New Delhi: In November 2015, the 7th Pay Commission had recommended the introduction of performance related pay for government employees – an almost corporate-like pay structure that would be determined on the basis of one’s performance and efficiency.
The PRP, recommended by the Seventh Pay Commission, will be based on the Results Framework Documents and the Reformed Annual Performance Appraisal Report and other broad government guidelines.
But it faced opposition from some IAS officers and never saw the light of day.
Neighboring Bhutan is considering a bill that links performance to incentives for its own civil servants, putting the spotlight back on the policy.
called the pay structure bill 2022Finance Minister Namge Tshering introduced the Bhutanese bill to the National Assembly on 14 November. below billThe government, a copy of which is with ThePrint, aims to introduce performance-based incentives (PBIs), a variable pay policy that will be part of the pay structure of civil servants.
The bill has been referred to the relevant committee for vetting but has generated widespread discussion and generated a wave of curiosity among the civil service officers of that country.
According to Bhutan’s bill, PBI will be linked to “national, organizational and individual performance” and can be 100 per cent of an officer’s basic pay. The Bhutanese government has stated that the bill is a way of “driving meritocracy”.
While Bhutan continues to discuss introducing performance-based incentives for civil servants, it appears that a similar PRP is unlikely to be introduced in India anytime soon.
An official serving in India’s Department of Personnel told ThePrint that at present there is no talk of introducing PRP in India.
The government will continue with the 7th Pay Commission, he said. [for now] Because it will not go for 8th pay commission in near future. Of all the recommendations, the government is considering increasing the DA, but [there’s no word] on PRP,” the official told ThePrint, adding that at the time The 4th, 5th and 6th Central Pay Commissions all mentioned performance linked incentives, it was the 7th Central Pay Commission which introduced it in a “concrete manner”.
Read also: 28 posts, 78 DGs and ADGs in UP – why experts are calling top-heavy IPS the ‘worst-managed cadre’
Opinion divided on PRP
According to the Bill, the PBI is “based on a robust system of measurement and performance will be provided when a performance management system is in place”.
,Performance-based incentives consisting of components linked to national, organizational and individual performance may be up to 100% of the annual basic pay of the Government servant to promote meritocracy and pay a competitive salary package.
In India, sServing and retired civil servants ThePrint spoke to seem divided on the policy. While some believe that such a performance-based policy would only serve to ensure efficiency, others say that it would be difficult to base a pay structure on performance.
“The 7th Pay Commission has come up with a good recommendation on introducing PRP,” a senior Indian Revenue Service officer serving in the finance ministry told ThePrint. “It is an idea like a corporate structure, but, if implemented, it will actually ensure efficiency at various levels. We have an appraisal process, and PRP could have been linked to ACR, mentioned the report. was also done.
ACRAn annual confidential report, or an annual confidential report, is an appraisal report written for each member of the civil service at the end of the financial year. It is the main method of annual review of the performance of a civil servant.
However, Arvind Mehta, a retired IAS officer who served as the secretary of the 15th Finance Commission, believes that the PRP is a “good idea in principle, but difficult to implement for practical purposes”.
“The methods of evaluating one’s performance generally include promotions and postings rather than working out the pay structure,” he told ThePrint. “This is how the incentive scheme for civil service officers works in our country.”
India’s former Coal Secretary Anil Swarup believes that what works for Bhutan may not necessarily work for India.
“The context and circumstances are completely different in India and Bhutan,” Swarup, a retired IAS officer of the Uttar Pradesh cadre, told ThePrint. “The context and circumstances are completely different in India and Bhutan. There is no such determinable parameter in the Secretariats. These types of structures need to be purpose-oriented. It may still be possible for public sector units but not for secretariat posts.”
(Edited by Uttara Ramaswamy)
Read also: ‘Ask approval, else’: How the Modi government is again cracking down on IPS in states