Promotion policy in PSBs
(To be sent by e-mail)
F.No.4/11/1/2011-IR
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Financial Services
Jeevan Deep, IIIrd Floor,
Parliament Street, New Delhi
Dated the June 26, 2012
To
CEOs of all Public Sector Banks
Subject: Promotion policy in PSBs
Sir,
I am directed to refer to this Department’s letter of even number dated 14.3.2012 on the above cited subject matter and to request that compliance report on completion of promotion process by 30th June, 2012( as conveyed vide letter No.5/5/2012-IR dt 3.5.2012) be sent to this Department on 2.7.2012 by email at ir@nic.in.
2. It is reiterated that no deviation from the Guidelines with the approval of the Bank’s Board would be possible. Any deviation from Government Policy would require prior approval of the Government before implementation.
Yours faithfully,
(Manish Kumar)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Copy to
The CEO, IDBI Bank Ltd w.r.t. to letter No. HRD. No.1306/ GoI/ Correspondence dated 11th May, 2012 with the request that the Guidelines issued by Government on the subject be followed.
i) Copy to Govt. Nominee Directors.
ii) NIC Cell for placing on website of DFS
If you like to red my views you may click on following links and let others know your views on ground reality of promotion processes which took place and which are like to take place in government run banks.Please do not make your silent spectator of Chirharan or Draupdi and do all what is possible to stop injustice with you or your colleagues.Bank management in nexus with union leaders divide the officer community by giving stray benefits to some powerful persons and deprive others their fundamental rights .Do not be victim of their malicious acts under the mask of good policies. You will find a lot of article on this blog related to reign of injustice, culture of flattery and bribery and rising amount of frustration among bankers.
Strike Threat BY Bank Unions
RBI now Questions HR Policies of Public Sector Banks
Guidelines Issued TO Public Sector Banks BY RBI on HR Policies
http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/05/strike-threat-by-bank-unions.html
Officer as Usual File Writ in Chennai Court Against Injustice
Supreme Court Verdict on Annual Performance Appraisal Reports
May I ask
few questions related to promotion processes in public sector banks
1.Why bank management
did not follow the dictates given by Ministry of Finance on Annual
Performance Assessment Report in light of Supreme court verdict ?
2. What steps MOF or RBI
use to take to ensure perfect execution of policies or government guidelines
related to recruitment, transfers and promotions and what punitive
actions are taken against top officials who willfully or fraudulently violates the
policy /guidelines to favour persons of their choice?
3. Do the MOF and RBI
take it for granted that human being sitted on top posts are always honest and
unbiased?
4. It is observed that
bank management of some bank has started Computer skill test for promotion of
an officer from scale III to IV and scale IV to V. May I
ask the concerned authorities why computer skill test is essential
only for promotion of officers from III to IV and then IV to V and why the same
is not needed for promotion of officers from scale I to II
and scale II to III and then from scale V to VI and VI to VII ?
5. As per MOF guidelines
an officers desirous for promotion from one scale to another has to obtain 75%
marks in all three preceding years. Some banks has relaxed APAR marks
from 75 to 60 in case of promotion from scale I to II and then II to III but
not relaxed in higher promotions from scale III to IV and onward?
As a matter of fact marking in APAR itself
does not speak of real worth of the officer because the assessing officer is
more often than not , does not have skill to mark and further different set of
officers award marks as per his mindset and not as per the real quality of the
officer. If assessing officers and reviewing officers are
casual which is a bitter truth ,in awarding marks on APAR , the future of an
officer does not depend on how he or she perform but how he or she get marks in
APAR.
However it is important to know why
relaxation in marks is allowed for junior scale and not for senior scale?
Officers who are in junior management are
required to perform for the satisfaction of
the customers safeguarding banks profitability and overall future of
the bank. If junior officers are casual, incompetent, inefficient and corrupt,
they may indulge in bribe based lending, they may commit fraud, they may not be
cordial while dealing with customers and their lack of knowledge
and experience on banking may cause huge loss to bank because
the real quality and quantity of business of any branch of any bank of bank
mostly depends on quality of field functionaries and not at all on executive
who dictates rules and policies as per their whims and fancies.
Why
the same relaxation in marks has not been given to executives appearing for
promotion from III to IV and onwards?
Why
discrimination is allowed?
Is
such discrimination in any office legally valid and sustainable?
If not,
why MOF and RBI are silent?
6. Future of any Bank,
quality of assets and quality of customer service of any bank depends on
quality of workforce and experience of employees and not that much on
educational qualification of the officers.
Unfortunately management of some banks have
started giving promotion to officer who has not acquired even minimum
experience of banking. In the past ,a bank employee had to work for at least
three years as clerk to become eligible for promotion to officer
cadre and then minimum 7 years of service to become eligible for
promotion from scale I to II.
In fact officers used to get first
opportunity to appear in promotion from scale I to II in a span of 10 to 15
years and then for promotion from scale II to III in a span of 5 to 10 years.
Nowadays banks have started promoting young officers in 2 to 3 years on some
plea or the other from scale I to II and similarly from II to III and
onwards whereas officers with experience of two to three decades are rejected
in promotion processes.
I am unable to understand what quality of an officer is assessed in 2 to 3 minutes of interview when the same set of top executives failed to assess quality and potential of the same officers through 20 to 30 APARs or through hundreds of meetings with the same officers and hundreds of branch visits.
I am unable to understand what quality of an officer is assessed in 2 to 3 minutes of interview when the same set of top executives failed to assess quality and potential of the same officers through 20 to 30 APARs or through hundreds of meetings with the same officers and hundreds of branch visits.
As a result
an officer who does not have adequate exposure in banking become Scale IV
, V or scale VI in a span of 10 to 15 years. The only quality he should possess
is to keep the boss happy and have the ability to deliver good speech like
politicians of the country.
I am unable to understand why banks have fixed zone of consideration for promotion process as four times of identified vacancies and why none it is one.
Anyway , even if it is assumed that zone of consideration is rightly fixed, I am unable to understand why bank management whimsically reduce the same from four time to three times or three to two times to accommodate a few officers of their choice?
Bank use to talk of merit and experience , but they do not hesitate to reduce minimum job length from 5 years to two years for promotion of officers from scale III to IV and reduce from 7 to 2 for promotion from scale I to II or II to III.
After all why seniors do not like to take part in promotion processes and why bank is constrained to consider even officers of negligible experience for promotion to higher scale which ultimately result in rise in bad assets and fraud?
If experienced officers are not available , will bank promote make a junior officer as General Manager .
Why do the bank need young officers ?
Are officers in bank promoted to fight on borders ?
Why experience of bank officer is not rewarded judiciously?
I am unable to understand why banks have fixed zone of consideration for promotion process as four times of identified vacancies and why none it is one.
Anyway , even if it is assumed that zone of consideration is rightly fixed, I am unable to understand why bank management whimsically reduce the same from four time to three times or three to two times to accommodate a few officers of their choice?
Bank use to talk of merit and experience , but they do not hesitate to reduce minimum job length from 5 years to two years for promotion of officers from scale III to IV and reduce from 7 to 2 for promotion from scale I to II or II to III.
After all why seniors do not like to take part in promotion processes and why bank is constrained to consider even officers of negligible experience for promotion to higher scale which ultimately result in rise in bad assets and fraud?
If experienced officers are not available , will bank promote make a junior officer as General Manager .
Why do the bank need young officers ?
Are officers in bank promoted to fight on borders ?
Why experience of bank officer is not rewarded judiciously?
And this is why quality of asset in bank
has been continuously moving from bad to worse .Seniors are sidelined
and juniors are elevated to top post. This has created frustration in seniors
and experienced officers who are constrained to work under juniors and less
intelligent officers.
It is
unfortunate or fortunate that top officers who are part of bank management are
clever in convincing MOF and RBI for all violation of policies and it is they
who amend promotion policy almost every year to accommodate officers of their choice.
Vacancies are identified for promotion of officer from scale VI to VII in the
month of April and May and accordingly a few officers are promoted from scale
VI to VII in May. Again to promote officers of their choice, they carry out
promotion process again in June on the plea that number of vacancies are likely
to rise. They need 10 officers for higher scale but make a panel of 40 officers
--why?
Is there anyone to verify the logic of top officers why do
they need to conduct promotion process twice or thrice in a year and why panel
is so long?
Why some banks are calling all officers for promotion test
and why some others give option to officers to apply for promotion?
Are banks ready to promote bad officers only because good officers
do not like promotion and do not apply for promotion or when good officers
knowingly do not apply for promotion because they do not have Godfather to push
their case of promotion?
Is MOF and RBI ready to jeopardize the future of banks,
future of investors and future of good performers by giving higher
responsibility to junior who do not have developed adequate skill in banking?
Will anyone tell the common men why cases of fraud and
volume of Non Performing Assets have been rising year after year when it is
said by top management of every bank that they have been promoting good
officers through merit and fast channel for last twenty years?
Is it not true that health of banks in public sector was at
least better in seventies and sixties when promotion of bank employees sued to
take place based strictly on seniority? It was only in scale I that banks were
empowered to recruit officer from market to the extent of 25% of total
vacancies in officer cadre. During that period there was no question of
recruitment of officers in higher scales directly from campus. In the past Banks
used to give value to experience but now these banks give value to flattery and
bribery.
Why not then quality will deteriorate is a million dollar
question?
Policy and guideline related to rural posting is as old as
20 years .Still there are hundreds of officers in scale II to scale VII who
have not seen rural posting during their entire service tenure. On the contrary
there are thousands of officers who are always thrown in rural areas or North east.
Such type of violation and discrimination with government guidelines has
resulted in sickness of bank and there is no doubt that HR policies in banks
require paradigm shift.
I hope MOF is slowly moving in this direction.
2 comments:
Mr.Danedra jain, I see logic in your point of view. I also concur with your views on Banks management going for campus recruitment. There is another angle to this campus recruitment. As far as my information goes, there are certain restictions on Banks about campus recruitment. But still some peer Banks like Union Bank during the tenure of Mr.MV Nair went ahead for campus recruitment violating the guidelines issued by RBI. What I understand is that lot of money changed hands and these so called campuses from where recruitment took place paid huge amounts to some top officials so that they can claim peer banks like Union Bank recruited (campus) from their colleges. This needs further investigation by CBI to know the truth.
Regarding Finance Ministry guidelines, I would like to say that their concern about violations in promotion process in PSBs appears to be genuine and whenever any one is taking up with the Ministry, it appears they are calling the concerned bank management to take necessary remedial steps. Yes it is no doubt a Herculean task for the individuals to convince and take up with the ministry and for once I understand that the Finance Minister is personally looking into any complaints whenever such scams are taken to his notice, despite his work load, indicating that he is against any violations of their guidelines.
Regarding identification of second dose of GMs is because an individual took up the violations involved in identification of posts and subsequently the issue of identification of DGMs, AGMs were also taken up with Finance Secretary with a copy to Finance Minister, who promptly called the CMD of the Bank for explanation. Since, GMs interviews were already completed by then, they again identified 8 additional posts of GMs to fall in line with the FM guidelines on promotions.
I hope Finance Ministry also will look into all the recruitments that have taken place during the tenure of Mr.MV Nair and take appropriate remedial steps and punish the guilty.
Ashok, a fresh computer graduate from a world-class University, goes for an interview in a software company.
The interviewer is Sunder, a grubby old man. And the first question he asks Ashok is, `Are you good at logic?'
`Of course,' replies Ashok.
`Let me test you,' replies Sunder. `Two men come down a chimney. One comes with a clean face and the other comes out with a dirty face.
Which one would wash his face?'
Ashok stares at Sunder. `Is that a test in Logic?' Sunder nods.
`The one with the dirty face washes his face', Ashok answers wearily.
`Wrong. The one with the clean face washes his face. Examine the simple logic. The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the
clean face and thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. So,
the one with the clean face washes his face.'
`Hmm. I never thought of that," says Ashok. `Give me another test.'
Sunder holds up two fingers, `Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face and the other comes out with a dirty face.
Which one washes his face?'
`We have already established that. The one with the clean face washes his face.'
`Wrong. Each one washes one's face. Examine the simple logic. The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the clean face and
thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. So, the one with the
clean face washes his face. When the one with the dirty face sees the one with the clean face washing his face, he also washes his face. So
each one washes one's face.'
`I didn't think of that!' says Ashok. `It's shocking to me that I could make an error in logic. Test me again!'
Sunder holds up two fingers, `Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face and the other comes out with a dirty face.
Which one washes his face?'
`Each one washes his face.'
`Wrong. Neither one washes his face. Examine the simple logic. The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the clean face and
thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. But when the one
with clean face sees that the one with the dirty face doesn't wash his face, he also doesn't wash his face. So neither one washes his face.'
_Ashok is desperate. `I am qualified for this job. Please give me one more test!'
He groans when Sunder lifts his two fingers, `Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face and the other comes out with
a dirty face. Which one washes his face?'
`Neither one washes his face', Ashok replies, `I have learnt this logic.'
`Wrong, again. Do you now see, Ashok, why programming knowledge is insufficient for this job? Tell me, how is it possible for two men to
come down the same chimney, and for one to come out with a clean face and the other with a dirty face? Don't you see the flaw in the
premise?'"
Post a Comment