The news of children dying in Bihar because of poisoned food brings to my mind my experience of supervising a canteen. I was working in Hindustan Aeronautics at Lucknow. During my stint at Training Department which was housed in ITI Aliganj, I had an overall responsibility of canteen. We had a contractor who was providing tea, snacks and lunch. The rates were fixed by HAL. Cost of items was higher than the rates. So there was a subsidy element. Being a public sector, the contract was awarded to the L1 vendor. For those who may not be aware of this terminology, L1 means the vendor who has quoted the least rate.
Being a bachelor and at times, being alone, I also ate at the lunch from canteen. Being relatively senior, I used to get my food in my office.
At some time I started getting complaints about the poor quality of foods from the trainees. As I inquired from other people I found substance in the complaints. Hence we went into action. Some of our actions were following:
1. I and my colleagues begun eating in the canteen so that there was no possibility of differential quality of food. We ate the same food which others ate. Contractor was careful and improved the quality.
2. We periodically went into the store and checked the quality of raw material. Particularly the rice quality can be always suspect. Difference in rates of various categories of rice is usually quite substantial. We had prescribed Basmati rice but the contractor would try to save money by giving lower quality rice.
3. Quality did improve. Next was the turn of contractor to complain. There were two elements of revenue - sale and subsidy. He said the his costs are going beyond the revenues that he is getting. I listened to him and asked him to give the details. What had happened that inflation during that year was quite high. After an analysis I felt an increase in subsidy was warranted. Usually PSU Officers refrain from such a move as they are risk averse and imagine that they may be accused of favouring the contarctor. I sent the note for approval. It was examined by my superiors and finally the subsidy was increased.
During my stint there was no other problem on this count.
Being a bachelor and at times, being alone, I also ate at the lunch from canteen. Being relatively senior, I used to get my food in my office.
At some time I started getting complaints about the poor quality of foods from the trainees. As I inquired from other people I found substance in the complaints. Hence we went into action. Some of our actions were following:
1. I and my colleagues begun eating in the canteen so that there was no possibility of differential quality of food. We ate the same food which others ate. Contractor was careful and improved the quality.
2. We periodically went into the store and checked the quality of raw material. Particularly the rice quality can be always suspect. Difference in rates of various categories of rice is usually quite substantial. We had prescribed Basmati rice but the contractor would try to save money by giving lower quality rice.
3. Quality did improve. Next was the turn of contractor to complain. There were two elements of revenue - sale and subsidy. He said the his costs are going beyond the revenues that he is getting. I listened to him and asked him to give the details. What had happened that inflation during that year was quite high. After an analysis I felt an increase in subsidy was warranted. Usually PSU Officers refrain from such a move as they are risk averse and imagine that they may be accused of favouring the contarctor. I sent the note for approval. It was examined by my superiors and finally the subsidy was increased.
During my stint there was no other problem on this count.
No comments:
Post a Comment