Economic Times, HYDERABAD, 15th September 2008
MUCH to the chagrin of the UPA government, the University Grants Commission’ pay review committee is unable to “estimate” how much more time it will require to finalise its recommendations. The Pay Review Committee, headed by Prof GK Chadha, was supposed to submit its report on September 5. The ministry of human resource development has given it a month’s extension, but Prof Chadha is unwilling to commit himself to a public deadline. The UPA government would like to wrap up the pay review before elections are announced. College and university teachers are an important electoral constituency and the government would rather give them the expected pay-hike in time so that it can reap electoral dividends.
However, the Chadha Committee does promise “radical” changes which will help the Indian higher education sector meet the socio-economic and cultural challenges in the era of globalisation. Even as Prof Chadha is unwilling to make public a deadline, he says that the committee will take “no longer than is necessary”. He also promises radical changes in the report. Among reasons the chairman has cited for the delay are some three or four issues on which consensus has yet to emerge. These include changes in the “layers” of the faculty at the college and university levels — the choice is to continue with the current gradation from lecturer to reader to professor or to introduce new levels. Prof Chadha said that should changes be introduced, suitable time scales will also have to be introduced.
Other unresolved issues include whether the UGC pay committee should replicate the central pay commissions system of grade pay and pay bands and the manner in which to resolve the anomalies of the previous committee, that is the Rastogi Committee, recommendations.
Another area that the committee members feel requires more attention is the manner in which stagnation of college and university professors can be addressed. At present, it seen that often college professors achieve the top of their scale and then continue to remain there without any possibilities of advancement. Former IISc director Prof G Padmanaban, who is member of the committee, said that there was a strong view within the panel that no teacher should suffer from stagnation. Now the committee needs to work out a way to compensate these members of the teaching community, and to do so they will need to find parallels within the Sixth Pay Commission’s recommendation.
In light of the vast higher education expansion plans of the government, the committee has suggested a uniform retirement age of 65 years across the country. At present, there is a “great discrepancy” in the retirement age that ranges from 55 years to 65 years. “We are in a situation when availability of teaching faculty is critical to the government’s plans. This issue can be addressed to some measure through a retirement age that is uniformly set across the entire higher education system,” Prof Chadha said.
But it is not just about a longer lien for existing members of the faculty. Prof Chadha said that at the entry level, the higher education sector is competing with the corporate sector and civil services for the best minds. “We need to offer an attractive package. While we can’t compete with the corporate sector, it should be such that 10 years down the road, the academic has no regrets.” Stating that the choice was clear, Prof Chadha said, “We can’t give the red carpet welcome but we can provision a decent living condition.” The effort to attract the best minds to join the academic circuit will include “unprecedented financial support” and improved research facilities. Clearly indicating that the entry and exit in the colleges and universities are not parallels or replicas, the committee chairman said that given the expansion plan of the government, efforts will be required at all ends.
Recommendations will also deal with issues like new categories of teaching positions to attract people at a mid-career level. The committee proposes to tackle head on the whole system of ‘contract teaching’ whereby many faculty members are retained at lower salaries without any permanent status. The UGC has in the past tried to tackle this issue. the pay committee hopes to deal with the “horrifying situation of contract or guest lecturers” in an institutional manner.
The committee is also addressing contentious issues like teaching workloads, where not only will hours of work be suggested but also hours of involvement in the institution. Another thorny issue that will be tackled is that of assessment, there is some talk of student and peer assessment of teachers.
