- No retention on promotion in the same station except for officers aged 58 & above:-. Since this does not specify the cadre, it is implied that this is for all cadres. This is bound to discourage officers from accepting the promotion. E.g. whether an officer of the age 55 will be posted out of station on his promotion as AO? We have time & again made our views clear on this matter. Till now, though there was some displacement on promotion, officers by & large accepted it since the displacement was not out of their bounds (except if it was out of Zone). We fail to see what would be achieved by such massive displacement. A disturbed mind cannot be effective in work.
- Request transfers to be considered after 3 years at a station for male officers:- We strongly differ with this. Request transfers in the case of male officers should be considered after 2 years. In the case of request transfers of female officers, the Zone-wise practices should be followed which have been in vogue till now but not exceeding two years.
- Officers working in ZO/DO for more than 5 years to be transferred from their positions/departments:- We have made our views clear on this subject too. Transfer just for the sake of transfer will not help. No purpose will be served by this. We strongly oppose this move.
Monday, April 20, 2015
NOINO submits protest letter on transfer / posting norms
NOINO submitted a protest letter to the ED(Personnel) today, i.e. 20.04.2015 on the recently issued transfer/posting norms. The letter is reproduced below:
The Executive Director(Personnel),
L.I.C. of India.
Re: Norms for Transfers & Postings-2015-16
We have information that certain norms have been specified vide Instructions dated 8.4.2015 sent to all Zonal Managers. After reading those, we have concluded that the management is bent on implementing the draft transfer policy that had been proposed & circulated to the unions/associations on 24.1.2015. In the subsequent individual discussions with the unions/associations on 11.2.2015, we had raised several objections regarding many clauses of the draft transfer policy & opposed the haphazard implementation of the same. We were given an assurance that the matter will be once again discussed with us & our suggestions would be taken into account while finalizing the policy.
However, it seems that the management has gone back on its word & has decided to implement the policy which will neither benefit the Officers nor the Corporation. We consider this decision as arbitrary & high-handed. We strongly protest this attitude & demand that these norms should be withdrawn immediately.
Let us examine some of the ‘norms’ that have been specified:-
These are only some of our objections. The point is that without discussing with the unions/associations this policy is sought to be implemented. We strongly protest this & once again demand to withdraw such instructions immediately.
Dattaraj PrabhukhanolkarGS, NOINO