adverse impact on the efficiency. More over the logic behind fixing mere 500/- or 1000/-for duties combined with one or two other work for a BPM by the GDS Committee is not justified. When a GDS MD or MC if employed will be earning even according to GDS Committee a minimum of Rs.888/- or 765/- per hour for a month. The combination of the entire duties of another GDS is equated with only 500/- per month is not acceptable to us. Either combination should result in regularisation or the combined duty allowance should be matching with full TRCA level of the combined duty since the GDS is expected to perform both the duties one after another to the perfection.


H. Office Maintenance Allowance: The doubling of office maintenance allowance from Rs.50/- to Rs.100/- per month is unscientific and inadequate. Even the actual electric consumption for running the office is not meted out by the Government by this recommendation. There is other office maintenance expenditure for up keeping etc. Justice Talwar Committee recommended a sum of Rs.200/- towards this allowance. It is requested that the on a separate electric meter the entire electric charges for the use of the Branch Office should be met by the Department in addition to the office maintenance allowance of Rs.200/-.


I. Cycle / Foot Beat: The work load calculation shall be on the basis of the agreement between the Department and the Staff side reached during 1987. This should continue without any distortion.


J. Detention beyond working hours: The recommendation for a paltry sum of Rs.6/- but not exceeding Rs.12/- per day for detention beyond duty time for exchange of mails etc is unreasonable and therefore unacceptable to us. To deny legitimate dues an argument is put in place that there are other avocations for the GDS to sustain himself. Accepting for argument sake that there are other avocations, the detention beyond work hours will jeopardise such of those other avocations. Therefore the compensation beyond work hours shall not be so less but a minimum of Rs.25/- per hour with other conditions relaxed.


K. Mode of Payment through SB A/c: The SB  account method suggested by the GDS Committee is not going to avoid the problem of remittance on the last working day of the month. More over the MOF orders are clear that as far as the lower grade employees are concerned the mode of payment through bank need not be insisted upon. We request rejection of this recommendation.


L. Service Discharge Benefit Scheme: The GDS Committee has proposed for a Service Discharge Benefit Scheme akin to pension payment. We want some modifications. The Severance amount of 60,000/- should be uniform for all GDS as at present and not according to number of years of service put in to facilitate moderate monthly payment under the Benefit Scheme. In addition we request that since the minimum pay in Central Services is 7000/- and the minimum pension will be therefore 3500/-, the amount to be paid to GDS as Discharge Benefit Scheme shall not be less than Rs.1750/- per month. The GDS Committee has omitted to mention about the continuation of Severance Amount to GDS who become regularised as Postmen or Group D. We request that the status quo on this matter shall continue.


M. Gratuity: The recommendation made in Para 14.7 for payment of ex-gratia Gratuity is against the Honourable Supreme Court Judgment and against the Gratuity Act. The Gratuity is to be calculated not only on the basic TRCA but also on the Dearness Allowance quantum. The maximum ceiling of 60,000/- recommended is unjustified and the ceiling is to be the same quantum under the Gratuity Act as disposed of by the Honourable High Court of Punjab and Haryana and subsequently by the Honourable Supreme Court of India.


N. Leave: The recommendation falls short of grant of adequate paid leave on Prorata basis with the regular employees. The carry forward system is also discriminatory. Instead of one year the leave accumulation shall be permitted without restrictions to enable the GDS to get paid leave for continued sickness etc. We welcome the recommendation for grant of paid maternity leave for the women GDS but would like the modification thereon to remove the condition prescribed to exclude medical termination of pregnancy since to save the mother medical termination may become necessary sometimes and also that the same should be compensated from the Welfare Fund. We request that the same be done from the Government Exchequer. We also request that proportionate child care leave as like regular women employees may be considered.


3. Other issues including Trade Union Rights:


a] Transfer: The transfer entitlement may include request transfer for all GDS in vacant posts without any conditions. Our Honourable Minister of State for Communications & IT in his open letter to GDS had committed that request transfer to GDS will be liberally considered. This commitment should be honoured by the Department. For an official working for the department for 40 years or so cannot be denied the opportunity to get a transfer against any vacant posts.


b] Recruitment: There are certain recommendations made by the GDS Committee which are stepping out of jurisdiction of a GDS Committee. These require to be ignored by the Department and not accepted. They are: [1] Amending the Rule 38 of Vol. IV to deny transfer to upgraded Group C; [2] Increasing the Direct Recruitment quota of Postal Assistants / Sorting Assistants to 75% and reduction of promotional quota to 25%; and [3] reducing the promotional quota of Postmen/Mailguard vacancies available to [Group D] multi skilled Group C by half.


c] Examination to upgraded Group D: The GDS Committee has recommended for examination to be selected to the posts of upgraded Group D posts in PB-1 with 1800/- Grade Pay. There is no need for any examination and the status quo method of seniority-cum-fitness through DPC should continue. After selection they may be imparted with training as intended for the Group D employees.


c] Discharge Age: The retirement age is recommended to be reduced as 62. This is not acceptable to us. There is no justification for reduction of retirement age without regularisation or grant of civil servant status etc.


d] Nature of Penalties: We are opposed to change of nomenclature of GDS Conduct & Employment Rules into GDS Conduct & Engagement Rules as recommended by the GDS Committee. This recommendation is against the spirit of the Honourable Supreme Court Judgment already accepted by the Government that erstwhile ED Employees are holders of civil posts covered by comprehensive recruitment rules. They are recruited against posts under the Department of Posts and not simply engaged for doing casual work. So the recommendation for change of nomenclature suggested by the GDS committee is retrograde and unacceptable. Secondly we request that an element of minor penalty for minor lapses be introduced in the Conduct Rules. The rejection by the GDS Committee to recommend for revision of exgratia payment for put off duty GDS requires to be reconsidered for increasing the quantum of such put off duty ex-gratia allowance to help the suspected GDS survive by moderate earnings.


e] Trade Union Rights: The recommendation of the GDS Committee for reducing the periodicity of monthly meetings, bi-monthly meetings, four-monthly meetings etc is negative. The existing facility is being reduced. These recommendations are requested to be rejected and status-quo with the periodicity of meetings should be protected. In addition we request for improving the trade union rights. The recommendation about the periodicity for holding the All India Conferences of GDS Unions may be best left for the decision of the unions concerned.


f] Security: The recommendation of the GDS Committee for increased Security to be furnished by the GDS may not be accepted and the status quo continued to avoid additional expenditure for the GDS.


g] Review of Establishment: We oppose the recommendation of the GDS Committee for annual review of establishment but request for the continuation of the status quo of triennial review.  


We request that the Staff Side may be called for discussions to explain our view points on all the aforementioned issues and also before taking a final decision for implementation of the GDS Committee recommendations.


Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,




Secretary General


No comments: