Violation of HR Policies in PS Banks is not Unusual

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

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/06/supreme-court-on-annual-performance_03.html

RBI now Questions HR Policies of Public Sector Banks

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/06/rbi-now-questions-hr-policies-of-public.html

Guidelines Issued TO Public Sector Banks BY RBI on HR Policies

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/06/guidelines-issued-to-public-sector.html

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/05/strike-threat-by-bank-unions.html

Officer as Usual File Writ in Chennai Court Against Injustice

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/05/officer-as-usual-file-writ-in-chennai.html

Supreme Court Verdict on Annual Performance Appraisal Reports

http://dkjain4970901092007.blogspot.in/2012/06/supreme-court-on-annual-performance_03.html

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.

   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?

    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.