OTP System Destroyed, Policies Bypassed, Executives Harassed : Still GS MA (Majority Association) Says “Thank You”
The annual transfer orders issued vide orders dated 09th May 2026 have once again established that the transfer and posting system in BSNL has become increasingly opaque, with discretion overtaking the laid down norms and policies. The pain becomes even more severe when genuine cases related to Medical Grounds, PWD, OTP, Education, Spouse Grounds etc. continue to remain unaddressed for many executives. To add further disappointment, the GS MA (Majority Association) has projected these orders as an achievement and extended thanks to all those involved in issuance of these highly discretionary orders.
It is not that the cases submitted by AIGETOA have not been considered or that we are reacting emotionally merely because some cases remained unsettled. The real concern and pain is the excessive use of discretion in place of the earlier transparent and automatic OTP mechanism which had become the hallmark of the transfer process in BSNL over the years. AIGETOA cannot celebrate such orders merely because some of our members may have got relief. AIGETOA considers it its duty to protect the rights of every executive irrespective of association affiliation. The real victory will only be when transparency, fairness and the hassle-free OTP system are fully restored.
With sustained efforts during its tenure as the Representative Association, AIGETOA had ensured the introduction and strengthening of the OTP Transfer System which streamlined the entire transfer and posting mechanism in BSNL. The process had become transparent and predictable wherein every executive was aware of his/her position, knew the circles available for placement, and long stay transfers were executed only after calling for options. Waiting lists were maintained and immunity provisions were extended transparently without bias or discretion.
However, after the current GS MA (Majority Association) took over, the significance of the transparent OTP process has steadily eroded. Transfers are increasingly being executed on discretion without transparency. Long stay transfers are being implemented without seeking options. OTP has virtually become redundant with executives being posted even to stations which they never opted for. Executives are being thrown to faraway locations, hard tenure postings are being done on own cost basis, promotions are being linked with transfers, and immunity provisions are being bypassed. Even PWD candidates and serious medical cases are not being spared.
The OTP Transfer system has practically been converted into ATP (Annual Transfer Process), forcing executives to remain stranded at their stations for almost a year. The cut-off date has been considered as 31.03.2026 instead of extending it to 31.03.2027 despite annual OTP being in place. It is pertinent to state that the prevailing transfer policy itself provides only a two-year break in tenure period in normal stations. Accordingly, those executives who had sought transfer back to their earlier circles after completion of the prescribed break period could very well have been considered. Alternatively, the cut-off date could have been extended up to 31.03.2027 in the larger interest of fairness and transparency.
The situation has become so rigid and opaque that even the sections dealing with the issue are often unable to provide clarity regarding the criteria being followed.
Those executives who obeyed earlier transfer orders, joined their transferred places in the interest of organisational discipline and complied with the policy in true spirit are today feeling cheated while witnessing selective and discretionary implementation. In fact, this selective execution has become one of the biggest issues prevailing in BSNL today. Whenever there is any change, instead of following the laid down policies uniformly, arbitrary methods are increasingly being adopted in implementation of promotions and transfers.
The GS MA (Majority Association) was duty bound to object and raise its voice to restore the system or improve it further. Unfortunately, all that is visible from them is endless thanks and gratitude for actions which deserved objection from the very first reading of the orders. During the entire tenure of the present GS MA regime, there has hardly been any substantial resistance or meaningful objection on issues adversely affecting executives. Even the current orders have been welcomed by them without any concern for the hardships faced by executives.
Neither do they raise issues effectively, nor do they allow others to function freely. While AIGETOA has remained consistently vocal on HR issues, day-to-day executive concerns and larger BSNL viability matters, the GS MA (Majority Association) has largely remained reluctant to raise issues. As AIGETOA started receiving wider acceptance and appreciation for its sincere efforts, even that became difficult for them to digest. Efforts were made to use the GS MA (Majority Association) tag to impress upon management that only they should be consulted and management need not discuss issues with Service Associations. If all such activities are happening with the concurrence of GS MA (Majority Association), then nothing can be more unfortunate for the executive fraternity.
It is only because of the persistent efforts and timely interventions of AIGETOA that some level of system and accountability still survives today.
AIGETOA never intended to enter into criticism or allegation-based discourse. However, the appreciation and thanks extended by the MA on such a sensitive and painful issue has deeply hurt the sentiments of executives when several discrepancies remain unresolved, serious medical cases are still waiting for justice, spouses are forced to live separately, women executives are being transferred to places more than 1500 kilometres away, promotions are turning into punishment postings and there remains no transparency regarding the criteria adopted.
Can these transfer orders dated 09.05.2026 genuinely be termed as appreciable?
Can such actions be claimed as creditworthy achievements?
Should thanks really be extended for such orders?
WE LEAVE IT TO THE WISDOM OF EXECUTIVES TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES.