Request for review of incentive structure for procurement of PLI/RPLI to SSP/SP & ASP/IP

 Letter to GS requesting to review the present PLI/ RPLI incentive structure

📌 Key Issues Raised

1. Excessive & Oppressive Targets
• Frequent PLI/RPLI melas organized at Directorate, Circle, Division, and Sub-Division levels.
• Staff compelled to participate continuously without respite.
• Targets like “one crore premium in one day” imposed even at Sub-Division level.
2. Unfair Incentive Distribution
• SSP/SP and ASP/IP receive incentives despite having minimal or nil role in procurement/processing.
• Example:
• SSP/SP earns ₹20,000 for achieving ₹1 crore premium target.
• Sub-Division Head earns ₹17,500 for procuring ₹25 lakh premium.
• Actual contributors (BPM/SPM, CPC PA, APM Accounts, Postmaster) receive ZERO incentive.
3. Harassment of Staff
• GDS and Group-C staff face relentless pressure to procure high-value, long-term policies.
• Practices include:
• Refusal of leave
• Threats of adverse APAR grading
• Threats of Rule Transfer
• Charge sheets for non-achievement of targets
4. Decline in Policy Quality
• Many policies discontinued after 1–2 months.
• Proposals often submitted only for statistics, without proper documents.
• CPC rejects such proposals, but figures still counted for target achievement.
5. Unethical Local Incentive Schemes

• Division Heads announce local prize/incentive schemes from their earned incentives.
• Seen as attempts to procure more business for personal gain.
• Raises concern whether Department is functioning like a private commercial/chit fund enterprise rather than a government organization.

📌 Recommendations / Requests

• Restructure Incentive System:
• Incentives should be given only to officials genuinely involved in procurement, processing, quality checking, approval, and issuance.
• Stop Target-Based Harassment:
• Avoid torture in the name of targets.
• End coercive practices like denial of leave, threats, and punitive measures.
• Rational Target Fixation:
• Consider area feasibility and socio-economic background.
• Example: Same target for a metropolitan city and a tribal/hilly area is illogical.
• Identical targets for PRI(P) and counter clerks are irrational.
• Ban Ad-hoc Incentive Schemes:

• Local incentive schemes without statutory backing should be stopped.
• Ensure uniformity and propriety in incentive policies.

📌 Closing

• The letter emphasizes the serious adverse impact on staff morale, work culture, and credibility of PLI/RPLI products.
• Requests intervention at the appropriate level for remedial action.
• Signed by:
  S. Sudeesh Kumar
  Circle Secretary, NAPE Group-C, Tamil Nadu Circle