Forces must communicate better The Statesman 26 Dec 17
In recent times, there have been numerous contentious issues, dominating social media, concerning armed forces personnel, both serving and retired, for which the top hierarchy is blamed for inaction. Some issues being discussed include non-granting of Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU), withdrawal of entitled rations, degrading military ranks as compared to civilian counterparts, denying them status of Group A services and non-implementation of OROP. These have also impacted morale of the serving soldier, who has felt that his hierarchy which is responsible for his welfare, since he has no union to project his grievance, has let him down.
The reality may be different, however actions undertaken by the top hierarchy on resolving contentious issues, based on their logic, fail to reach the soldier and the mass of veterans, who have taken it upon themselves to stand by the soldier. An example is the differing opinion on NFU. Most serving and veterans, including me, feel that non-implementation of NFU is a major factor in degrading the status of the armed forces. Simultaneously, there is a strong feeling that the armed forces must be considered a Group A service.
Historically after the commissioning of disciples of Jesus Christ, only officers of the armed forces are commissioned. They are therefore logically a step above Group A services and due to their nature of service, including willingness to sacrifice their lives for the nation, would remain a cut above. Thus, the perpetual battle seeking to evolve a means of comparison to establish working relationships with civilian counterparts. If they were equal to any group service, this issue would never have arisen. The battle is perpetuated more by the present Group A services, as they feel hemmed by the presence of the military in any common gathering.
Group A services comprise of two parts, All India Services and Allied Services. The all India services comprise of the IAS, IPS and the IFS (Indian Forest Service). All other central services are termed as allied services and are considered below the all India services in status. The difference is on the logic that the IAS, IPS and the forest service (IFS) are allocated to states and serve both the states and centre.
The allied services, comprising the Indian Foreign Service, multiple revenue and railway services and a host of others (almost forty-four) are employed only by the centre and can be posted based on vacancies across India. There is always friction between the allied and all India services as the latter dominates in status. In case the armed forces seek equation to Group A service, they would be considered at par with Group A allied services, based on the nature of their serving all India, as against an all India service.
The top hierarchy having understood the likely game which would be played by the bureaucracy, if it demands equation with Group A has taken up a case for a separate NFU, based on similar parameters, specifically for the armed forces, as it is a commissioned service, above Group A. This battle is progressing slow, as in all government cases.
It has also insisted on the government to issue a direction that NFU allocated to civilian employees will not be considered towards enhanced status and grade and there would be no change in the reporting chain, thus maintaining status quo in working relations. This letter would resolve the pending status degradation to some extent. It has been reported that such a letter has been issued, however, official verification on the same is not available. If issued, the service HQs should make it public.
The hierarchy refused to accept degrading circulars and directions of the ministry on equating armed forces officers with their civilian counterparts. While more panels may continue being established, anything which degrades the rank structure would never be accepted. After all, individuals who head the armed forces today, have come to that level after battling their way up the ladder and are aware of its consequences. Similarly, it was the refusal of service chiefs to sign the 7th pay commission notification which led to intervention by the PMO.
A similar action has been adopted on another painful issue, withdrawal of entitled rations for officers. The hierarchy has taken a decision to re-implement the same as it existed, within the financial constraints laid down by the government, as its supply chain purchases in bulk and is feasible. It would commence shortly. Hence issues are being addressed, however fail to circulate down in the correct perspective.
Similar actions would be on hand on multiple other cases which affect the soldier and his working conditions. Recent inputs on lack of equality between the Siachen allowance for the army and allowances of other central agencies has also begun being highlighted. As these inputs flow, the hierarchy would be involved in taking it up. Whether every case is taken up by the armed forces HQs or the MoD acts on its own is a mute question.
Based on lack of inputs, the rank and file and the mass of veterans, including me, had begun feeling that rights of the soldier are being ignored for personal gains of the top hierarchy. This is simply because the hierarchy has failed to connect with the mass they represent and project the correct perspective. This needs urgent correction. Actions being undertaken should be conveyed employing channels of social media in an unobtrusive manner, thus setting aside rumours and correcting perceptions.
In the present environment unable to convey welfare actions in progress causes more harm than good. Even a soldier deployed in remote areas has communication networks available. To ensure his morale is always high he needs to be regularly assured that issues which affect him are being addressed.
While for service chiefs, blowing own trumpets is not the normal norm, however positive actions impacting morale, leading to spread of rumours, should be disseminated. Whether the Public Information Directorate of the three services release such inputs through social media or they are clarified in the addresses by senior serving members, the choice is that of the military. Ignoring conveying positive messages is detrimental to military morale and leads to spread of malicious rumours.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army