The long-standing demand of pay fixation benefits for central government employees promoted after availing of the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) scheme has now been officially shifted to the 8th Pay Commission to decide on. Employee unions had urged that employees who were given a pay fixation benefit on MACP should also be given a fixation benefit when the employee is promoted to a higher post. However, the government said that larger policy issues would be decided by the 8th Central Pay Commission.
The decision was recorded during the 49th meeting of the National Council (Joint Consultative Machinery or JCM) chaired by the Cabinet Secretary. The minutes of the meeting were circulated by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) through Office Memorandum No. 3/1/2025-JCA dated June 3, 2026.
What was the demand regarding MACP?
The meeting discussed the grant of pay fixation benefits to those employees who are promoted after availing the benefit of MACP (DoPT).
Under normal conditions, when an employee is promoted, their pay is fixed using Fundamental Rule (FR) 22(1)(a)(1) which provides financial incentive through an additional financial increment. However, under current regulations, if an employee has already received a financial upgrade through the MACP scheme then they will not be given this additional pay fixation benefit upon their actual and regular promotion.
The Staff Side argues that regular promotion results in an objective increase in duties and structural responsibilities. The Staff Side said that denying financial recognition for this step-up creates an organizational anomaly where employees take on harder roles without corresponding financial benefits.
The Staff Side said that after getting MACP, when an employee is promoted the benefit under FR-22(1)(a)(1) is not given. The Staff Side demanded that employees who were given a pay fixation benefit on MACP should also be given a fixation benefit under FR-22(1)(a)(1) when the employee is promoted to a higher post carrying higher responsibility.
Key arguments from staff side representatives
Staff Side member C Srikumar stated that during the 6th CPC the employee who got MACP prior to regular promotion was given the benefit of pay fixation under FR 22(1)(a)(1). When the employee was promoted to the next higher post he got the grade pay difference, even though the fixation benefit was not given. The member argued that the previous mechanism of giving a partial financial lift was broken because the 7th CPC completely dispensed with the Grade Pay system. He said that granting one additional increment on promotion after MACP is justified under the current Pay Matrix format.
Staff Side member Sivaji Vasireddy pointed out that the historical system inherently respected promotional vertical movement by granting the difference in grade pay but the benefit disappeared under the current layout.
The Staff Side also mentioned that various related irregularities had been brought up frequently in previous forums without a comprehensive solution.
What did the government say on MACP?
Clarifying its stance on the structural anomaly surrounding MACP, the government said that specific cases can be examined but the larger policy issue will be left for the 8th CPC to decide.
The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) retains the power to review isolated and highly specific administrative irregularities where the transition of rules caused unintended pay disparities.
A baseline demand of reviewing the definition of FR-22(1)(a)(1) execution to allow an extra increment after MACP has been recognized as a structural policy matter. This puts the onus of finding a permanent solution entirely on the upcoming 8th Pay Commission.
Latest developments in 8th Pay Commission
The 8th Pay Commission is currently conducting the data collection exercise from stakeholders to assess the pay, allowances, pensions and service conditions of the central government employees. The commission is expected to move towards drafting its report after reviewing stakeholder suggestions and proposals. The report is expected to be submitted approximately 18 months after the Commission’s constitution.
Will the process be further delayed now?
While the final recommendations of the 8th CPC are expected to take time, the 8th CPC may seek proposals and suggestions from stakeholders on pay, allowances and service conditions of employees. Meanwhile, employee organisations will have the opportunity to submit their demands to the 8th CPC. The latest JCM decision makes it clear that the issue of pay fixation after MACP will be one of the major policy issues before the Commission and it may take a little more time to arrive at a logical conclusion.
