Do Voluntary Retirement Schemes serve their purpose?

Do Voluntary Retirement Schemes serve their purpose?

The recent controversy over the GO No.5 of 18-7-06 providing budget for retrenchment of 60000 employees in 30 state level public enterprises ( SLPEs) in the state of Andhra Pradesh and its suspension has given the government some time to look back and take some cool-minded decisions about the rationale and justifiability of the external-agency induced restructuring reforms. The writer of this article being an Ex-General Manager of SERIFED, an SLPE, having been retrenched under so called VRS and being a victim of the such reforms wishes to air his views on the justifiability of such reforms and what kind of output results out of such exercises.

It is unfortunate that state government has been depriving the livelihood of many hapless employees to finance the populist and vote-securing projects. It is akin to ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’. It is apparent that the World Bank is financing public welfare projects. But, while doing so, it is stipulating that the expenditure on salaries of the employees of both government department employees and public enterprises should come down every year continuously. It has given the advice through its conditions that government should prioritize its spending on education, health, power supply etc. What with lack of native wisdom or lure of bulk finance, the governments irrespective of their party affiliations have been complying with external advice and guidelines. It is unfortunate that handloom industry, agriculture, handicrafts etc, as a sequel to compliance to such guidelines, got very paltry budget allotments and as its retribution the ire of the affected artisans and farmers was reflected in the rout of Telugu Desam government. The governments are oblivious to the fact that they are surrendering their sovereignty just for the sake of securing hassle-free public finance. The result is that our state-specific priorities are dictated from outside. It is unfortunate that the governments are ignorant of the fact that externally-induced reforms miss out on the state-specific needs like those of handloom weavers, craft artisans, resource-poor farmers etc. An important realization that has to dawn on them is that World Bank or Americans or Europeans have very scant experience in dealing with such state-specific needs and hence their advice has to be taken with caution. But, Telugu Desam government has taken the advice of World Bank and complied with it in letter and spirit. In such subservient mood, it made a seamless arrangement to implement VRS programmes. As part of that, it was ensured that any petition, even the most insignificant one, challenging the VRS proceedings of any SLPE by even a few employees before courts had received the special attention of the Advocate General and every VRS proceedings went like a bullet from a gun without any hitch. Any representations to the government from victimized employees were pushed under carpet. What is surprising is that Telugu Desam government, which was so convinced about the world-bank induced reforms then, has taken a U-turn now after it rout from the rule and now took up the cause of employees who are on the chopping stick. Now, the party is thinking of ‘human face’, which was never in their vocabulary. The point that is proved here is that wielding of power is of paramount importance than anything else.

Under the restructructing program, 23, 449 employees of 32 SLPEs were sent out of jobs and an amount of Rs.351.39 crores was disbursed towards VRS benefits till date. Under the program, 24 units were ordered for closure, 32 SLPEs downsized and 9 units disinvested. The World Bank is all praise for the effective implementation of the restructuring programs. There is also a claim that 35% of the retrenched employees were redeployed, but the proof of the same is not within reach of the writer.

As per VRS guidelines, the decisions about which posts and how many have to be cut are left to the discretion of the managements of the SLPEs. No foolproof methodology was evolved at the government level. The guidelines, if any, are too broad to obviate arbitrariness. The government just endorses whatever proposals come from the SLPEs with regard to the kinds of posts and the number of employees in each category to be declared as surplus and retrenched. The net output of VRS implementation is that disproportionately big chunk of old employees remained in service, whereas young and energetic employees have left SLPEs either out of will or force, leaving the SLPE weaker than before. Though the guidelines are cautioning about proper age-mix in the remaining workforce, it was observed more in breach than in practice. A case in point is SERIFED, an SLPE, where all young officers were retrenched and because of that, there would not be even single officer and manager available in another four years. Sudden human resource bankruptcy was foisted on the SLPE.

The state level committee which monitors the restructuring and whose members are not willing to consider any other constructive and employment-generating measures, always on harp on closure. SERIFED has been making profits continuously for over 4 years till the time of restructuring. Hence the need for its downsizing was not as much as it was before. Nevertheless, buckling under the fear of winding up which would kill the lives of many, the management proposed downsizing by one-third, though that also was not warranted. The point here is that the decision about the downsizing and the number to be downsized is just an act of ducking, but not of objectivity. In fact, in most of the SLPEs there is enough scope for work in services. The paradox is that a large chunk of the employees in the Cooperative department are on deputation to the other organizations, since they don’t have work in their own department. Government did not dare to retrench any government employee, though they don’t have work. This is due to strong unionization in them and the perceived immediate and direct backlash from the unions. But, the unions were weak in SLPEs. Hence, the government presumably chose an easy target of SLPE employees to satisfy the World Bank’s desire. In fact, the salaries given to SLPE employees are not an expenditure on the government exchequer and hence reduction does not immediately benefit the treasury. If the organizations are allowed to work on their own even without any budgetary support, they would run well. The malady is that the government appoints chairman and members on the board of SLPEs without any consideration to their qualifications and the suitability of their background to the objectives of the particular SLPE. They mostly contribute to the expenditure, but not to revenues or effective management. That apart, governments use SLPEs for public purposes like free bus passes for underprivileged groups which cut into their profits on one hand, but at the end of the year, on the contrary they measure its performance in terms of profits. The truth is that governments represented by politicians, bureaucrats and deputationists had a big share in the messing up of SLPEs. Since they destroyed, they want to close it, though the scapegoats on the altar are the employees of SLPEs.

It is quite visible that the employees of SLPEs are more focused and devoted towards their jobs than their counterparts in the government. Compare the attitude of an employee of APSRTC with that of his counterpart in any government department. Vast difference is easily noticed and an RTC employee is many times better. I opine that APRTC is more useful than any other government department. But that SLPE is an easy target of all governments. There are many areas that need strategic and managerial intervention. The World Bank does not seem to have applied its wisdom in this area. Every government functionary sings one refrain that governments are not good for business. Presumably, World Bank has implanted this self-talk in the minds of the government officers. Thank god, they did not ingrain another refrain like ‘government is not good for any thing’, though it is believed to be true by many people. Governments and World Bank are not prepared to improve or streamline. The only recourse they know in the name of streamlining is downsizing. Is it not an insolvency of ideas and will to work and improve?

Restructuring not only destroys the livelihood of employees but also fails to improve the performance of the SLPEs. The mindset of the governments have to change towards taking positive decisions like productivity improvement of SLPEs in stead of just closing and washing of hands.

Dr.Appalayya Meesala

Reforms in Andhra Pradesh.: Are They for True Reform?

Reforms in Andhra Pradesh: Are They for True Reform?

Is there efficient administration in Andhra Pradesh? What is the truth behind the publicity that AP is a trailblazer of reforms particularly of public sector undertakings? There is no denying that a lot of ruthless downsizing took place in the name of reforms. But, are the reforms truly guided by clean objectives? Is Chandrababu Naidu really reform-oriented? My friends in north India used to heap praise on Chandrababu Naidu as an austere and reform-oriented chief minister. My stint with SERIFED as General Manager of SERIFED for seven years and as Marketing Development Officer for 9 years debunk this positive opinion about Chandrababu naidu.

The major damage done by chief ministers of Andhra Pradesh- of whom Chandrababu naidu’s name figures prominently- is in the appointment of chairman and members of the board. The experience, background and their qualifications of the persons appointed to SERIFED as Chairmen and members of the management board are no way relevant to ensuring effective management of SERIFED. The only criteria apparently followed while selecting the candidates were to see if the candidates were recommended by their party office-bearers and if they were active in party work. The paramount interest in appointing a person as a chairman was to see that at least a few active party workers were appeased.

Unfortunately, Andhra Pradesh government so far has not specified a proper skill set and personal profile for chairman’s post. Unfettered freedom is given to the executive, which only resulted in appointing incompetent candidates.

The chief ministers of Congress party too contributed negatively to the inefficient functioning of public enterprises. In 1992, for example, Congress party saw that a farmer of Dharmanvaram was elected as a president for a primary weavers’ cooperative only to be further elected as Chairman of SERIFED. Note the ease with which a farmer could be made a weaver for the sake of election and the weakness of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act in preventing such atrocities. But, quite strangely, he contended that only candidates of Rayalaseema should be appointed to various clerical posts in SERIFED to give jobs to whom he favored while those hailing from Coastal areas were rejected though they were seniors and hard-working. Another shining pointer to the character of the chairman is that after his term was over, he had not returned SERIFED’s furniture which he took away to keep in his residence while in power.

Importantly, the chairman, appointed by chief ministers of both Telugu Desam and Congress party on political loyalty basis, weakened the organization by locating important production projects in their own areas where there was neither raw material availability nor market for the final product nor skilled labor.

In regards to the qualifications possessed by the appointed chairmen, surprisingly, some chairmen did not pass even a bachelor’s degree course, though a chairman’s coordinating function required incumbents with qualifications in sericulture, agriculture, and management. Do you think it is possible for such appointees to contribute to the efficiency of organizations like SERIFED? Leave alone the contribution to efficiency, the chairmen sucked the vitality of the organizations.

In this scenario, the Managing Directors, being from Indian Administrative Service and naturally better-groomed as managers, typically monopolized the decision-making. One chairman, for example, who was holding office in 2003, though a doctor, was an alcoholic (and received de-addiction treatment in Rahul Luther’s Hope Trust). He used to chair board meetings in an inebriated condition, to which I was a witness. The MD handled all the decisions. Such a person could not use his faculties correctly and left all important decisions to an IAS officer- especially the decision-making exercise related to identification of employees for Voluntary (Compulsory) Retirement Scheme. This pointedly led to the identification of persons on the meanest personal and extraneous considerations. But Chandrababu Naidu’s ruthless determination to downsize the public sector undertakings, overpowered the affected employees. To give an example, in the hearing related to petition before of employees numbering as few as six on the issue of retiree identification, Chandrababu Naidu put on job the Advocate General and a retired Advocate General to argue against those few employees. Can employees’ advocate sustain so much pressure!

The chairmen used the infrastructure for personal ends and party work. Major share of expenditure came from air tours and fuel to their cars, which did not contribute in any way to the efficient functioning of the organizations. That apart, staff paid for office work was posted as assistants at the chairman’s home and also as assistants to their political masters. While this being the case with chairmen, the board members too did not prove any different. Their paramount interest was to attend many meetings and get their traveling allowance bill paid. Hungry of travel bills sanction, the board members passed a resolution in 2002-2003 that board meeting should happen every month, regardless of the quantity of issues requiring the resolution by the board.

This reform-hungry state named Andhra Pradesh followed the principle of ‘first spoil to make it eligible for implementation of reforms later’. The public has to understand that Chandrababu naidu, who contributed enormously to the mismanagement of organizations, chose downsizing in PSEs in stead of effective management while power; but he now opts out downsizing when he is out of power. Judge his real motive- power or reform?

RTC Should Tell Which Bus Would Leave When

Help the passenger choose the next immediate bus: RTC should care for a passenger's waiting time in the bus stand

Passengers are left confused about which particular bus (of the many buses kept in bay) will start first! APSRTC has to awaken to this awkward practice of it.

A few years ago, I was in Simhachalam RTC bus stand and looking for the next immediate bus to go to VIZAG. There were many buses with Vizag name board. But no bus had a placard to say that it would leave at a particular time; nor any member of the crew was available to answer our query as to when that particular bus would start. The person at the inquiry told me that any bus parked in the bay would go, and advised me to get into any bus. When I chose to sit in a bus and was waiting for the bus crew to come, more than four other buses left for VIZAG while the one in which I was sitting did not start; I was puzzled at the way RTC fails to keep the passengers informed of at which particular point of time a particular bus leaves. When I came out of the bus which was not moving and sat in another bus, the bus, from which I came out to board another, left immediately. What an anguish!

It happened today also when I was waiting at Secunderabad for a bus to Mallapur . I sat in Bus No.250P but the crew got down without informing when the bus would resume journey. Before my eyes, two buses which are set to touch my destimation left while I was left sitting and waiting in the bus with my baggage; when baggage is there, it is not possible to change bus quickly. This has resulted in a delay of 45 minutes in my commute to my destination.

APSRTC has to make some standard arrangement to let passengers know when a particular bus (which is parked in the bay/bus stand) will leave. One solution which crosses my mind immediately is to write with a piece of chalk on an important part of the bus- like bus notice board/windshield/door.

RTC should not only facilitate commute of the public but save their time also while commuting in their buses.

STREAMLINING ANDHRA PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ( APSRTC): AN OFFBEAT PERSPECTIVE OF ANALYSIS AND PLANNING

STREAMLINING ANDHRA PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ( APSRTC): AN OFFBEAT PERSPECTIVE OF ANALYSIS AND PLANNING

I waited for 30 minutes at Nacharam village bus stop a few days ago to board a bus towards Mallapur. Not even a single bus out of the huge fleet of RTC buses, was sighted to help me get transported to Mallapur. The wait was both tiring and disgusting. To fuel my anguish, there were a train of buses going in the opposite direction towards Habsiguda. Then suddenly six buses came towards Mallapur. I relieved myself of the waiting pain by taking one bus to my destination. When I got down at Mallapur, quite amazingly four more buses came in the same direction taking count of my candidate buses to 10. I encountered many a similar instance in my life. A group of RTC buses, some starting from different origins and some starting at the same terminal, accidentally all arrive at a given bus stop and crowd it, while there was not a single bus from for half of an hour at the same bus stop. In lighter vein, I used to quip to my friends that RTC buses come in groups to save themselves from the attack of highway robbers in broad daylight on Hyderabad roads.

Higher income group avoids RTC buses because of prolonged waiting time involved in commuting. Commuting by RTC bus requires a common man to waste a lot of his productive time in waiting and providing for uncertainty of bus arrival. If RTC can plan well and schedule the buses seamlessly so that a bus user need not waste a lot of time in waiting and preparation for uncertainty, the buses can be a comfortable recourse to one and all including executives and higher income groups, by which RTC has the potential ot generate a lot of revenue.

Bus scheduling is the key to optimizing the use of resources of APSRTC. Bus scheduling should be more scientific in that at a given bus stop, buses arrive at regular short intervals so that a passenger is sure of getting some bus within a short interval in any direction. It takes a broad and integrated scheduling of all buses that touch a particular point. RTC may develop a software for such scheduling.

I want to give a new insight here. At any given bus stop, APSRTC has to figure out what the average gap is between one bus and the other? Analysis should be made from this perspective for each bus stop. If APRTC can reduce this gap at a given bus stop, people will use more of RTC services because of assurance of arrival of buses. The basis of analysis should be a bus stop but not bus depot.

RTC is doing yeomen service to public plying its buses from and to the most unprofitable locations. Real estate businessmen and politicians took enormous advantage of the RTC. In the absence of RTC, can you imagine the expansion of city to remote points like Hayathnagar, Kondapur, Miyapur, Ibrahimpatan, Vansthalipuram, Ambedkarnagar, Shamshabad etc. Public got enormously benefited by RTC more than any other Government department or institution. Any loss of RTC small or big, is just a social expenditure like any whopping expenditure in any Government department. Are we bothering how much profit is made by education department or health department while spending colossal amounts? Expenditure on RTC operations is no less. While Government munificently gets RTC avoid all strict private-business-like practices in the matter of its commercial operations like issue of bus passes, starting of new routes etc, it is meaningless to insist on profits for RTC. The refrain of many ministers and bureaucrats about RTC losses is unjustified since they are failing to give the required thought to it to make it efficient. RTC losses should not the reason for the proposal for privatization, since they are the product of efficiency of ministers and bureaucrats

LEADERS OR HYPOCRITES? FOR THE POOR OR FOR SHEER PUBLICITY?

LEADERS OR HYPOCRITES? FOR THE POOR OR FOR SHEER PUBLICITY?

Is Sonia Gandhi really kind to the disadvantaged? Will you vote for Congress or Telugu Desam again? Is Dr.Rajasekar Reddy really committed for the poor and distressed? Does Chandrababu Naidu or Ramoji Rao of Eenadu act with social responsibility? Is a highly-placed celebrity like Sonia Gandhi or Dr.A.P.J.Abul Kalam or Governor or Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh or the Chief Editor of Eenadu or Times of India or Deccan Chronicle kind to a fellow citizen and help a person caught in a distress? Do you think these modern legends always look for some information or clue about how they are ruling, what lacunae they have in their rule, and how the citizens by chance are at the receiving end? Do you think President of India or Sonia Gandhi or Chief Minister go out in the night masquerading as an ordinary traveler and discreetly enquire about what kind of hardships their citizens are facing in their rule-like Kings of yore such as Krishnadevaraya or Vikramarka or Bhoja used to do? Will he or she act socially responsibly? But when you happen to listen to a celebrity on a public forum on taking care of the poor or grief-stricken, your heart will melt at the way a celebrity expresses his or her strong sentiments for the poor. Political leaders like Indira Gandhi mastered the art of displaying sympathy for a grief-stricken mob: they cry, wail and whine over dead bodies or survivors more dramatically than the kith and kin of the dead. Do you think they are honest and always look for some clues about where they are wrong and how their rule should improve? But I have strong reasons to suspect the sanctity of their goals in sympathizing the affected.

Similarly when you observe the way mass media espouse calamity-victims or grief-stricken group by filling pages in newspaper or stuffing the channel with images or interviews, you will certainly feel that the medium is doing yeomen’s service to the poor and unlucky. You will also contribute your might to the newspaper which invites you to do so. Is it real or just hypocrisy? I have a personal experience corroborating ‘media hypocrisy theory’.

Can a common man have any other opinion except that such a celebrity or a newspaper organization will definitely come to the rescue of somebody in an emergency or trauma? Are we- the humankind as symbolized by these celebrities- kind to our fellowmen? If somebody is trapped in a crisis – like being raped or robbed or disrobed or beaten- is crying for help, is our humankind human enough or kind enough to take a look at the victim and do something? Let us find out if helping others is an inherent trait of humanity or self-centeredness replaced altruism. I want to give here three cases, of which one is mine.

A 30- year old woman was lying unconscious with no clothes on her body in a first class ladies compartment of CST-Titwala ( Mumbai) local train ( reported in Times India-September 10,2007) throughout the journey of 65 kilometers and nobody cared to, at least, to make out her condition, leave aside admitting her in a hospital or reporting to a police station. A police constable too who was informed of the scene by a passenger disappeared from there as if he should not concern himself with such incidents. In such a situation, can a celebrity behave differently-with compassion and social responsibility? If a political celebrity like President of India or a CM or Governor witnesses such a scene, will he or she -who typically cries before mob about calamity-victims and announces special packages of relief- admit the victim into a hospital or at least report the fact to the police or public authority?

On March 13, 1964, Catherine Susan Genovese, a 29-year old, New York woman was stabbed to death near her home around 3.15 a.m. She was at that point of time returning from bar. Genovese is a single, American Italian working as a bar manager. While being stabbed, she cried for help for more than half an hour. Thirty eight neighbors who are all respectable citizens saw the attack. But none of them attempted to help her. This later became popular as ‘by-stander effect’ or ‘Genovese syndrome’. Out of fear of getting entangled into the case, people avoid helping others in distress because of legal procedures. But do think the mightiest Sonia, Rajasekhar Reddy, and Chandrababunaidu who are powerful, endowed with the best resource of the society, and entrenched enough to ward off entanglement will help a person in distress?

I was in the severest distress and hardship in 2004 and wrote to Sonia, APJ Abdul Kalam, Rajasekar Reddy, Sushil Kumar Shinde, Ramoji Rao of Eenadu, and the Editors of Deccan Chronicle and Times Of India in August 2004. To give you some background, I was forcibly relieved of my job and on the top of it my separation benefits were withheld for wrong reasons. I was a victim of Chandrababunaidu’s reforms so I lost my 20-year-long held job which is labelled as Voluntary Retirement Scheme though. It is nothing but a forcible retirement but with some severance package. I was at that time a patient of multiple diseases-rheumatoid arthritis, indigestion, duodenitis, gastritis, sinusitis and candidiasis and unable to run errands to the concerned offices for release of my separation benefits. Though I was not bed-ridden, I have all the discomforts of a bed-ridden patients. While my defaulted, monthly installments of home loans taken while in service are accumulating in monster-like proportions, my two college-going children required bigger money to pursue their engineering courses. While this was the sordid state of my career and finances, the officers who were supposed to release my separation benefits on the day of being relieved from the job were either basking in the rules or rejoicing in apathy or leaving affairs to my fate even after 7 months of my retirement. At this point, I wrote to the aforesaid big people. But two months later while ending my desperate wait, I realized that they had consigned my letter to their dust bin. Surely, nothing was done on my letter even till now which is three and half years later - when I started writing about this celebrities in these pages.

Never ever think that these great leaders and newspapers who speak a lot about the country, the poor and oppressed and who cry over the dead bodies with overflowing sympathy really mean it.