AIBOC CIRCULAR NO. 32 DATED 09.03.2012

AIBOC issued its circular No. 32 dated 09.03.2012 on HR Policy in RRBs. We are placing the same here for our readers.

CIRCULAR NO.  32                                                         Date: 09.03.2012

TO ALL AFFILIATES/MEMBERS:

HR POLICY IN REGIONAL RURAL BANKS (RRBS)

Recently, the government of India , in the name of Operational Integration and Human Resources Development, have issued directives to RRBs to depute 20% of RRB officers in Scale I to IV to the sponsor Banks for a period of 3 years to give them exposure to Sponsor Banks and vice versa.

The Directives are impractical and counter productive as the same disturb the basic objectives of the RRBs.

We have addressed a letter to the Secretary, Department of Financial Services, highlighting the negative aspects of the directives and requesting them to withdraw the same.

A copy of the letter annexed to this letter is self –explicit.

We will keep you posted of the further developments.

With greetings

Sd/-

(G.D. NADAF)

GENERAL SECRETARY

No. 1454/75/12                                                            Date: 07.03.2012

To,

Shri. D.K. Mittal

Secretary,

Department of Financial Services

Ministry of Finance, Government of India

3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street

NEW DELHI -110001.

Dear Sir,

REGIONAL RURAL BANKS (RRB’s) HR POLICY

We invite your kind attention to your letter No.F:7/7/2012 and also your instructions to CEOs of Sponsor Banks vide letter No.F:No.7/6/2011-RRB dated 8th September, 2011 on Operational Integration and Human Resource Development of RRBs, indicating therein that, the officers of RRBs should be given exposure to Sponsor Banks and vice versa. The order stipulates that, 20% of RRB officers in Scale I to IV would be deputed to the Sponsor Banks for a period of 3 years and similar number of officers from Sponsor Banks to RRBs.

These directives are impractical; as they are counter productive and disturb the basic objectives of the RRBs. We feel that this move will affect the autonomy of RRBs.

The instructions are also against the provisions of the RRB Act and RRB Staff Recruitment – cum - Promotion rules.

It is pertinent to take note of the following facts.

a)      The allowances and benefits differ between RRBs and sponsor Banks, even though according to Section 17 (i) of the RRB Act, the Government of India has to issue instructions for revision of Salary and other allowances, after each salary revision in Sponsor Banks. However, Government of India did not revise other allowances and benefits of RRB Staff, after two successive salary revisions. This has resulted in wide disparity between RRBs and Sponsor Banks.

b)      The officers of RRBs are governed by the RRB Officers’ and Employees’ Service Regulations 2010, which are totally different from Bank Officers’ Service Regulations (OSR). The officers of sponsor Banks on deputation to RRBs shall have to be paid higher allowances and leased housing accommodation, which would put avoidable extra financial burden on the exchequer of the RRBs. There is an urgent need to bring uniformity in other allowances, benefits and Service Regulations between RRBs and sponsor Banks.

c)      At a time, when RRBs are reeling under tremendous pressure of attaining viability and wiping out accumulated losses, the proposed move will be a drag on the profitability of the RRBs, because of payment of deputation allowances, other allowances, other benefits including retirement benefits for the deputation period to those deputed Sponsor Bank Officers, which invariably are higher than those payable to RRB Officers.

In view of the fore quoted constraints, we would request you to kindly to withdraw the impractical order. In this regard, there is an urgent need to evolve a comprehensive manpower policy in the RRBs.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(G.D. NADAF)

GENERAL SECRETARY