To
Sri. VIVEK KUMAR
Executive Director,
Executive Director,
Mechanical Engineering
(Traction)
Railway Board, New Delhi
Railway Board, New Delhi
Respected
Sir,
SUB
: RATIONALISATION OF SUPERVISION OF LOCO RUNNING
STAFF-WRONG CONTENTIONS LEADING TO RAILWAY BOARD ORDER - SEEKING CORRECTIONS.
REF
: NO.2001/M (L)/467/2 DATED 12.11.2012
This
association would like to bring the misconceptions, false contentions and
notions on the above subject to your esteemed attention for needful correction.
As stated in the RB order, the recent cases of serious accidents did not occur
for want of training, counseling, or monitoring of the running staff, but due
to the draconian, inhuman, and weird HOER( six continuous night duty rule, 13
hours duty rule, and the 22/30 hours PR rule) thrust upon the loco
running staff. In addition denial of leave due to depressed sanctioned
strength and non filling up of sanctioned strength has only exaggerated the
woes of the loco running staff. CCC/CPRC/CTLC are in no way related
to the recent cases of accidents. The SPAD minutes Vide No.
2004/M(L)/466/7101 dated 14.06.12 by Director Mechanical Engg. (Tr) has mainly
addressed the causes of accidents to a large extent and suggested simple
remedial measures such as reduction of duty hours to 6 limiting of night duties
to 2 or 3 calendar day rest and many more.
The conviction of the railway board that senior Loco Pilots are unwilling to
opt for CCC/CPRC/CTLC posts is not true. And the contention that existing LI’s
are seniors to occupy such posts needs rethink. Railway still consider
Loco Pilot(G) and Loco Pilot(P) as the qualification criteria for LI post
instead of LP(M) and so railway board cannot declare that LI’s are the seniors
in loco running cadre. This argument seems to be the justification given
by railway board to usurp the regular day duty CCC/CPRC/CTLC posts from Loco
Pilots in a dubious way. The LI’s drafted from LP(G) are entrusted
to monitor loco pilots working in EMU/Pass/mail trains which is a futile
exercise in absence of working experience in passenger/mail/express
trains. Railway board has not bothered to rectify this anomaly, even though
highlighted several times by AILRSA. Even though loss of emoluments
is a serious concern to senior loco pilots it can be
compensated by the railway board enhancing 120KM per day to total
Kilometerage of mail crew link/month of the concerned depot or like
the LI’s being allowed 30% pay fixation and 120 KMS per day for
CCC/CPRC/CTLC.
Presently when medically unsuitable/A1 unfit cases are increasing among loco
pilots, taking away the existing CCC/CPRC/CTLC post will create problems in
accommodating them suitably.
The
E2 minutes of SPAD states that retirement age of Loco Pilots should be reduced
to 55 years or they should be made CC/PRC/LI if they want to continue beyond 55
years. E12 minutes of SPAD states that CC/PRC cadre should be permanent
instead of drafted CC/PRC, conflicts with the E2 minutes of SPAD.
The RB order in question is in conflict with the SPAD minutes given earlier and
appears to have no proper application of mind. If most of the loco pilots
above 55 are to be given non-running duty then LI, CTLC/CPRC/CCC posts should
be made as an ex-cadre post for loco pilots above 55 years to ensure safety
according SPAD minutes in its true spirit.
Due to the above said reasons this association demands to modify the said order
in reference giving utmost priority to the loco pilots for the post of
CCC/CPRC/CTLC and in absence of applicants from loco pilots enhance emoluments
on par with the LI’s to senior loco pilots drafted to work as CCC/CPRC/CTLC
Thanking
you,
Yours
Sincerely
Bangalore,
(C. Sunish)
01.12.12
Copy : MM,ME,CRB/RB
0 comments:
Post a Comment