Ministry of Finance Dictate on Promotion Policy

This is the news item published in valued Newspaper Economic Times on 26.12.2011
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/banking/finance/banking/state-run-banks-told-to-discard-fast-track-promotion-policies/articleshow/11248127.cms
This is small victory for bankers who have been cheated by Bank Management .

State-run banks told to discard fast-track promotion policies.

Now bank management will not be able to recruit as per their whims and fancies, they will not be able to promote as per their sweet will or reject as per their whims in the name of merit, and they will not be able to earn wealth in the name of recruitment, promotion and transfers.

Provided

Unions and Association (who are called as protectors of bank officers but who are real enemy of bankers)  stop dancing as puppet of management and decide to extend support the new guidelines , of course after some modification on some issues like  lateral movement among banks , bank officers will get justice though late.

Hitherto top executives of almost all public sector banks were working as dictators by choosing flatterers for key posts and by giving humiliating treatment to devoted and talented seniors. They  say young officers will prove better and hence picked up freshers directly from campus of their choice for the posts in scale II, scale III and above.All officers were young when they were recruited , they forget this while choosing young for promotion. Arbitrarily and unjustifiably indeed, top executives sidelined the matured and experienced officers of two or three decades to serve their vested interest. 

Now government has realized that increasing trend in volume of bad assets is primarily due to bad Human Resource Management. Government has rightly now suggested all banks to discard merit channel which gives scope for misuse of discretionary powers.I hope this policy if implemented honestly will restore the pride of bank officers and help in improving the overall health of banks.


After all, Health of Banks depends not on youth power or youth energy, but on mental power, maturity, experience, honesty of officer and ability to assess value of customers while taking lending decisions. Best Lending decisions are best taken not on the basis of financial parameters only but based on creditworthiness of the borrowers and which can better judged by matured bank officer only.

I submit hereunder copy of news item published in Economic Times.

The finance ministry has directed state-run banks to do away with their separate promotion policies, a move strongly opposed by the officers' unions. The fresh guidelines aim at removing the anomalies across public sector banks and addressing severe manpower shortage by creating a common pool of managers. 

This spells the end of fasttrack and super fast-track promotions at managerial levels in some public sector banks, including the country's largest lender, State Bank of India. The new guidelines will allow lateral movement across banks without any remuneration issues, a finance ministry official said. 

"The guidelines will also ensure that there are eligible candidates across all verticals in all 21 state-run banks, which is a big advantage when it comes to succession planning," said a human resources head at a Mumbai-based bank. The 2.5 lakh strong All India Bank Officers' Confederation has, however, slammed the revised guidelines. 

"The government should realise the situation is different in each bank and it cannot force its policies," said TN Goel, senior vice-president of the confederation. As per the guidelines, an employee will have to work in all verticals of a bank before being promoted to the middle management level. 

"Specialists recruited in banks will however have to spend at least five years in their area before being moved to other functions," the finance ministry official said. Further, in a case where a relaxation has been provided on the basis of merit, the same officer will not be eligible again, the official said. 

The guidelines run contrary to the recommendations of a panel, set up to look into human resource issues at state-run banks, which had recommended that the banks should develop mechanisms for identifying star performers and to track their performance for fast-track growth. Headed by former Bank of Baroda chairman AK Khandelwal, the panel had suggested that such a move will act as a motivational and retention tool, besides creating a leadership pipeline.

New Policy for Promotion of Bank Officers

With reference to new terms of promotion policy for bankers dictated by Ministry of Finance I would like to place my views for consideration of bank employees, for union leaders who are supposed to protect the interest of bank employees and for top executives of bank management who have been directed by MOF to frame new policy of promotion for officers.

I would like to say that until there is system of Interview in promotion processes there is no guarantee that whimsical rejection or arbitrary promotions will not take place in Government Banks. Interview is the root of all maladies in all banks and in all government departments. Members of Interview panel more often than not apply their whims to select or reject a candidate ignoring completely the quality and quantity of work done by any particular officer. Various powerful officials are used by candidates as source called as Godfather to win the hearts of members of Interview panel and this give rise to flattery and bribery. As such I feel the system of Interview must be abolished completely.

I feel there is no benefit in conducting group discussion for promotion of any officer in any scale and neither is there any need for having a separate Merit Channel which gives scope of manipulation. During five to thirty years of service, top executive of banks get hundreds of opportunities like meeting, branch visit, correspondence, audit reports which give ample opportunity to judge the quality of an officer who is candidate for elevation. If the higher executives are not able and do not possess enough capability to assess and ascertain the level of proficiency, efficiency, communication skill, , behavior with customers, work performance, style of working, relationship, innovative and creativeness , level of initiative, loyalty to bank, level of corruption, honesty and integrity etc of an officer in span of five to thirty years , how can interview panel members judge all these in a minute or two of time available in Interview with candidate eligible for promotion?

Interview in my view is undoubtedly a tool given to management to reject good officers and whimsically select bad officers for higher assignment on some plea or the other. Same logic applies for all organization and government offices. This is why most of officers promoted to executive cadres are subsequently found to be guilty of various malpractices and later given non-sensitive assignment. It is different that such evil worker or officers get patronage and protection from his mentors sitting at top echelons and due to which they are never punished but always promoted to higher level.

Madu Koda , Harshad Mehta, A Raja, or Suresh Kalmadi succeeded in execution of their ill conceived ideas causing loss to government in tune of hundreds of crores of rupees. They succeeded in their dirty goal only because they could use their power to select flatterers for their team who blindly say yes to every order of Ministers and who do not talk of ideal or safety of the organization. By dint of money power they could earn through the rout of bribe and flattery they could manage the CBI official or vigilance official or inspecting and audit official to conceal their evil works. In the same fashion top bankers select a few flatterers and blind followers who can earn illegal money through bad lending or through ill motivated contractual works and share with them.

Similar is the line of action of top ranked official in banks who manage vital issues and who decide on big value loan proposals. In such position and in such a dirty environment, an honest and talented officer cannot visualize performing as per set procedures ensuring safety and security of the bank. And when the work culture depends on so many extraneous factors which are beyond control of officers there is no merit in talking of merit channel or group discussion or interview.

Root cause of all maladies lies in these delegated powers in top executives which shuts the mouth of good officers and when such culture is prevalent, even policy of whistle blower become futile. Officers who move opposite the line of bosses are transferred to such a critical branch that survival of officer and his family becomes an issue. Can an officer in such critical place of posting with humiliating background behind the scene perform as per his skill or as per his potential and give same growth as an officer posted at comfortable branch? Not at all.

There is no fixed yardstick which can measure perfectly the efficiency, honesty and loyalty of an officer until the intention of assessing authority is bad. It is therefore desirable to give all promotions based purely on seniority and punish officers who commit mistake or train officers who are willing to perform but lacks in knowledge. Same practice is prevalent in central government services as regards promotion and release of increment without stagnation. It is different that again politicians use transfer powers to make or mar the career of an officers for their vested self interest.

I further feel that the method of Fast Tract called as Merit Channel is another scope to bank officers to concentrate of academic knowledge and somehow or the other pass various examinations even by unfair means . In most of the cases officers who are weak in performance but strong in reading and raising knowledge level get success in written test and get promoted from one scale to other scale even though their performance in the field level is dismal, damaging and full of corruption.

Banking service is completely practice oriented and here focus remains on how an officer render service to customers and not on how much knowledge he or she possesses. I agree that one banker should possess adequate educational qualification and it should be ensured at the time of fresh appointment. There are many officers in banks who continue reading even during service period but do not perform at all in the branch they are posted. They know that if they acquire degree they will get better marking not only in appraisal and in interview but also create good impression in the minds of members of Interview panel. Such officers even at work place focus on circulars and make diary but they seldom apply their knowledge to enhance productivity of the bank.

It is true that practice without theory is blind, but it is also true that theory without practice is impotent. It is to be kept in mind that after passing ordeal of written examination, Interview and group discussion, a person is appointed in a bank. Once a person is selected for banking job, it is the duty of bank management to make him perfect in the line of activity he is supposed to work. As per assignment of duties the employees should be trained and motivated.

If banks fail to prepare an officer for particular job, it is the fault of training system and that of department of Human Resource Management and that of Planning Department. It is the duty of bank management to use the bank employee as per his attitude, skill, knowledge, interest and specialization. It is absolutely bad to deprive any office from promotion or even from annual increment if the bank does not have adequate vacancies or when bank fail to ensure good working culture.

Besides if the assessing authorities fail to assess the merit of officers in a period of five to thirty years they cannot do the same in few minutes of group discussion or interview or by placing some questions in written test. Besides it is also bitter truth that the same officer is assessed differently by different assessing authority due to his different level of perception, conception, preferences, love and hate style. Fate of the same person depends less on his or her skill but more on the prejudiced eyes of assessing authority. Same piece of cloth in a cloth shop may be liked by one and disliked by the other. Cloth is same but buyers have different likings and different attitude. God has made it , none is guilty for such multiplicity of attitude, conflict of interests and varity of inclination and deflection.

Many times officer in a bank do not succeed as per expectation of higher management due to situation beyond his control such as there is no adequate manpower in the office he works. Branch has to waste most of precious time in unproductive work like pension payment, No frill accounts as suggested by the government, salary payment of various department.

Interruption by higher bosses in normal functioning by asking various types of reports and statement by adding duties which are not reckoned with in appraisal system for assessment of work performance also adversely affect the efficiency of an officer in a branch.

When his predecessor ( branch head who worked prior to present incumbent )has committed fraud, disbursed loans to bad borrowers without completing required formalities, when Non Performing assets in a branch is huge and the new incumbent officer who has inherited bundle of irregularities has to devote more time on improving housekeeping , on recovery of past loan than in mobilization of new business and on creating better relation with customers. Image built by his predecessor is so bad that customers hesitate to oblige new incumbent and business do not grow as per expectation.

Every Higher bosses has his own liking and disliking. They may compel a subordinate officer verbally to sanction advances to persons of their choice and punish officer if he or she does not abide by verbal instruction. Otherwise best option available to boss is to threaten such officers of transfer to critical places.

Area of posting also plays a significant role in performance. If an officer is posted in bad area he cannot give good output. If the place where he works is crime belt or naxal affected or where security threat is more, growth of business will be at low speed. On the other hand if position of branch is in business concentrated area, bank’s business may also grow at higher speed. Moreover customers also hate going to crowd inflicted area or robbery prone area to avoid cash loss risk or life risk and in such position even good officers cannot perform well.
And so on ------------------------------------
Moreover the business of any branch depends on potential of the area also. If an officer is posted at critically remote village or crime prone area or is disturbed mohalla he or she cannot increase business as an officer posted in an area where number of government departments are more, where schools and colleges are more, where the area is in developing stage and government sanctions hundreds of crores of rupees for development, where Multinational companies and big domestic companies are situated etc.

Sometimes multiplicity of banks in a particular area also dampens the prospect of growth. Private Banks offer better ambiance and skilled staff on front level counters backed by a team of marketing personnel whereas PSBs open their branches with one or two staff and place of branch is selected in remote corner so that rental payment is minimum. As soon as a branch of private bank is opened, customers of high standard prefer to switch over to Private Banks.

Branch Managers of branches of various government banks are busy in preparation of reports or statement. VIP Customers are going away from public sector banks to private and foreign banks and on the contrary pensioners, teachers, salaried people, NAREGA beneficiaries etc have become choice customers or compulsion of PSBs.

Even after having customer friendly service charges, customers prefer foreign and private banks because they are fed up with the attitude of employees of government banks. Employees in public sector banks are invariably short of manpower or incompetent or frustrated or busy in preparation of various reports and statements or in recovery of bad loans or busy in serving their bosses etc.

Good customers dislike PSBs, they dislike share of PSBs and prefer buying shares of Private Banks even at higher PE but retired persons, students, low paid salaried people, small retailers etc like going government banks due to lesser service charges. There may be plenty of General Managers, DGMs, AGMs, and CMs in administrative offices but there is no adequacy of staffs in most of the branches to serve the real customers.

Moreover the brainless expansion of banks and opening of new branches to cover up Financial Inclusion has also added fuel to fire. Total number of staff in a government bank is less than what it was ten years ago even though thousands of employees have left the bank, business of bank have grown ten or twenty times and new products have been added to banking industry. There is practically no proper man power planning due to some reason or the other. It is the employees who ultimately bear the brunt of higher management when they fail to perform as per the desire, whims and fancies of his bosses.

Similarly an officer may have influential IAS and IPS officers as his relative, ministers and important government officers as friends and may have linkage with high profile corporate houses. In such position he or she can attract good business for branch he is working as Branch Head. On the contrary some other officer may not have such good connections and so his power to mobilize business may appear low and weak even though he or she is good performer and when customers are happy with his services. Quality of a bank officer should be judged by service extended by his team to bank customers and safety provided to bank assets and not by numerical numbers of growth in deposits and advances.

There are some officers who are good in mobilization of deposits, some have better expertise in lending, some have good marketing skills to sell Non banking products and some other have some other qualities. Every officer cannot be expected to perform similarly in different circumstances. Growth of bank’s business does not depend solely on quality of officers or qualification of officers but also on various other factors which are beyond the control of officer. Policies framed by difference banks is different, quality of higher management in different banks at different level is different, quality and quantity of subordinate staff is different at different branches of different banks and so on……

Suppose an officer is corrupt , he indulges in bad lending and misuses his delegated powers to earn bribe from borrowers he may not only cause bank to incur loss in crores of rupees due to asset financed by him turning bad but he may also accumulate illegal money in huge quantity which he may use to increase business . Corrupt officers can easily motivate government offices to park their surplus fund in his branch. In such position though business growth is attractive there are greater chances of loan going bad and bank incurring loss. Trend of NPA exhibited by various banks in recent past is enough to indicate how corrupt bankers have spoilt the future of bank.

Politicians can talk of interview or that of group discussion or written test. They are habituated to select officers of their choice based on flattery and bribery only .They decide higher posting and higher assignment of an officer based on their relation with the officers, based on how are they treated on their visit to their offices and people of various caste and communities like an officer to be promoted. Politicians give even election ticket to a candidate based on his money power and muscle power. Those who have developed an art of speaking, art of speaking lie and making false promises and delivering false lectures can only win the heart of high command.

The theory of politician if applied in banks and in other public sector organizations, the situation will go beyond control and result which will precipitate will lead the bank from bad to worst. The conception and perception style of politicians in entirely different from that of bankers. Work culture in banks cannot be compared with that of politicians and other government officers who are least concerned with customer service. Politicians have already caused irreparable damage to banks through their vote bank politics during last few decades and it is they who have caused bad assets in Banks to grow to such a large extent. They may be rulers of the country but they have no moral right to preach sermons to bankers.

As such politicians cannot and should not be allowed to dictate policy of promotion. Rather if there are true leaders in various employee unions and in any officers association, they must protest the newly dictated promotion policy as also existing policy and devise a better and transparent promotion policy removing all scope of discretion from all levels. It is disheartening to observe that union leaders have also become puppet in the hands of corrupt executives of government banks.
I once again reiterate that the tools of Interview, written test or group discussion or that of campus recruitment in higher scales as per whims and fancies of top bankers are killing the very work spirit of bank employees and all right thinking bankers must protest and strive for other ways to bring about desired reformation instead of becoming a puppet in the hands of clever politicians. To safeguard banks and to weed away bad performers and corrupt person from the system, I would like to suggest that the work of inspecting officials should be made more effective and that of Industrial Relation Department, Audit department, Human Resource Department, CBI, CVC who take punitive action against erring employees should be made more active and efficient. No delay in punishment should be tool to remove bad performers and isolate them from the system and at the same time No delay in awarding a good officer should be used a tool to spread positive culture in government banks.

Bank Scam Rs32000 Crore? or More

Collected from www.allbankingsolutions.com

http://www.allbankingsolutions.com/Wage-Revision/Legal-Cases/RBI-needs-to-supply-details-of-MTM-losses.shtml#LAND


Who is responsible for Rs 32,000 crore Loss in Currency Derivatives to corporate by Indian banking sector ? Are Penalty of Rs 5 to 15 lacs (That Too To Be Paid from Shareholders Funds) is Sufficient for Such Big Lapses by Board of Directors, CMDs and EDs of Private / Public Sector Banks - RBI Needs to Introspect.



by

Rajesh Goyal, Executive Consultant





During the last few months the issue 32,000 crores scam in the banking sector has been kept under wraps and RBI and banks have been consistently been trying their best to keep this issue under carpet. Inspite of CBI enquiry into the whole affair and court strictures, the issue has NOT been sufficiently highlighted by major financial newspapers owing to the reasons best known to them.



It has been reported that CBI in its affidavit in the Orissa High Court had mentioned: “The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has been monitoring the gross end-to-end mark to market losses incurred by the banks. As on December 2008, the gross mark to market gains (corresponding losses to consumers) of 22 banks working in the business of derivative work is Rs 31,719 crore.”



Some believe that this is only a very very conservative estimate and tip of the real scam, as it is believed that the total derivatives contract sold in India as per RBI approvals is 3 trillion USD on December 2008 (as per the statement of P Chidambaram in Rajya Sabha), where as total GDP of India was not more than 1 trillion USD and total export and imports including oil bills were not more than 500 billion USD. The difference in the value of the dollar however has been between Rs 8.50 to Rs 10 / dollar. If this difference is multiplied by the figure of 3 trillion, we are looking at a figure of Rs 25 lakh crore that has not been accounted for. If this turns out to be true, then the scam will be even bigger than 2G scam.





However, RBI and Banks were forced to share at least some information when the affected corporate / importers / exporters filed cases in various Courts of the country and refused to pay the losses and asked their respective banks to pay the same as they have mis-sold such products to them for their personal petty gains and profits for the bank. Corporate have been given various concessions / waivers so that they do not default on the loans they have availed from the banking sector.



RBI, the only regulator of our Banking system, had miserably failed to take timely steps so as stop the Banks openly flouting these rules. In a reply to RTI query, RBI appears to have taken a stand that it does not vet all the forex derivatives products sold by banks in the country. However, under pressure from all sides, RBI in April 2011 fined 19 commercial banks, including the country’s largest, State Bank of India, for mis-selling derivatives products to clients RBI has imposed a small fine of Rs 5-15 lakh on these banks for not complying with its instructions on derivative products. Who had to pay this fine? Poor shareholders of these banks had to pay these fines as orders were not to recover the same from salaries of CMDs / EDs etc. Is a penalty of few lacs on a Bank is sufficient when losses to the economy are in thousands of crores of rupees? Has any other action like suspension or dismissal of any Head of the Bank or other officials has taken place? Why RBI had not forced some Heads to roll down for such a big scam. In 2G scam, even ministers have been jailed when the matter was taken up seriously by honourable SC



RBI and concerned Banks had been consistently seeking shelter of secrecy and were not ready to disclose any further details. RBI had been taking the plea that DISCLOSURE OF THIS INFORMATION WOULD AFFECT THE ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF THE STATE AS SUCH DISCLOSURE TO THE PUBLIC COULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE SUBJECT BANK AND TO THE BANKING SYSTEM IN GENERAL.





However, now CIC in one of the judgments has asked RBI to provide detailed BANK WISE AND CUSTOMER WISE losses in the currency derivatives to Mr. Raja M Shanmugham who had been fighting to get this information from RBI for now over one year. (The full judgment is available on this website itself). Let us see whether these orders are complied with or RBI and banks seek shelter under some other rules.



Now question arises who are the people in banking sector who allowed this kind of scam to continue for months together. Who colluded with whom ? From my experience, I can say that even CMDs and EDs, GMs, dealers of such banks had little or no knowledge about the risks such derivative deals carried and were swayed by personal gains they were likely to get in different shapes. Can junior FEX traders do such large transactions without the knowledge of GMs / EDs / CMDs / Board ? Were the top management of these banks were so INCOMPETENT AND UNEDUCATED that they could not make efforts to understand the basics of derivatives? With best of brains in India, why we have such incompetent people heading our top Banks ? Instead of being a guide to the juniors, they bashed people who tried to stop such inappropriate transactions. A review of the people who actually perpetuated these losses will show that by this time they have been promoted and enjoying all the benefits, and none of them has been punished till date. Some of them must have retired after enjoying their full terms of service,



RBI and Banks now needs to introspect and strengthen their systems and punish the guilty. How it is possible that 22 banks together flouted rules and RBI could not detect this scam even in one of these banks ? The continued pressure from various sides may soon bring to light new dimensions of this scam and the names of the Banks and people responsible may have to disclosed soon.

http://www.allbankingsolutions.com/Press-Release-Views/32000-cr-MTM-loss.shtml



RBI Should Supply Information Relating to MTM

by

Ganpat Subramanian ganpat@rtiindia.org



I am attaching another landmark decision by the CIC.


Gist of the case:


Mr Raja M Shanmugham of Tiruppur sought through his RTI application on RBI, the bank-wise breakup of the MTM losses and latest figures available with RBI of the amount of losses suffered by Indian business houses with latest figures bank-wise and customer wise.


A few important observations in the IC's decision:


It is apparent from the scheme of the RTI Act that the Commission is a quasi- judicial body which is responsible for deciding appeals and complaints arising under the RTI Act. The Commission cannot abdicate its responsibilities under the RTI Act to RBI on the ground that the latter is an expert body. The Commission cannot rely solely on the decision of the public authority and must look into the merits of the case itself.




The RBI is a regulatory authority which is responsible for inter alia monitoring banks and financial institutions along with flow of public funds and forex in accordance with applicable law. In the present matter where MTM losses on currency derivatives are to the extent of more than Rs.32,000 crores, it is certainly a matter of national importance. There appears to be a large financial scam affecting the economy as a whole and citizens have a right to know about the same.




In the present matter, it is clear that while banks may have given information to RBI in confidence or in trust, there does not appear to be any duty cast upon RBI to act in their benefit. RBI being a regulator of the banking sector obtains/maintains such information in regulatory/ supervisory capacity. Therefore, there is no element of choice as such available to banks. There does not appear to be a creation of any fiduciary relationship between RBI and the banks, as laid down above. Therefore, the PIO’s contention that information in queries 1 and 2 is exempt under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act is rejected.





Moreover, for the reasons mentioned above- a larger public interest would be served by disclosing this information under Section 8(2) of the RTI Act.

New Promotion Policy for Bank Officers

Finance Ministry has lately realised that slowly PS Banks are becoming fiefdom of CMDs and EDs as they had absolute authority in promotions and processes have already been tinkered to suit their requirements in each individual bank. Therefore, government thought it fit to interveneand issued draft guidelines sometime in October / November 2011 for views. Now on 5th December, 2011, they had issued the revised guidelines to all the PS Banks. Although, we are of the view that even this policy has many pitfalls, yet it is likely to put at least some brake on the absolute powers of CMDs and EDs who were till now promoting people at their will. The new policy if implemented sincerely is likely to reduce flattery to some extent. We give below the details of the new policy below:-



The channel of promotion and minimum experience requirement at various levels shall be as follows :-



Scale
Promotion Channel
Minimum

Experience

requirement

(in years)
Maximum

permissible.

relaxation by Board•

(in years)
Minimum

length of

services

(in years)



I to II


Normal/Seniority Channel
5
1
NA

Merit/Fast Track Channel
3
1
NA



II to III


Normal/Seniority Channel
5
1
NA

Merit/Fast Track Channel
3
1
NA

III to IV
Merit/Fast Track Channel
3
1
NA

IV to V
Merit Channel
3
1
12

V to VI
Merit Channel
3
1
15

VI to VII
Merit Channel
3
1
18








Cut off Date for Eligibility:

The cutoff date for determining eligibility as well as completed years of service will be as on the 1st of April of the financial year (April-March) in which the vacancies arise.





Relaxation in the Minimum Required Experience:

No officer would be given the benefit of relaxation in the minimum required experience by the Board at two successive levels of promotion in Scale - III and above.





Promotion from Scale — I to II and II to III :



There shall be a requirement of minimum 75% marks in APAR for each of the years of service eligible for promotion in case of promotion on merit / fast track channel

There shall be a mandatory requirement of two years continuous service in rural areas for promotion from Scale - I to II, and a total of three years in rural / semi-urban areas, including the rural service in Scale - I, for promotion from Scale - II to III. For the seniority channel, officers who have put in more than the aforesaid service in rural areas will get an advantage of further relaxation of 50% weightage in minimum experience for each additional completed year of service while assessing their eligibility.







Promotion to Scale — IV and above

For promotion from Scale — Ill to IV and IV to V, it will be mandatory to pass an examination to test for computer literacy and computer knowledge.

For being eligible for promotion to Scale - V, the candidates should have been a Branch Head for at least three years. Officers recruited for specialized cadre would be required to have field experience in a branch or as branch head. In case of officers in specialized cadres, this requirement can be complied with over the next three years, beginning with 2013-14 when experience of one yea, and two years for the year 2014-15 would be necessary.

For being promoted to Scale-VI, the officer should have Regional / Circle Head or must have worked, in Scale - Ill to V, in the Regional / Circle Office for two years.





Process of Promotion :

It shall be mandatory to have a Group Discussion to assess the communication, conceptual and leadership capabilities for promotion to Scale - IV and V. For this purpose, a Board consisting of outside experts and officers of the Bank should be constituted with the approval of the Board.



Job Rotation :

Bank shall make appropriate job rotation policy giving exposure to all verticals for officers in Scale - V and VI and get it approved from the respective Board.





Written Examination :

Banks would be free to also have system of written examination for promotion at various levels as per their Board approved policies





Interview Committee and Broad Guidelines for the Committee for Selection :



The interview committee for promotion to Scales - V, VI and VII should have two outside expert with domain knowledge approved by the Board of the Bank for. each year.

During interview for Scales - V, VI and VII, weightage should be given to the following :-



a) Whether the officer has worked in different specialized areas of the banks.

b) Whether officer has been posted to different parts of India or has been only one / few Region / Circle.

c) Whether the officer has experience of working in the field as well as working in Regional / Zonal and Head Office.

d) Whether the officer has professional qualifications and has the officer acquired additional qualifications after joining the service.







Some Major Guidelines for Specialised Officers :



For specialist cadres, namely, forex, credit, technology, HR, wealth management etc., it shall be mandatory that prior to joining the main stream cadre, the officers joining these cadres should necessarily remain in that cadre for at least five completed years of service. Thereafter, the officer should gain experience of at least two years in field operations. There will be exemption from. posting to rural areas for these officers.



Officers recruited in the specialist cadre would be eligible for promotion in their respective cadre as per the eligibility and experience mentioned at pare 3 (i) above and shall be allowed to join the main stream in the event of completion of service as mentioned in pare 7(i) above. It must, however, be ensured that suitable replacements are placed in the vacancies likely to occur specialized cadres



Banks should ensure that before moving the officer to a field position or to main stream cadre, they develop the capacities of other officers of the bank in order to ensure proper functioning of that specialized vertical. No officer shall be moved to the main stream cadre / field positions without ensuring this cadres.





Other Requirements :

The zone of consideration for promotion should be strictly maintained at 1:3 ratio. However, in case, the required number of suitable persons is not available, the banks may enhance this to 1:4 with prior approval of the Board



The guidelines shall come into force with immediate effect and shall be operationalised after adoption by the respective Boards.





The above guidelines are likely to be implemented by each Bank after approval of the respective Boards. Therefore, all serving bankers should watch their interest in finalisation of promotion policies which can again be fine tuned to suit the ends of the top management by interpreting the new guidelines in their own way. All Bankers needs to be vigilant through their respective unions and ensure that while finalilsing the names of the TWO outside domain experts, only honest people are put on the Interview Committee.