Is Revised Flexible Complementary Scheme  of the Government of India is a ladder and recognition of scientific success

Scientists are the backbone of any research organization. The name, fame, and success of any research organization depend on the intelligence, hard work, dedication, and indefatigable efforts of the scientists. However, many research organisations, especially those under the commodities structure umbrella,  whose mandate is to conduct research to increase production and productivity, often restrict their activities as service providers. In many such organisations, the hardcore scientific activities are often compromised for various reasons, making the scientific career development extremely challenging.  Despite the above, such scientists work in very remote places, undergo a lot of hardships, but nevertheless dedicate their entire lives to the welfare of the planting community.  However, the Ministry has recognised the effort of those scientists and extended the Revised Flexible Complementary Scheme to such organisations.

What is the Revised Flexible Complementary Scheme?

The Revised Flexible Complementing Scheme (RFCS), which replaced the older Modified Flexible complementary scheme as of July 2024, is a merit-based, in-situ promotion framework designed to ensure that scientists in Indian government departments can advance their careers based on performance rather than the availability of vacancies.

The scheme specifies the minimum years of residency service period at each level before becoming eligible for promotion. The RFCS is purely based on  performance:

• Scientist B to C: 3 years
• Scientist C to D: 4 years
• Scientist D to E: 4 years
• Scientist E to F: 5 years
• Scientist F to G: 5 years

In exceptional cases, such as when the scientist has excelled in their AWR,  the residency period can be reduced by one year. However, such employees can avail themselves of these facilities a maximum of two times in their entire service period.

Eligibility: RFCS applies only to the scientific cadre starting from Scientists B,  up to Scientist G. The research assistants and technical assistants, irrespective of their pay scales, are not eligible for RFCS. This is because the primary role of the technical assistants and research assistants is to support the scientists in their research and carry out routine scientific tasks, and therefore, they can not be evaluated for this scheme. This is a serious problem in many organizations, but the main issue is which cadre the RA and TA  will be evaluated for, and how to fix their residency period. For example, a research assistant has reached level 10  by the internal career improvement scheme (CIS), or whatever, after 10  years of service, but his designation won’t change to scientific cadre. In such cases,  you are not eligible for  RFCS. However, once his designation is changed to scientist B, then he/she will be eligible, and the residency period can be fixed from that day only.

Not Eligible:  The  RFCS does not apply to the scientific posts who are primarily performing management or administrative work. However, here there is a very ticklish issue and needs to be handled carefully. In many organizations,  the posts of the Deputy Director (Research) and Joint Director of Research are based on regular promotion, and in the majority of cases, they are placed in Research farms as officers in charge. Whether they were engaged in hardcore research or only facilitating research of other scientists is debatable. It can be argued in both ways. The situation is similar in the case of the Joint Director of Research as well as the Director of Research. They were not directly involved in research, but may be overall supervising the research activities of other scientists. If this is merely administrative in nature, then hardcore research, in such cases, they are not eligible for RFCS evaluation as per the guidelines. Further, Deputy Director/Joint Director/ Director of Promotion, Marketing, Market research, propaganda, etc., are absolutely not eligible for RFCS. Another controversial issue is often asked is whether scientists who are working on quality evaluation are eligible for RFCS. As per the guidelines of RFCS, they were not eligible because mere evaluation and imparting training are not considered as research but a mere application of knowledge.  Unless these personnel engage themselves in research-oriented evaluation, such as demonstrating the enhancement of quality by physical, chemical, and biological manipulation, identifying the chemical constituents that determine the quality, evaluating the environmental, agroclimatic, and genetic influence on quality, etc., which significantly enhance our knowledge, then they may be eligible.

However, in many organizations, the rule is manipulated arbitrarily, making the eligibility and non-eligibility criteria a bit ambiguous.

Procedure of RFCS

The procedure specified for conducting RFCS is very clear. If you are a scientist, eligible for RFCS, then you must have your AWR evaluated by your reporting and reviewing officer and obtain your grade (Good/Very good/ Outstanding, etc.). Based on your grade and after completion of the minimum residency period, you will be eligible for RFCS. This is the first line of internal assessment. The next round of assessment is more critical and usually conducted by the outside experts who not only evaluate your quantum of work but also determine nobility and quality therein in an unbiased manner.  However, two major problems are usually observed that cripple the essence of RFCS.

1.  The biggest hurdle RFCS  faces is that many times, the organization does not conduct RFCS interviews for years together, though they are supposed to be duty-bound to conduct them twice a year, provided sufficient candidates are available. This undue delay often ruins the career prospects of many bright scientists who are eligible to climb up the ladder of success in their scientific endeavors, but are unable to do so because of the faulty system.
   
2. In many organizations, unfair interference is observed /reported by the higher authorities. The favoritism/nepotism shown by the higher authorities to some employees defeats the whole essence of RFCS in many organizations. In such cases, the deserving candidates with all the qualifications, publications, etc., fail to qualify, whereas the undeserving candidates climb the ladder. This disheartened the spirit and enthusiasm of many scientists. In fact, in many instances, complaints are heard, and in some places, people go for a legal battle.

RFCS, MACP, CIS

The Govt of India has framed specific guidelines for RFCS and MACP; there is no such framework for CIS, which is completely designed internally. While RFCS applies only to the scientists involved in Basic Research, Applied Research, or Experimental Development. MACP applies to all employees after completion of a specific period of service in a particular cadre. The Career Improvement Scheme (CIS)  is designed to help employees by framing suitable rules in some organisations. These schemes are generally based on the length of service rather than scientific contributions. While in MACP and CIS,  the pay scale is upgraded, but the cadre remains unchanged. However, in the case of RFCS,  both the pay scale and cadre changed since the scheme is applicable irrespective of whether there is a vacancy in a particular cadre or not. However, in some organizations, this aspect of RFCS  is wrongly interpreted, which not only creates acrimony but also hampers career prospects. But in reputed organizations, this aspect is well taken care of.

What should one do: Even though nothing much can be done to address the RFCS issues in many organizations, one simple, straightforward solution is to fight your own battle, expecting that things will change for the better tomorrow. Rather than placing blame, one can make a concerted effort to elevate their candidature status by emphasising their achievements over responsibilities. One of the most visible performances is to publish several high-quality papers compared to your peers, so that your candidature can not be easily ignored. In my view,  this is the only way to climb up the success ladder and gain recognition through RFCS when other options are scarce.