An Exchange of Thoughts- IDSE and Sappers

Recently, on Navdeep's blog I happened to meet a very articulate, young (that's what I felt and assume) and committed IDSE officer and had a long interaction with him on the disconnect between the IDSE and service engineers.

Rest assured that at personal level, especially among the middle level officers ,their is a great deal of respect , particularly between those sappers and IDSE officers, who have served together.

At the senior level, obviously, there is a heartburn since, coming close to retirement, an individual is bound to feel that his prospects were diminished/ hampered/ curtailed, in some way by the other.

In fact, the issue of army sappers occupying some of the vacancies, thus creating lack for the IDSE officers is a binding glue for the lobby of IDSE officers, who shall be otherwise on each other's throat. Thus , they have exemplary camaradrie and unity of purpose, much much greater than in the cut-throat world of the army Officers.

As the IDSE do not face the steep pyramid, they rise and retire with both their mental faculties adequately utilised, thus sharp and their spine erect. Should we be surprised!! (tham, khali-ek-do!!)

However, the problem is the young IDSE officer, recently out of engg college, cocky and combative (due to his age), and unaware (and also unwilling) about the service ethos and where MES comes from.

No wars in recent past have actually created a great chasm between the armed forces and the youth. So much so that there is unawareness about the basic mil structure.

Anyway these brash but intellectually alert young men, having cleared a fairly tough exam, arrive at the scene and get misled by the trade union (IDSE lobby).

As we know, power corrupts. And these youngsters get to taste it in large doses as AGEs. Even the service officers, posted as their superiors (Right upto the top man)do not feel interested to integrate these boys into the service (they will chew down an insolant subaltern). These the the 'milk cows' and the boss's 'meter is down'. These guys boycott the 'Corps Day' with impunity. A service officer can't boycott a mandir parade.

Soon these youngsters rise to an Executive rank, believe they have learnt all there is to learn- And as it is, there is not much to learn, after all, one just needs to know the few people who actually matter in the station, look after them and voila!

They also know that a seven pointer CR is more than enough and no service officer gives below this (Unless the 'milk' is really gone sour). Soon they get fixetted of ideas and want to take on the system. The general demeanour has been constant during the past year after the 6 CPC proclaimation.

So here is the full transcript of our interaction.

MES Engineer said... September 26, 2009 12:05 PM

The "Degradation" of military ranks and status unfortunately was started by the military itself when the Lt. Col rank was downgraded to a Time Scale rank to be obtained by one and all on completion of 13 years. In essence it became equivalent to Old Majors as the Lt. Col rank which was a CO rank started doing the job of a Major as 2IC or Company Commander. Cols started doing the job of a Lt. Col as CO and Brigadiers started doing some jobs that used to be done by Col. All this naturally lead to a reduction in status and the dignity attached to those ranks. The Outside world has seen that and has rightfully recognized the true equivalence of these ranks based on their actual job profile and has equated accordingly. No point staying in the past - instead face the reality of today's military rank status based on actual level of responsibility assigned to each rank and compare them with actual level of responsibility attached to Civil Ranks. Mere Grade pay equivalence will not do it but the actual job profile and responsibilities will. The sooner the AF realizes this the better!

I Said September 26, 2009 9:24 PM

Anything wrong with my previous input? Don't see it here!!

Anyway- "...ours is to do and die."

I somewhat tend to agree with the MES Engineer @261205 when he says that the downgradation of mil ranks is a self inflicted wound.

Unfortunately, We do not possess the right means to show our disappointment, unlike MES engineers who can and are boycotting the E-in-C's farewell.

The Outside world has seen that and has rightfully recognized the true equivalence of these ranks

Pray, tell us, how did they arrive at the equivalance? I really want to know.





MES Engineer said... September 29, 2009 12:46 PM
All. In response to everyone's comments to my earlier post - the unfortunate rank degradation of AF has taken place since the higher ranks are doing the lower ranks jobs earlier. Even in MES, a Major / EEs job as a GE is being done by Lt. Col - so naturally the outside world now thinks that Lt. Col is equivalent to EE now despite the difference in pay. A Col. is doing the job of a SE as CWE instead of Lt. Col earlier and so the new equivalence is Col / SE. Remember folks equivalence is based on equivalent jobs and nothing else - Grade pay etc. does not matter so much in terms of public perception. Till the AHQ accords enough respect / status to it's own ranks with appropriate levels if authority, the ranks will get downgraded - simple as that. Making everybody a Lt. Col after 13 years with no selection criteria and making him do the work of a Major / EE who too earlier became a Major after 13 years will now give the Lt. Col a status of a EE instead of a SE earlier since he is doing the job a EE now and NOT of a SE. The reason why a EE's status or a SE's status has not gone down is because they continue to work at the same level with same responsibility. A SE continues to work as a CWE and an EE as a GE. If people automatically became SEs after 13 years and to accomodate them got posted as GEs, then the SE status too would get diluted as what happened to Lt. Col and other ranks. Hope this adequately explains.


IndianACE said...October 1, 2009 11:01 AM
Good to see some healthy discussion and the MES Engineer (I hope he is actually one- an IDSE officer!!) is game for an issue based argument.

I also hope, service officers keep the discussion "civil".

I would like to point out to my MES friend that his comment-

"Remember folks equivalence is based on equivalent jobs and nothing else - "

is inherently flawed.

You are requested to go through this blogpost
http://acepost.blogspot.com/2009/01/albatross-around-our-neck.html

The post was written pre PB-4 for Lt Cols, but it seems that somehow AV singh's thoughtlessness is considered a panacea for all issues with IDSE.

Now the G of I has written (On the sly??)that civ EEs (6 yrs service, PB-3, ) will not be placed under Lt Cols (13+ yrs service, PB-4).

http://idse.org/mod_letter.html

What is the response of our top brass? Anyone?


MES Engineer said... October 2, 2009 7:23 AM
@ IndianACE - Sir, if equivalence is not based on equivalent jobs then how logically could it be based?

The status ascribed to a rank comes from the role / authority / command level assigned to it and nothing else. Rank by itself has no status Sir. A General has his status since he is COAS, if more people are promoted as Generals and placed as Army Commanders then his status would automatically get downgraded to that if Lt. Generals holding that position now. Lt. Generals have 2 status levels now - Corps Commander Level and Army Commander Level with different levels of authority and Command responsibility even though both have 3 stars. If some Brigadiers were promoted Major Generals and placed as Sub-Area Commanders with 2 Stars, the 2 Stars status would unfortunately get downgraded to 1 Star Brigadier Level - at least that is how the outside world would see it logically. Some Army officers do not seem to understand this. The Lt. Col rank despite getting PB4 and higher GP is now equivalent to EE / Erstwhile Major due to a lower level of authority / responsibility / command level ascribed to it as 2IC / Company Commander / GE rather than CO / CWE ascribed to it. Same thing for Cols now who work as COs / CWE like SE. In fact to be fair, a Lt. Col should be paid like an EE in PB3 since his output is like that of an EE as a GE / DCWE or an EE should be paid like a Lt. Col on PB4. However that is a different topic. The important thing is the role played by various AF ranks vis a vis their civilian counterparts to determine equivalence and this down gradation in AF ranks started with the Lt. Col rank being made a Time Scale 13 year post like the erstwhile Major. The AF should have objected then but now it is too late.

BTW Sir - I could not find any of the links that you posted so cannot comment on them.


IndianACE said... October 3, 2009 12:27 AM
@MES Engineer,
Sir,
Aren't we getting a little selective wrt the basis for our arguements?
As someone pointed out, a Lt Col (Sapper) is an engineer as well as a leader of men. The job is not exclusive. Just because sappers send their officers to gain constr engineering expertise in MES, does not give anyone a leeway to equate all Lt Cols EEs.

With the attitude shown by the IIT professors and the AI pilots recently, don't you think that it is a good investment by the nation to have a group of engineers to take on the responsibility when the need arises.

After all, an army engineer cannot take "sick leave" at will.

I would have appreciated if you could have managed to open the links stated in my earlier post-May I request you to copy the hyperlinks and paste them to the address bar and then press enter. Voila!!

Talking of equal pay for same job, let's take a simile -A visiting professor from the IIT may take a few classes in a suburban college. He does not get equated to the resident lecturer. Does he? (With all due respect to the lecturer!).

Here, I do not intend to cast any aspersion on the engineering acumen of the MES (IDSE) Engineers, but what I mean shall get clear once you go through the blog post.

http://acepost.blogspot.com/2009/01/albatross-around-our-neck.html

Regards


MES Engineer said... October 4, 2009 3:16 PM
@ IndianACE - Sir let us agree to disagree on the equivalence issue in this forum since I have been unable to make you understand how the outside world sees a Lt. Col as equivalent to EE now since they both do the same job. Furthermore as per your statement if a Lt. Col with at least 13 years of professional experience both as an engineer and a soldier still needs to work as an EE to gain construction expertise and so are posted as GEs, then it indeed is a sad commentary on engineering skill of sapper officers. If this is true, then pretty soon the outside world will accord a Lt. Col the status of a AEE since EEs are expected to have the construction expertise before being posted as GEs which apparently the Lt. Cols don't as per your statement.

So far as a visiting IIT Professor is concerned, he may take a few classes in a local college to share his expertise for a very short period of time with the college as an expert so there is no question of equating him with a lecturer of the college.

Even DRDO has recognized the true status of Lt. Cols as they employ them as Scientist D - PB3 and Cols as E - PB4.

Bottom Line - If the AF wants it's old status back, make the Lt. Col a selection rank again with minimum of 16 years and post them as CO / CWE etc. as they used to be. Making everybody a Lt. Col has really devalued it - it is like printing lots of 100 rupee notes - the 100 rupee does not have any value now but once it did. Otherwise rue the lack of status ascribed since the army ranks have been devalued by army itself as the higher ranks are working in posts that used to be held by lower ranks. Civilian MES engineers and others continue to perform the same duties for the same ranks and hence the status of a EE or SE remains the same. If a SE works as GE, then SE too would get downgraded like Lt. Col and the outside world will not accord the same status as it does to a SE.




IndianACE said... October 4, 2009 9:51 PM
MES (IDSE??) Engineer Sir,
Agreed to disagree.

Circa 2012, India is forced into a war with a larger neighbour. Need of the day is all hands on the deck.

So the govt of India promulgates to engage govt servants to augment the regular army. As it is, all national effort is targetted to defend the nation.

Now an MES SE with 21 yrs service is asked to report to BEG Centre Pune for further detailment on completion of a 16 weeks crash course.

Would this officer be put in command of an engineer regiment since the regular CO has just 19 yrs service?

If your answer is No- Let us assume he is placed as a company commander or a specialist engineer who reports to the above CO. Now would he continue to get the pay of a Supdt Engr or should he be placed in the lower pay grade?

Now just reverse this war time scenario to get an equivalant peace time engagement for sapper officers.

You state that the IDSE EEs have construction "Expertise" before they are posted to the appointment of a GE.

A very vain statement, Sir!! Have you ever bothered to counter check with your service users. Especially the Other Ranks!

Anyway, I respect your point of view. Sapper Lt Cols do need the tenure as GEs in MES to get experience in civil engg and it will indeed be difficult for "experts" to understand that there is a different engineering field where we design explosive placements and demolitions, construct/ launch bridges on the move, design and create minefields, channelise the adversary, build fortifications and bunkers and so many other activities when we are not with MES.

Like I said in the beginning, circa 2012 and some IDSE 'experts' may get a closer view on this field of engineering and then the men who have not feigned sickness on the way in(a la AI pilots) and those who come out of it on their own two (or even one) feet, will understand.

Till then we agree to disagree.

Best Wishes
IndianACE




MES Engineer said... October 5, 2009 12:01 AM
@ IndianACE - Sir - Thank you for your best wishes and the best wishes to you too.

We also agree to disagree in an agreeable way - a good thing for this blog when people can have a healthy discussion about various points even it they do not agree - a sign of maturity, adulthood and OLQ.

Respectfully I would like to disagree with Circa 2012 scenario -

1. It is a very fetched hypothetical scenario with a very very low probability of actually taking place in this day and age of intertwined global commerce where trade dictates everything. In 2001 after parliament attack, India did not actually attack Pakistan despite all the troop mobilization due to the pressures if maintaining global trade from US and others. So I see not much point dealing with imaginary scenarios which are not going to occur.

2. Even if this were to occur, it would not be wise to post a SE as a Company Commander under a Col CO - not a good use of such an experienced officer. Instead the SE should be posted as an Engineering Consultant or in a Senior Staff Position reporting directly to a Brigadier / Maj Gen @ the Brigade / Division Level where his expertise can be used effectively in the most optimum way if it is found that a SE cannot be a good CO due to lack of combat experience. If a SE is made to work as a Company Commander, the status of the SE would automatically go down be like that of a Lt. Col / Maj who are Company Commanders no matter what the SE gets paid. Govt, also has very clearly instructed that a SE cannot be placed under a Col.

A better alternative would be to train a AEE / EE for a crash course and make him a Company Commander reporting to the CO for these situations.

In fact I think all IDSE Officers should be made to take this 16 week crash course irrespective of war / peace situation so that they too can be placed in Engineer regiments for a fixed tenure as Reserve Officers to alleviate the shortage of officers. The same can be applied for all Govt. Officers so that non infantry / artillery and other non-combat roles in the army can be met as needed. It would also lead to better understanding and appreciation of each other and not cause any unnecessary heart-burn and friction to the detriment of the tax payer. May be a AEE / EE starting as a Coy Commander could be groomed or get the expertise also to be a CO or even E-n-C with time as the Sapper Officers get the expertise to corner all the top MES posts. Nobody will also be a "bloody civilian" anymore and we indeed would have one service then!




MES Engineer said... October 5, 2009 12:17 AM
@ IndianACE - Sir - Another comment if I may.

Regarding construction expertise - It is my submission that unless someone has the construction expertise, they should not be posted as GEs be they IDSE EE or Sapper Lt. Col. The govt. is paying the officer for his expertise in a certain area - that is what they are paid to do - this is not a training post - it is a senior position in an executive role - would be like posting the SE as a CO for the Circa 2012 scenario after 16 weeks crash course to gain combat expertise.



IndianACE said... October 6, 2009 11:10 PM
@ MES (IDSE) Engineer, Sir

The entire 6CPC imbroglio is based on the surmise that Uncle Sam will be our Savior and Lord Protector.

During UN missions, I have personally come across similar statements from officers from other countries, whereby USA shall control the events to their nation's benefit, - Such nations are called BANANA Republics.

The Mughals, in their later years, had similarly let-out/ out-sourced their defence to firstly the Abdali (Ahmed Shah) then Sindhia and ultimately the British.

They would come to know over the next hundred years,and very clearly that "there is no free lunch"

But one cannot be forced to learn from history.


I'm so happy to note that the 16 week crash course appeals to you. There can be a revolutionary jointmanship amongst the defence Engineers if this is conceptualised.

After all, if you go through British History, there was a system of purchase of commission by civilians right upto 1872.

Believe me!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_commissions

And on the other side the military man was also found to bribe his way to get a civil appointment (Mostly political).

However out here, what we are suggesting is that the IDSE officer periodically attends courses to keep abreast of mil engg and the service engr attends courses to keep abreast of civ engg. Logical.

And both, during the course of their career get appointed to appropriate appointment in the other branch.

But this is precisely what the E-in-Cs br is doing for service officers. Now it is for the other component to take the plunge.

Now about the second part dealing with expertise of an EE. Since you yourself state that this is an Executive appointment, the Lt Col clearly holds a better hand here.

He has been an executive through out his career. The entire training at NDA and IMA is aimed to make you an executive. And then 13 years of service.

Unlike him, the IDSE engr is a 'technically' trained individual who is getting to be an 'executive' after an 'Assistant Executive' tenure or two. After all he is just 6 years out of college!!

So we conclude by saying, while the EE learns to be an executive, and a 'senior one' as you stated, the sapper officer brushes up the technological advancements needed for his appointment.

And as all the corporate world and their salaries tell us, the 'executive' expertise attracts a greater premium.

I hope we are in sync till now.


As regarding what the govt is doing for the service-man and is getting from him in return, is what history shall judge and, hopefully, learn from.

On our part we serve this nation to the best of our ability.

With best wishes
IndianACE




MES Engineer said...October 8, 2009 12:57 PM
@ IndianACE - Sir - glad that we can agree on something - that a 16 week course for MES and other Civilian Officers is a good idea and placing such officers with Engineer and other non-combat army units would be a beneficial idea for the nation. As a first order of business the E-n-C should start this for IDSE Officers and start placing them with Army Engineer regiments on a fixed tenure basis on the same pattern the Sapper Officers are placed in MES. The BRO Officers could also be placed in the same pattern. For senior officers like SEs and above, they could be placed @ Brigade, Division and Corps levels in a senior staff / consultant / adviser level.

Where I would respectfully disagree with you Sir is your contention that a Lt. Col should be paid more than a EE when the two are doing the exactly same job as GE. Even though GE is an executive appointment, it is an engineering executive appointment with technical expertise and experience in civil engineering being of primary consideration. By the time an IDSE Officer gets promoted to an EE, he is expected to get the right blend of executive and engineering expertise to be an EE - otherwise he should not be posted as GE - as I mentioned it is not a training position. Hopefully his stints as AEE would give him that combined with his engineering degree. He also has been vetted for his technical skills - otherwise he would not have cleared the UPSC Engineering Services Exam in engineering which is competitive in nature. Moreover promotion to EE is not automatic after 6 years - he has to face a DPC for it unlike promotions up to Lt. Col which are automatic time scale - 13 years. So if a Lt. Col despite his "executive training" in NDA / IMA is lacking in civil engineering experience and is placed as a GE, such a placement at a higher rate is not fair on the Tax Payer as the tax payer is getting a lesser qualified person than an EE and paying more for it since a Lt. Col costs significantly more than an EE. same thing for SE / Col as CWE. The corporate world may pay more for executive skills but they do not waive the engineering requirement for technical executive posts and would not pay someone more if they lacked the key engineering experience for a certain position. Corporates also pay someone based on their output and if both an EE and a Lt. Col as a GE are expected to have the same output, they would also be paid the same as per corporate standards - Lt. Col would not be paid more just because he has more number of years if he is doing the same job as an EE by the corporate sector.

I know we can debate on this indefinitely but I do not see any point in doing so. I am however glad that we could express our views in a "civil" manner and could agree on at least one point - military training for IDSE Officers. With all due regards to you Sir.




IndianACE said... October 8, 2009 8:04 PM
Dear MES (IDSE) Engineer Sir,

I understand that this debate is unlikely to conclude among the two of us. But you know what!

I just copied our conversation and it has gone to 13 pages of a MS word document already. I am impressed by your intellect and appreciate your clear language.

Since our discussion is being compiled by me and shall be sent to the new E-in-C, whom I happen to know closely, I would like to go on a bit longer with your kind permission.

You have raised the issue of selection through DPR for IDSE officers vis a vis the system followed by the armed forces.

If I tell you that out of the 294 coursemates who were commissioned into the Indian Army with me, only about 243 reached the rank of Lt Col. 21 resigned, 18 died in harness (16 in action), 9 – failed part D/ inadequate OLQ etc

Today, I visited the idse.org site and entered Search -->UPSC year, to get a list of officers who had joined IDSE in a particular year and their present rank

Lets start with year 1995 (13 years service or less)

1995- Total Entry -19, Now EEs-19
1996- Total Entry- 14, Now EEs-14
1997- Total entry- 16, Now EEs-15
1998- Total entry -17, Now EEs-17
1999- Total Entry -07, Now EEs-06
2000- Total entry- 20, Now EEs-19
2001- Total Entry- 15, Now EEs-14

Now what can we say about the selection procedure of the hallowed DPC!!

I also noted (on the IDSE web site)
http://www.idse.org/dpc.htm

that the last complete course for which DPC has been held is UPSC year 2001 and of which 14 offrs were placed before the DPC. All of them are through!! In the first go itself!!!.

While browsing the IDSE website, I must say I am so impressed with the camradarie amongst the IDSE officers.

You will break free, my friends!! Just don't fire from Sapper Lt Cols' shoulders.

Our Generals are simpletons, we realise, albeit lately.




IndianACE said... October 9, 2009 8:30 AM
And since I love statistics, allow me to indulge a bit longer.

At the Rank of SE, the selection figures are as under. I start with 1981 batch as equallent army officers are just about getting into the Col(TS) zone. Amongst 1982 onwards, in sappers there are just about 35% offrs who are colonels (Selection)

IDSE Status is as under
UPSC batch
1981 Entry-3 Now SE- 3
1982 Entry-39 Now SE- 38
1983 Entry-94 Now SE- 90
1984 Entry-24 Now SE- 21
1985 Entry-24 Now SE- 23
1986 Entry 49 Now SE- 17*
(*- No Supersession. The first 17 on the list are SEs others are yet to be placed before DPC)

Offrs who entered 1987 onwards are EEs.

I am now searching out the details of the few unfortunates in the list above who have not got into the next rank.

These are the trivial pursuits of a Lt Col (SS)with a broadband connection.




MES Enginner said... October 9, 2009 1:21 PM
@ IndianAce - Sir thank you for your compliments. I appreciate the healthy respect shown by you. Yeah - please feel free to show our conversation to the new E-n-C - maybe he will be a breath of fresh air and not act in inimical interests of IDSE Officers. As our chief, we expect him to be like our father figure and not like a step father and treat all his children - sappers and civilians equally and not be partial to anyone. I too want a healthy organization.

Now regarding your comments on promotion prospects - Of the 294 course mates who were commissioned with you, 243 reached the rank of Lt Col. This is 100 % promotion to Lt. Col rank within the stipulated period of time since the rest 21 resigned, 18 died in harness (16 in action) very unfortunate but a professional hazard, 9 – failed part D/ inadequate OLQ etc were not eligible for promotion since they never served the stipulated period of time required. Subtracting these cases of resignation. deaths and discharge due to lack of OLQ etc., the total is indeed 243 who served the requisite number of years and simply got promoted as Lt. Cols without facing any screening.

On the other hand not all eligible EEs got promoted on time after 4 years of eligibility due to DPC selection criteria being applied and lack of vacancy since the EE posts are being taken over by Lt. Cols. In other engineering services like Railways, CPWD etc., engineers do get promoted on time there since there are no Lt. Cols taking those positions. In fact from your list, some did not even make it to EE yet despite serving more than the requisite number of years. It also has to be remembered that the average age of entry of a IDSE Officer is higher since the UPSC examination can only be taken after graduation and requiring one - two years of study for clearing the examination and appointment in which the engineers gain professional experience in other jobs. Perhaps a stint for EEs as Majors / Lt. Cols in Engineer Regiments after 16 weeks course can open up more EE vacancies for AEEs to ensure that they do get promoted on time like other Engineering Services and cause less heartburn as we see our positions cornered by Sapper Officers. This will also help the shortage of sapper officers in engineer regiments too.




MES Engineer said... October 9, 2009 1:22 PM
@ Indian ACE - With all due respects Sir, Generals are anything but simpletons - they would not be generals starting as 2nd Lts just as the rest if they were so. They must be having something in them which the rest don't otherwise they would not rise to be generals - they would rise up to Lt. Col only like the majority.

The youngest SE is of 1987 batch - only One that is a SE has 22 + years experience despite the minimum being 16 years. Hence EEs too are not being promoted on time as SEs unlike other Engineering Services. There are Cols who have been promoted in 16 - 20 years. Unlike the Sappers we do not have any acting ranks - so stagnation takes place if promotions do not take place on time. This again is due to Cols being posted as SEs unlike other organizations.

People may eventually get promoted but have to work under junior officers - both Sappers and Civilians till they do get promoted. So the DPC system does work since the higher ACR Officers get promoted first be it for AEE to EE or from EE to SE or from SE to ACE etc unlike the Sapper Officers who automatically get promoted as Lt. Cols just by completing 13 years. It is unfortunate that only 35 % make it to Col but that should not come at the expense of IDSE Officers by cornering the posts which can be done by SEs. It also costs the taxpayers more since a Col costs more than a SE due to MSP, rations etc. Looking at the Corporate analogy, that would not be possible since corporates will never pay someone more for doing the same job.

Hence despite the higher compensation offered to Sapper officers, the outside world will see a Lt. Col as equivalent to EE and a a Col as equivalent to SE and the govt. of India too has issued formal notification to that effect - No SE / EE should be placed under a Col / Lt. Col respectively and for Border Roads also the same equivalence has been established. The fact that E-n-C has blatantly ignored a govt. order or the DGBR was held in contempt of court for ignoring a govt. order is all together another issue. Wonder what happened to the BRO case?

Thank you again Sir for consideration of my views with highest regards.




IndianACE said... October 9, 2009 8:00 PM
IDSE Engineer Sir,

A) The 'unfortunate but professional hazard' which you mention in passing, is the very reason for the MSP.

B) The 'Lack of vacancy' is the reason that some of sapper Lt Cols, well qualified educationally(better than many IDSE officers) and having a blemishless career, does not make it to a full col. The sappers can also request you to opt for railways and leave Military Engr Services for them so that more offrs can be promoted to SE.

But both components know the vacancies available to them abinitio and thus have no reason to crib.

Our Generals are simple souls as they do not understand/ get involved into petty familiarity business. Can we have a situation where the COAS asks all commanders to ensure that the ACR of officers is not 'damaged' so that they all get promoted.

Here is what the president of the so called IDSE association has to say about 'management' the ACR for the IDSE officers.

Read http://www.idse.org/presi.doc

It is a long diatribe so go to para 16A where he speaks about ACR management of junior IDSE officers.

If this is not robbing the system, then what is?

Further you desire a stint as a maj/ lt col in the units. Most appreciated. But I hope letters will not be written to the 'cadre controlling authority' from the trenches. and you shall willingly come under the Army Act for the course of the tenure.

Rest assured- It is 'draconian' And this is the second reason for the MSP.


I'm really pained by the 'professional hazard' comment but it was expected, sooner or later.

However, I am flummoxed by your justification that IDSE is well screened by DPC where almost 100 % get through to the rank of SE whereas there is 'lack of screening' of Army Lt Cols inspite of the tests, annual medicals and having to operate under the Army Act for extended periods of time.

But it seems there is a fixation of ideas. I'm sure it is encouraged by your 'Cadre Controllers'. (This phrase itself seems out of the Soviet Union !!)

Thank you for allowing me an opportunity to interact with you in some length.

I hope that you shall carry the positive outcome (the 16 weeks trg and tenure in uniform business) to a conclusion as you rise in service and then I shall have the honour to reveal my identity to you.

On this account, I rest my case.

Best Wishes
IndianACE

PS- 'Food for thought'
Will the IDSE accept a qualified Lt Col (SS), to its fold permanently, if the officer agrees to forego his uniform and the 'perks' and is willing to be placed in PB3 with prospects for future promotion through the DPC system.

Can you ask the president IDSE.




MES Engineer said... October 10, 2009 12:28 PM
@ IndianACE - Sir - please accept my deep apologies for inadvertently causing you pain by my "professional hazard" comment - I did not mean to do so. What I meant was that if these folks had unfortunately not died they too would have made the Lt. Col rank. Any death - be it Army or civilian is unfortunate for all the loved ones left behind - but unfortunately is a price paid perhaps more paid by the Army than others. My salute to all the brave soldiers both in uniform and civilians who have laid down their lives for our country. I hope and pray that the govt. take good care of their families without giving them any runarounds - the least one can do.

I have no problem when Army Officers are posted in field units getting MSP but see no justification for it in peace stations and / or working in civilian appointments like MES etc. when the job is essentially civilian in nature and can be done by civilians.

IDSE Officers are meant for MES so there is no question of them moving to Railways etc. - they have their own cadre and vacancies. Moreover a MES Officer will not be aware of Railways construction technology either to justify him to work in Railways - will not be a good use of tax payer money to enable faster promotion of IDSE Officers to the detriment of the Railway Engineers at the expense of Tax payers - does not make any sense to me as a tax payer even if it means more promotional opportunity for me as an IDSE Officer. As responsible govt. officers - both civilian and army, all of us must keep the interest of taxpayer supreme and then comes the interest of the men under our charge and then our interest comes last. Is this not what was taught in IMA? Simply promoting Sapper Officers to Lt. Cols and placing them as MES EEs is to the detriment of IDSE Officers at tax payer expense since a Lt. Col costs a lot more than an EE and yet needs to be trained in construction technology where as an EE is already expected to have that before being promoted and posted as GE. Forget IDSE or Sapper, Sir is it fair to the tax payer?




MES Engineer said... October 10, 2009 12:29 PM
@ IndianACE - Sir, COAS / Generals not asking the commanders to not give an adverse ACR to an Officer so as to not damage his promotion prospect. This is the right thing to do as an ACR is meant to be an independent system to gauge an Officers proficiency to determine their fitness for promotion in a competitive environment - provided it is fair. The IDSE President - an elected person of IDSE Officers was telling this in his role as the Association President and not in his official capacity with no binding effect - don't even know what he does himself in an official capacity. In fact he was complaining the same thing amomgst civilian superiors giving adverse ACRs to their civilian officers reporting to them affecting the promotion of the officers as the COAS, Generals and other Commanders do. No difference here as the people are free to do what they think is right in terms of ACRs - these advisories do not make any difference in reality.

About lack of screening up to Lt. Col - Provided minimum qualifications as meant like fitness reps etc., the army officers get automatically promoted to Lt. Col just by serving for 13 years - Time Scale with no selection criteria. Civilian IDSE Ofifcers have to go through DPC and there is no guarantee of promotion after the stipulated period of service. Different people of the same batch attain different ranks based on DPC results - that is why only 1 SE is there from 1987 batch - rest are all EEs - a sad commentary - also shows that the system is stringent and works - that only 1 officer of 1987 batch is considered fit to be a SE as there are no vacancies left for them since they have been cornered by Sapper Cols. In fact some officers of 1986 batch and earlier are still EEs - so there seems to be a selection / elimination criteris set by DPC - otherwise all officers would have got promoted at the same time within stipulated service period.

Yes - I will be one of the first to volunteer for the 16 week course and gladly serve under Army Act in uniform while I am posted with an Army Engineer regiment. Hope I get the MSP and other perks then while I serve in uniform under Army Act. I also appreciate and will gladly undertake the professional hazard of giving up my life on duty should such a need arise just as any soldier would. Even now as a civilian, I would be glad to do since I consider myself as a soldier even if I am not in uniform.

I would also like to mention Sir that GREF Officers / Personnel in BRO also serve under Army Act in uniform and do face the same "professional hazards" in field conditions including having to give up their life on duty for the motherland. However they do so with a smile with no MSP or other perks / status accorded to Army officers. Is that fair to the GREF personnel Sir?

Thank you Sir for your offer to join the IDSE as a civilian giving up the MSP and other perks in PB3. I can certainly ask the IDSE President about it but he is no one in authority to make a decision. He just represents the legitimate interests of the IDSE Officers - so his opinion is of no consequence. It is really up to the govt. to accept your offer. Some in IDSE will resent it as they will feel that an EE post has been cornered which could have been taken given to an AEE who has served the organization longer and can legitimately aspire to rise to. My personal take on this us that it is neither good for the organization or the individual to take up a position that is lower grade. If you are on PB4 now, why would you take up a PB3 job? Does not make any sense to me. You would not be fully motivated at PB3 with a massive cut in pay and perks and will not be fully productive for the organization. My suggestion to you Sir would be for you to join a large Private Construction / Engineering Company at a higher pay than what you are making now at a DGM Level making 1 - 2 lakh rupees / month rather than take a pay cut and join MES in PB3. Will not be good for you or MES!

Apologize once again Sir for causing you pain and would be grateful if you would accept my sincere apology.



At this juncture I took a time out.

Loyalty is earned

Left- NEW PERSONAL KIT ITEM FOR THE ARMED FORCES

The First Time is the Hardest

"What I don't know can't hurt me!"
Blessed are the service pers who profess ignorance about the treatment meted out to the armed forces by the 6th pay commission and its aftermath. Sitting on a distant ship/ in a field location, getting to read 4 days old news, it is easy to ignore the ignominy being harped upon the forces.

However it is more likely that we come back in limb to a family station and come across the non functional (weren’t they always so) officers of the group/ class ‘A’ services of this great nation who have carried out a coup upon us with the active support of the elected representatives. He will look at your shoulder stripes, snicker and will try to show you losers down at the first instance. If only he could put the amount of his NF Grade pay on the plate in front of his staff car!!

The service bosses, few of them at least, objected the blatant skullduggery/ daylight robbery, but the result of the election gone by, is a clear smack on our faces by the people of this great nation whom we strive to serve with our blood. I continue to believe that the poor public was unable to look beyond their daily bread and the better bakers won the elections.

In a UN mission some years ago, I happened to inquire from an officer from a small South American nation which had a meager and ceremonial army, their strategic plan in face of hostilities from their neighbours. His reply- “We telephone Uncle Clinton”. Has this nation found a dear uncle? Or the Thakur, indeed has got for himself a ‘hijron ki fauj’.

Ours is not to question why- and so is it for our wives and children. An attentive child does notice that his father has now started getting a lower salary than Sh XYZ, who spends precisely 40 hrs per week in his official seat while his pop is out 20 days on the ship or months altogether in the field exercise. And then he notes that his father is an M-Tech from an IIT while Sh XYZ is a B-Com graduate who happened to pass a written test 15 yrs ago, the same year when his own father could not be around to witness his own birth, being involved in a border patrol.

The ‘quality of life,’ is another turn of phrase. It is good that a large no of those with such great ‘quality of life’, mostly the HQs’ lot, are getting ensnared into inquiries involving misappropriation (which got that ‘quality’ in the first place) and are asked to quit. Bye!!

Then there are “volunteer army/ welcome to leave” type HR statements, mostly coming from the half baked and ‘cautious as hell’, how-do-i-climb-0n-your-shoulder-lot. Sirs, if at the onset, you knew your HR beans, sitting on your bums at the Sena Bhavan, we would not have arrived at such a pass.

A few apologists state that a poor nation such as ours cannot afford to pay the army more even if it deserves so. But sirs, even if we die for the cause, a large no will still question the cost of our pall and suspect if we have died to collect the medal. And, in any case it is a question of proportion. Poverty needs to be shared by all govt departments and the politicians themselves

Anyway, as any psychologist will tell you, the first time is the hardest. So it has been difficult for the armed forces (at least for some of us, who can put value on the caliber of our counterparts on the civil side) to accept the blatant injustice. But in course of time we will learn to accept injustices as they come along. In due course, injustices from ___ ___ will also be taken in our stride.

I pray not.

The Boot Diplomacy

"Boot Diplomacy" is a real phrase, though the context of its use differs entirely from as illustrated in the recent episode which caused a dear union minister to smell leather.

Smelling leather happens to be a traditional Indian way to wake people up from epileptic seizures and in this episode it did have the intended political effect almost immediately. But I happen to be a non-political person (as has been drilled into me on account of my profession for past 24 years) and so the cause-effect for a particular political dispensation is not the subject of this discussion but what is interesting to note is that the "Boot Diplomacy" has a quicker response than even the RTI Act.

So is it the time to write the BOOT Act-2009 to make the sloth filled and malice inclined leadership to mend its way as regarding the armed forces of this nation?

This blogger has always been a faithful advocate of the non-violent, legal method of Booting out the non-performers which is through the vote- however there is no denying the shock value of a size 10 DMS followed by the quote-
" Yeh 2.5 Kg ka BOOT jab kisi pe padta hai toh veh uthta nahin uth jata hai"- Applause!!

Just take the strategic voting path for now- DO IT! (Cut it out- No I am NOT hinting at a size 10 Nike).

Also visit http://jaagorefauji.blogspot.com/ to learn the basics.

I hold no brief for one of the major national political parties, but it has at least mentioned our grievance in its menifesto. So go through it and maybe we can vote strategically and hope for the best.
The other way is to continue being a non-entity and hope that the crumbs will be tasty, if at all, they come our way! Good Luck.

You may be interested to learn from the past election statistics- There are a whole lot of parliamentary seats which were decided by wafer thin margins. The sitting incumbent will be willing to offer you the moon and his opponent- two of them!
Read- http://acepost.blogspot.com/2008/11/where-few-votes-matter.html
You are the citizens

Pillars of the Kashmir House

A few incidents, wherein senior army officers, in their official capacity, reportedly, ran foul of the majesty of law and were deemed to be in contempt of court, brings forth a long held apprehension that as the nation integrates the armed forces into the main stream, our senior functionaries will be blinded by intensity of the media glare and public scrutiny, akin to a rabbit, who tends to freeze to the spot, blinded by headlights of an incoming car .

In the recent incident, well not so recent, the DGBR (Not the incumbent) was found frozen to the spot for last 4 years. He has been found to have acted against the orders of the Gauhati High Court in not equating the SE(FG) with a full colonel. For those who have the opportunity to serve a tenure in the BRO as young subordinate officers, the strife and discord among the service and GREF oficers is amply evident as overbearing and invasive throughout the tenure.
A few naysayers would scoff, but rest assured they would be the ones who served in a Project headed by a service officer.

Coming back to the issue of the high court, (read the judgement here) or http://idse.org/judgement.pdf
(Do note the web address above- because this is from the other pillar of the corps of engineers, which may bring the (Kashmir) House down!)

You got to hand it to the hon'ble judge Roy at Gauhati. He was able to gather the intent behind the original govt notification of 2005 and sift through the ECM/ flares. Those officers who served in the BRO, circa 2005- did bring the issue of the Rajpatra (Gazette Notification) and the inner Shenanigans of the GREF clique to the attention of a few senior service officers. A layman could see the intent was to ensure that the GREF cadre officers were moved up one rank vis a vis their existing army equivalents without so much as 'by your leave' of the head of that organisation, the Director General.

The GREF officers could achieve this coup since they belong to the MoRT&H and not MoD. But the collective brasspot response was to put their heads into the ostriches’ nest. That the Notification was "only for the purpose of the Army Act", was obviously a lie floated for internal consumption. It would have been hilarious, if the matter was not this serious, that an order of the Government given in such clear language and adequately elaborated upon by the courts, could be handled such cavalierly.

IMHO, the release of this Gazette Notification in Feb 2005 was a watershed event in the history of disconnect between the armed forces and the civilian bureaucracy and along with the non compliance by the army in releasing the Muslim personnel data, (which alienated the politicians) should count as the two immediate precursors to the present 6CPC imbroglio, which has put armed forces at loggerheads with the executive.

Further, negligence of the kind exhibited in the above court case, sows sense of doubt amongst the judiciary and ultimately our masters, the common public! Surely we have a special army with bright, talented functionaries.

A Personal Aside-(From a verbal briefing by a BRO veteran!)
Remember, ye all youngsters
When under a GREF officer- the first rule of engagement is to make sure that you allow the colour of your uniform to morph into a dirty shade of khaki while at the same time scrub your inner-self so as to rid yourself of any vestige of Chatwodian principles and brotherhood of the armed forces. (Each one on his own, sir, and the most slimy, survives!).

Finally, as always-

'VOTE' to be relevent.Else continue on a wing and a prayer.

The last Refuge of the Scoundrel

For Starters:
Bravery, like beauty, lies in the eyes of the beholder.
And again like beauty, bravery can launch a thousand ships/ warriors.

The Ashok Chakra is the highest arbitrator of patriotic bravery in this country while we may consider the 'Miss India' title, its equivalent, where judging physical beauty.


IMHO, if we discount the unfortunate loss of life at Mumbai, the award of AC to the three police officers, can be counted as an exercise in political expediency whose equivalent would be an award of 'Miss India' title to Kumari Mayavati.


Now talking of politics and patriotism, a few months ago- prior to the 6CPC award, there was a lot of hullaboo on the blogs about the people of this nation sitting in towns and cities, not appreciating the sacrifices and patriotic acts of the army personnel. There were angry retorts that the servicemen are not the only patriots in the "sare jahan se achha" .


There can be no denying that patriotism is NOT a sole preserve of the armed forces and a common citizen, what to say, the common politician can be equally patriotic. However, talking of the later, did Samuel Johnson state so wonderfully (and which has been so often misunderstood) that-

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"

Sirs, Samuel Johnson later clarified that what he meant by the above quote was that a vested show of patriotism by politicians is the last resort of the scoundrel.

http://www.samueljohnson.com/qotw02q2.html#0630

Make no mistake, these awards are motivated, not with any noble aim of promoting a cult of bravery but by petty ulterior motive to draw votes.

Can you believe 11 Ashok Chakras in an year when the nation is not even at a (declared) war?

For sake of comparison, during 1971 Ops, the armed forces received a grand total of 4 Param Vir Chakras. There were 4 others at Kargil 1999, but then there were 7 ACs at Delhi 2002.

For those interested in records-

http://www.rediff.com/republic/2000/jan/28param.htm

Does the colour of blood change in this country with the uniform you wear, the place you serve at and the media interest you generate?

If our media has been bought out by sundry awards, foreign jaunts and gifts, then who questions the misuse of gallantry awards and petty shenanigans of these scoundrels?

We all believe that, in 1991, a capable financial wizard, caused a turnaround in the Indian economy. If memory serves me right, Sh Manmohan Singh, used to accept only Re 1 as his salary as Finance Minister in the Govt of India. This was an indicator of his commitment. However his actions as a PM, in the wake of 6CPC and now the gallantry awards episode are troubling. Because two things matter to a soldier- Izzat and the value of the indicators of the Izzat.

Here is hoping that the recent bypass surgery at AIIMS would have put his heart back at the correct place.

Else let's help vote this government out.

AN ALBATROSS AROUND OUR NECK

Now, a number of times during the past few months, our friends from IDSE have complained that since the Lt Cols are being posted as GEs which is an appointment tenated by their EEs who are in pay band 3, thus Lt Cols should also be in PB3. Logical! But is it?

Imagine a scenario- India is involved in large scale, extended hostilities with its major adversary. There is a need to make up the deficient force level and raise and mobilise new units. What will the government do?

Recollect similar situation from the world wars. Circa 1942, Maj Charles Orde Wingate, a career soldier becomes Brig Wingate, almost overnight. And he was not an isolated case. Not by far. The combatant officers under him, were government employees from the other departments- freshly trained and equipped with a smart haircut. Maybe one of the Engineer Platoon Cdrs is a director from CPWD, and another is a Superintending Engineer of the transport department who may, after a crash course, is made the Tank Tp commander. Their peace time pay is protected while they don uniform of a lower rank.

Plausible and practical? Or would these gentlemen insist to be placed in command of a unit being equal in status to a full colonel?

Thus, the experience and continuity in a particular type of job, is also a contributing factor for placing the officer on a lower job profile while on posting to a works tenure or a deputation while his pay is protected. Hence a Lt Col, posted as GE, gets the pay of a Lt Col. How is the Govt standing to lose anything by this arrangement?

It is clear that the great Dr Kohli, gold Medal Economics, LSE, has been taken on a right royal ride.

Anyway, that time of reconciliation is now passe. I sincerely request the powers that be to rid ourselves of this millstone around our neck, but do not throw the bathtub along with this stillborn baby (IDSE). We can yet save this organization (MES).


For the uninitiated-
The issues with the IDSE lobby and the service officers of the Corps of Engineers in MES is a long standing and acrimonious one.

At various times in the past, the IDSE lot has approached the courts with their grievances, but have been returned suitably admonished. This has been amply elaborated by Navdeep over the past few months.

Therefore, this time around, they have 'reportedly' resorted to some serious gratification in the power circles with the AFHQCS acting as willing conduits.

Now, the kind of statement which has been reportedly issued by the PMO- seems to be a pitiful dictation by this IDSE/AFHQCS lobby, who were throwing words like "combat ready" during informal tea time banter, much prior to the actual release of the PMO's decision on 01 Jan .

It is now incumbent upon the fraternity of uniformed citizens to realise that this motivated act will not affect the Corps of Engineers officers in MES units, as such, since that department is directly under the E-in-C's Br. Further, officers regularly undergo battle field proficiency tests (BPET) and are appraised annually by at least one service officer (as IO/ RO/ SRO) on the same CR parameters as would an officer who is on combat duties. But on the other hand, feel for the unwitting infantarian who would have hoped for a bit of a chance to spend some quality time with his family at a DRDO/ DGQA/ Ordnance Factory campus after a grueling tenure with RR.

This makes this act of theirs unpardonable.