|
Personnel policies:
Army shoots itself in the foot
Military officers
are quick to blame bureaucrats, but it is their own
arbitrary and parochial attitude and policies, without
any understanding or training for administration, that
are to be blamed. In the bargain, the military becomes
its own greatest enemy
Maj Navdeep
Singh
Gentleman cadets
during their passing-out parade at the Indian Military
Academy, Dehradun. The obstructive, inward-looking
conservative approach has to go, times are such.
Camaraderie has been the hallmark of defence services
but the same is not just meant for the battlefield but
for normal day-to-day life too which actually and
practically affects personnel and their families
HUMANS are alike.
Wearing a uniform may suppress, but not fully insulate
them from corruption, greed, power-play et al, vices
inherent to human race. But besides grit and courage,
what sets military personnel apart from the others is
the sharp ability to self-destruct and to invent
self-defeatist masterstrokes as far as welfare, manpower
and personnel policies are concerned.
Whichever side one
may be, what the Army Chief's age row has brought fore
is that there is a belief doing the rounds, factual or
fictional, that meticulous, surgically incisive
processes are constantly at play where careers of those
who may pose a future threat are played with crudely and
ruthlessly and all this happens behind closed doors
under a cloak of secrecy marked 'national security',
which is not actually in consonance with the age of
transparency we live in. The lucky few in key
appointments have their way and others can only pull
their hair in despair. The number of cases pending
before Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal and other
Courts, and the kind of strictures passed on such
matters bear testimony to the chaos at work. It is yet
another matter that even in well-rounded verdicts, the
system, out of egotism, tries its best to wear out its
own personnel by litigating till the highest
court.
Arbitrary attitude
and policies
While military
officers are quick to point fingers at the bureaucrat,
it is their own arbitrary and parochial attitude and
policies, without any basic understanding or training
for administration, that are to be blamed. In the
bargain, the military becomes the military's own
greatest enemy.
The examples are
many. Recently the Supreme Court reportedly reprimanded
the Army for creating artificial hurdles for its own
officers when an appeal was filed against a lady officer
of the Judge Advocate General's Department whose case
had been allowed by the AFT granting her promotions and
permanent commission. Till date, the Army, based on an
internal artificial interpretation by the Military
Secretary's Branch, is promoting Short Service Officers
commissioned prior to 2006 as Captains in nine years of
service while those commissioned after 2006 are being
promoted to the same rank in two years. The impediment
was not created by with the Ministry of Defence, but by
the Army. When the Military's medical establishment was
directed by Courts to grant medical facilities to its
elderly retired Emergency Commissioned Officers based on
an already existing Government Order, the Army itself
was quick to challenge it before the Supreme Court.
Imagine, the Army approaching the Supreme Court with a
prayer that the same Army may be directed to withdraw
medical facilities from its own officers, some of them
in their 80s.
When the Navy and
Air Force vouched for implementation of the
Non-Functional Upgradation for the defence services, as
already applicable to civil services, which guarantees
the pay of a Lieutenant General in a time-bound manner
to superseded officers, the Army was the first to oppose
putting across the banal argument that if implemented
there would be 'no charm for higher ranks'. When all
Doctors of the Central Government were granted a
'Dynamic Assured Progression Scheme', the Army itself
tooth and nail opposed its implementation for its own
doctors on the pretext that doctors would then start
getting higher salaries than other officers.
Faulty
interpretation of rules
While the civilian
establishment is constantly blamed for degradation of
status of military officers, the Army, in the Military
Engineering Services (MES) itself places senior promotee
military officers of the rank of Major and lady officers
of similar rank as Assistant Garrison Engineers, an
appointment tenable by Subedar-equivalent civilian
officers, while directly commissioned officers of the
rank of Major with much lesser length of service are
posted on higher appointments such as Garrison
Engineers, all again based on an artificial, faulty
and forced
interpretation of existing rules.
Recently, based on
a decision taken by the Prime Minister, young army
officers, both Permanent and Short Service Commissioned,
up to 35 years of age with 5 years of service and in fit
medical category, were sought for lateral induction into
the Indian Police Service through a statutory gazette
notification. But rather than moving with the times, the
Army Headquarters, based on an outdated policy
promulgated in 1987, issued a circular pointing out that
only those Permanent Commissioned Officers would be
permitted to apply for the IPS who had only two years of
service left (that is, who were 50 years old), or who
were in low medical category, or who had completed 18
years of service but had not passed their promotion
exams. Needless to say, it's a no-brainer that all such
categories 'allowed' by the Army HQ were actually
ineligible to be inducted into the IPS as per the
notification.
Whenever there is a
welfare oriented proposal or proactive personnel policy
under consideration of the Government which elements in
the bureaucracy would not like to see implemented, they
simply throw it in the court of the defence services for
a consultative process for they know that first the
Army, Navy and the Air Force would start struggling
between themselves, and then the fight would shift
inter-se between the fighting Arms, then it would be
fighting arms versus support arms and finally arms
versus services. The end product would be zilch
resulting in sniggers from the ringside.
Shedding
obstructive approach
So where does the
fault lie? Is it because of the stiff competition and
ACR oriented 'smile up - kick down' culture or is it
because of plain lack of understanding of finer aspects
of personnel management and lack of administrative
acumen or downright foolhardiness? The answer is hard to
find. It seems that in a nation with the psyche of
public servants deriving power by imposing obstacles,
red-tape and impediments in the ordinary life of a
common citizen, officers holding key appointments in the
military feel powerless when they compare themselves
with their civilian counterparts. Hence the only way to
feel powerful is by posing hindrances in areas of policy
where the pen can be used as an authoritative instrument
of damage, and that damage unfortunately is restricted
to within the uniformed services. As a sequel, creation
of restrictive clauses and provisos becomes a tool of
ego empowerment through which the policy writer feels
potent. Liberal construal is abandoned for sadism and a
sub-culture emerges where cribbing is rampant and peer
happiness is not tolerated.
The Army has to
wake up and smell the coffee. The obstructive,
inward-looking conservative approach has to go, times
are such. Camaraderie has been the hallmark of defence
services but the same is not just meant for the battle
field but for normal day to day life too which actually
and practically affects personnel and their families. A
recent positive example would be the strong efforts of
the Army's Personnel Services Directorate in reducing
litigation and convincing the Defence Ministry to
withdraw appeals filed against its disabled soldiers
bringing succour and kudos to the organisation. The
positivity must spread and must spread fast to other
spheres, otherwise the self-inflicted injury to the
heretofore seemingly strong foundation would make the
organisation a laughing stock leading to a spectacular
derailment of the only institution every Indian has been
unconditionally proud of.
Bare facts
Supreme Court
recently rapped the Army for creating artificial hurdles
for its own officers in a case related to the promotion
and grant of permanent commission to a woman
officer. The Navy and the Air Force vouched for
non-functional upgradation,as applicable to civil
services, that would grant pay of Lt Gen to superseded
officers, but the Army opposed it. When all central
government doctors were granted Dynamic Assured
Progression Scheme, Army opposed it for its own
officers.
In MES, the Army
places Majors and Lt Cols in appointments tenable by
Subedar-equivalent civilian MES cadre.
On the PM’s
directives, military officers below 35 years were sought
for lateral induction into the IPS, but the Army, citing
an outdated circular of 1987, put a spanner in the
works. The writer practises in the Punjab and Haryana
High Court |