news details |
|
|
| Is Govt’s transfer policy non-applicable to leaders of Employees Unions? | | Majority of them stationed at capital/district offices since decades under Govt watch | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Jan 12: Though the transfer policy government should be uniformly applicable to all the employees but the leaders of employee unions across government departments are exceptional as majority of them have been stationed at offices in twin capital cities or at district headquarters without any break and successive governments refused to displace them to rural or far flung areas, due to reasons best known to them.
Pertinently, the LG led administration has relaxed its earlier order and has instructed the administrative secretaries to make transfers till 31st of January.
According to officials, there are a number of employees Unions in each government department, while membership of some Unions runs across various government departments, making them large in membership. Except few, the majority of these Unions have not been democratic and are constituted by some employees, who continue to occupy pivotal posts in the Union such as President, Vice President, General Secretary etc.
One common thing among all these Unions is that their main office bearers such as President, Vice President and some others managed their stay at capital or district headquarters without any break, in total violation of the transfer policy.
“How is it possible that under the reins of successive state governments, the main office bearers of these employee Unions remained stationed at district or capital headquarters without any break”, a senior official of department said, adding that these Union leaders have been securing their stay in return of their complete allegiance to the political party in power.
Across all government departments, the writ of these Union leaders have been prevailing and manage the transfers in their respective departments. “If transfer policy mandates the government to transfer an employee to Rural areas for two years and in Urban areas for three years, why these Union leaders have not served in rural areas and far flung areas. Is Unionism allowing them to remain stationed at Urban areas?”, another official questioned, adding that the successive state governments used these Union leaders for their political ends, which is also evident from the joining of political parties by several Union leaders after their retirement.
The Lieutenant Governor administration should seriously look into the issue and instruct the concerned officials to make a list of all these Union leaders as well as their tenure of stay in urban areas for most of their jobs tenure, to know about the reality behind these Union leaders. “If the transfer policy is for all employees then why have the Union leaders always been untouched by it under successive state governments?”, an official questioned. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
