My View on Pension updation?? Its Divide & Rule........
Dear Mangesh,
Pension Upgradation—Issues
Shri B.Kamath, my very good friend, is pained by the delay in giving effect to the approval in principle given by the Ministry on the captioned issue. He is fully justified in his reaction and many of the retired officers share his anguish. As Shri Kamath sees it, the delay is a result of the “Divide and Rule Policy” of the Ministry of Finance. So far as linking the issue of “rationalisation of perks” of the serving employees with the Pension Option and Updation issues, this criticism would be justified. Perquisites of serving employees have nothing to do with the issues under hand and hence Governor, with all the authority under his command, would do well to reject this part of the proposal with the contempt it deserves.
Let us come to the issues of the periodicity of pension updation and reckoning of ‘pay’ for updation (or revision as GOI calls it). The concept of pension updation, if I am correct, was introduced only in the 5th Pay Commission (perhaps improved further in the 6th Pay Commission) and hence, if we demand it, justifiably on the ground that our Scheme is on the lines of the GOI Pension Scheme, then the rules relating to fixation of ‘pay’ have to be on the lines of one prevailing in the GOI. In my view, if we insist that pay revision would have to be as hitherto, viz. once in 5 years, then the updation has also to be along with the pay revision. Otherwise, it would not be possible to ensure that all those who have retired from the same grade draw the same pension regardless of the date of their retirement. Let me give an example. My wife retired in the grade of CGM in July 2004 and she got the benefit of the pay revision with effect from November 2002. (I had retired in October 2000 in a grade higher but my pension is lesser than hers!) If another officer in the same grade as that of my wife had retired, say, after November 2007 with the benefit of pay revision given effect to from November 2007, his/her pension would be higher than the pension of my wife unless pension updation has been done along with pay revision in 2007. I am not sure whether it would be realistic for us to expect that pension updation has to be agreed in our case once in 5 years because our pay revision is once in 5 years.
I would not want any benefit given to the serving employees to be taken away for the sake of retired employees and it is also not my intention to deprive them of any benefits for the sake of expeditious settlement of the pension updation issue. It is for this reason that I have said that the linking of rationalization of perquisites of serving employees with the pension issues has to be rejected. It is only because that pay revision and pension updation cannot, in my opinion, be delinked, we may have to agree that the periodicity of pay revision has also to be the same as that of pension updation.
I would request those who have more knowledge in this area to enlighten the readers of MT’s Newsletter.
- A.Chandramouliswaran
