Tag Archives: pension

-78569 – It is not a mere number.

24 Friday Jan 2020

Posted by in AIBDPA - BSNL DOT Pensioners, BSNLEU, Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

-78569 –
It is not a mere number.
It is a harsh reality, the number of BSNL employees who were compelled to take VRS, by threat of transfer, reduction in retirement age, 12 hours work, no salary and a sugar coated offer with many pitfalls.

The VRS offer with threats was a double edged weapon – to reduce manpower thus weakening service leading to privatisation and also deny full eligible pension to the VRS optees by not allowing them retirement on superannuation. Govt is expected to save lakhs of crores of rupees through reduced pension.

But AUAB / BSNLEU and All India BSNL DOT Pensioners Association are there to defend BSNL and the VRS pensioners.

AUAB/BSNLEU have already given excellent suggestions to improve BSNL and make it profitable.

AIBDPA has met top officers of DOT to ensure that Pension is paid to all the
78569 VRS retirees by 29th February itself. In case, all these cases could not be completed in time, then at least provisional pension should be paid, which suggestion was accepted by DOT.

There are many pitfalls in VRS. AIBDPA, the biggest pensioners organisation in BSNL is committed to safeguard the interests of all BSNL DOT pensioners including VRS pensioners.

AIBDPA is already on the struggle path. On Pension Revision issue it is approaching all M.P.s in the country to take up the matter with Prime Minister. Already more than 30 M.P.s have been met, who assured to take the matter with govt. Tens of thousands of signatures are being collected in Memorandum to be submitted to Prime Minister. Thousands will participate in Hunger Strike in front of CCAs on 12 February.

Tens of thousands of BSNL DOT pensioners will March to Parliament on 12 March on these demands.

AIBDPA welcomes all VRS retirees to its fold to unite and fight for the demands of pensioners.

Kerala Budget – Senior Citizen Pension increased to Rs.1,200

31 Thursday Jan 2019

Posted by in General, Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

In the Kerala Budget presented today by Finance Minister Dr. Thomas Issac, the Senior Citizen Pension which at present is Rs.1,000 will be increased by Rs.100 and fixed at Rs.1,200. During the next three  years, it will be increased by Rs.100 every year reaching to Rs. 1500. The demand raised by the Senior Citizens Friends Welfare Association was that it should be increased Rs.500 every years so as to reach Rs. 3,000 gradually.

Heart Congratulations to the Kerala LDF Government.

Memorandum to Prime Minister by National Co-ordinating Committee of Pensioners Associations (NCCPA)

21 Friday Dec 2018

Posted by in NCCPA

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Memorandum to Hon’ble Prime Minister

NATIONAL CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE OF PENSIONERS ASSOCIATIONS.
13-C Feroze Shah Road,
New Delhi.110 001
Website: http://www.nccpahq.blogspot.com
Email. nccpahq@gmail.com

President: Shiv Gopal Misra: Ph: 9717647594
Secretary General: K.K.N. Kutty Ph: 9811048303

Dated: 27th November, 2018.
To
The Honourable Prime Minister,
Government of India,
South Block,
New Delhi. 110 001.

Dear Sir,

We submit herewith a memorandum containing the demands, issues and grievances of the Central Government Pensioners. We request your goodself to kindly cause consideration thereof with a view to provide relief to them.

Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,

Sd/-
K.K.N. Kutty
Secretary General.

Memorandum

On behalf of the community of pensioners who retired from various Central Government establishments after putting in more than three decades of active service, we submit the following for your kind consideration and necessary direction to the concerned to evolve solutions to the issues raised therein. Before we dwell upon the issues in detail, permit us to mention sir, that NCCPA is the apex organisations of the Central Government Pensioners Associations in the country. Our affiliates also include associations of Pensioners of the Central Autonomous bodies. The grievances of the Pensioners mainly arise from the non-settlement of the following issues.

1. Implement option No.1 as per the pension fitment formula as recommended by the 7th CPC and grant MACP benefit with effect from 1.1.2006 .

The 7th CPC in appreciation of the demand placed by the Central Pensioners organisations jointly had recommended two distinct methodology of Pension revision leaving it to the beneficiaries to choose whichever is beneficial to them. The entire pension community was highly appreciative of the said recommendation and pleaded for the acceptance thereof to the Government. Unfortunately the Pension Department advised the Government not to accept Option No.1 on the ground that it was not feasible to be acted upon. The Government heeding to the said advice, accepted the recommendation and issued notification in which it was specified that the acceptance of the Government of the 7th CPC suggestion is subject to its feasibility of implementation. The subjective clause in the Notification was without precedence and appeared to be strange. In order to meet out the objections from large number of Pensioners, a Committee under the chairmanship of the Secretary of the same Pension Department was set up. The Committee made the same recommendation to the effect that the suggestion of the 7th CPC contained in Option Nol1 was not feasible. They however suggested to the Government an alternative formulation to replace the recommendation of the 7th CPC. This was primarily to benefit the officials in organised Group A service, where career progression was time bound. In a written submission made to the Committee, the Staff Side of the National Council JCM pleaded for offering all the three alternatives so that the pensioner would be able to choose whichever was beneficial to them. The Committee’s conclusion that option No. 1 was not feasible was flawed in as much as the document, which the official side affirmed as the bare necessity to implement Option No. 1 was available in the case of 86% of the pensioners, even according to the Committee’s own finding. The Committee’s report was heavily one sided and was conceived to favour a section of the pensioners, especially those who retired from the higher echelons of the bureaucracy. If the third alternative , which was accepted and implemented had benefited pensioners who had retired from the lower rungs of the hierarchy, it was incidental. Our submission before your goodself is that the Government, having accepted the recommendation of the 7th CPC must implement the same. The feasibility or otherwise of the recommendation must be subjected to critical scrutiny. The Committee’s finding that the Pay Commission’s recommendation was not feasible had been made to enable them to put before the Government the third alternative. There is no difficulty in disproving the Committee’s findings on the question of “feasibility”. A large number of pensioners would have been benefited and the question of parity between the past and present pensioners would have been properly addressed.

Another related issue is the date of effect of the MACP Scheme. The recommendations of the 6th CPC was implemented with effect from 1.1. 2006. However, while issuing the orders the MACP was introduced from a different date i.e. with effect from. 1.09.2008. The matter went first to the Armed Forces Tribunal, where the Govt. lost in as much as the Tribunal made it clear that the Government’s decision to implement MACP from 1.09. 2008 was wrong. The Government took up the matter before the High Court, where again they lost. The matter went upto the Supreme Court,who also confirmed the position taken by the Tribunal. Having reached a finality, the Government issued orders making the scheme effective from 1.1.2006 but only in the case of armed forces personnel, leaving out the Civilian employees and Pensioners from the ambit of their latest order. This is despite many decision of the Honourable Supreme Court that similarly placed personnel should not be dragged to the court for redressal. The Staff Side of the National Council, JCM had taken up this issue with the Government twice but are disappointed as those communications have not been responded with till date. We request that the Department of Expediture, Ministry of Finance and the Department of Personnel may be directed to issue orders extending the MACP Scheme effective from 1.1.2006 in the case of all civilian pensioners.

2. Revise the Pension of BSNL absorbed retirees with 15% fitment recommended by the 3rd PRC and approved by the Government from 1.1.2017 delinking the wage revision in BSNL.

When BSNL was formed in 2000, the entire employees working in the Department of Telecommunications were absorbed in BSNL with assurance of better prospects and pension from consolidated fund of the government of India. Rule 37A was incorporated with the CCS (Pension) Rules , 1972 to ensure them government pension and also their pay was upgraded to IDA scales. The pension revision was given to them with 30% fitment , recommended by the 2nd PRC for the PSU employees from 01-01-2007. Later, they were also granted pension revision based on the 78.2% IDA fitment at par with the working employees of BSNL. But both these revisions were much delayed due to a condition of 60:40 stipulated by the government for payment of pensionary benefits. However with much effors and struggles, this condition was annulled by the Cabinet and the order issued vide No.40-13/2013-Pen (T) dated 20-07-2016. It is stated in the order, Para 2 (b) that “The liability towards pensionary benefits including family pension to the BSNL employees (excepting those recruited after 01-10-2000), as per sub rule, 22 of Rule 37-a of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, lies with the government.”

The 3rd PRC has recommended 15% fitment for the pay revision of PSU employees with effect from 01-01-2017 which has been approved by the government. The BSNL absorbed government retirees are fully justified to get their pension revised with 15% fitment from 01-01-2017 without linking to the wage revision of BSNL employees. Wage revision of BSNL employees is being delayed due to the affordability condition laid down by the 3rd PRC. The pension revision of BSNL absorbed government retirees has nothing to do with the finance of BSNL, as the entire liability lies with the central government. The Department of Telecommunications, despite the assurance by the hon’ble Minister of Communications for early pension revision, is adopting a negative approach and their mindset , even after a series of discussions and struggles, is for the pension revision only after pay revision of BSNL employees. The central government pensioners have already got their pension revised from 01-01-2016 as per the recommendations of 7th CPC. So it is a great injustice being meted out to the BSNL absorbed government retirees by denying the due pension revision, even after two years of their counterparts in central service got their pension revision.

3. Revise Pension of Central Autonomous Body pensioners.

There are more than 600 Central autonomous bodies. Thousands are employed in these institutions. These institutions were created as special vehicles to deliver certain goods and services for public benefit. Most of these institutions have adopted Govt. of India rules and regulations and service conditions. Some time back, the Govt. issued an executive fiat making it obligatory for these institutions to generate own funds and be self reliant. The said fiat as pointed out by the Managements of these institutions, were impracticable unless the user charges are increased manifold putting the public at large into unbearable financial burden. After the 7th CPC’s recommendations, most of these autonomous bodies revised the wages of the working employees and officers, but chose to punish the pensioners. In quite a number of cases, the pension revision has not taken place. Even the entitled dearness relief was not sanctioned in certain cases. It is our ardent plea to your goodself that the pension revision in the case of retirees from the autonomous bodies may be directed to be undertaken immediately and the funds required for the purpose being made available to these bodies.

4. Provide notional fixation of pension under Option No.3 on the basis of the pay scale/grade pay/pay level from which the pensioner retired. Provide fixation of pay in the case of all pre 2006 pensioners on the basis of the grade Pay/pay level/pay scale of the post or cadre from which one has retired as per the judgements of the court.

It is the interpretation of the Department of Expenditure that led to the denial of the legitimate quantum of pension in respect of some of the pensioners, who could not avail the benefit of pay scale revision during their service. The issue had been the subject matter of judicial scrutiny and the judgements were clearly against the interpretation of the Department of Expenditure Instead of accepting these court verdicts, the Govt. had been dragging the poor pensioners to higher courts denying them what is legitimately due to them. While the serving employees are given the benefit of revision of pay scale or grade pay, the same is denied to the Pensioners. In some cases, the Govt. has implemented the decisions of the tribunal denying the benefit to the other similarly placed personnel. The attitude of the Department of Expenditure has only led to the increase in the number of cases in the court apart from placing unbearable financial burden on the pensioners. This is also clearly against the principle/policy announced by the Government while setting up the administrative tribunals to the effect that the Govt. would abide by the decisions of these tribunals with a view to speed up the delivery of justice. It has now become a common practice for the Govt. to approach the High Court and Supreme Court whenever the decisions of the tribunals go contrary to the position taken by the Govt. We request you to kindly direct the Department of Expenditure to reverse their untenable interpretation in the matter and render justice to the Pensioners.

5 & 6. Extend the benefit of CS(MA) rules to all pensioners who are not covered by CGHS. Increase the FMA to Rs. 2000 pm as has been granted to PF pensioners. Introduce the health insurance scheme as suggested by the 7thCPC.

CGHS came into existence decades back inconsideration of the dire requirement of addressing the health cared needs of the Central Government employees. It commenced its operation in a few stations initially and was later widened to cover 26 important towns of the country including almost all metro cities. It received wider appreciation from the employees and Pensioners. However, its expansion was arrested in the post 1991 period, especially after the report of the Expenditure Reform Commission was submitted to the Government. Its service was curtailed and the budget allocation was drastically reduced. The number of empanelled hospitals at certain points of time got reduced. In a city like Mumbai, where number of Central Government employees and pensioners is huge, at some point of time, there had been only one or two empanelled hospitals. The health insurance scheme, which was one of the recommendations of the 6th CPC, did not take off. The health care has now become abysmally poor. While this is the case of the employees and pensioners in the CGHS covered areas, the situation in other moffusil stations is precarious. While the working employees have the old CCS(MA)system whereby they could get the expenses reimbursed, the poor pensioners are given a pittance of Rs. 1000 p.m.to meet out the health related expenses. Most of pensioners, being at the advanced age, require hospitalisation for continuous treatment of the ailments. Therefore, the demand for the extension of the CCS(MA) Rules had been raised continuously and persistently for many years. The Government has not responded to this demand positively. Rather on many occasions, the Govt. has expressed their inability to consider this demand fearing the huge financial outflow. We request your goodself, to kindly get the matter seriously examined from the humane angle and pending a decision thereon, kindly direct the Department of Expenditure of the Ministry of Finance to increase the FMA toRs 2000 p.m to the pensioners.
Incidentally, we may also bring to your kind notice that the 7th CPC had recommended for introduction of a health insurance scheme. This is an alternative worth considering by the Government as the insurance scheme will obviate the financial outflow from the exchequer. The Departments of Pension and expenditure may be asked to consider this recommendation seriously and evolve a scheme which would go a long way in addressing the health related problems of the pensioners to a very great extent.
7. Raise the minimum pension to 60% of the Minimum wage i.e. Rs. 10800pm.

Minimum Pension is presently computed as half of the minimum wage determined by the Pay Commissions. One is entitled for full pension on completion of the specified number of years of service. Pension is computed as 50% of the last pay drawn. It is, therefore, discernible that the computation of Minimum pension at 50% had been based on the assumption that pension is normally calculated as half of the last pay drawn. This appears to be not based on any sound principle. Minimum pension is related to Minimum wage. Minimum wage is the wage determined on the basis of the minimum basic and essential requirement of a person’s existence. As per the agreed formulations as early as in 1957, the basic essential requirement is considered to be the requirement of the family of a person. Family is defined as “Husband, wife and two children” treating this as three units. The formula stipulates and provides one unit for the bread earner, 0.8 units to his spouse and 0.6 unit for each children. The point at issue is that the minimum pension cannot be less than the minimum wage. Minimum wage being the least below which a person may not be able to live on, the same analogy must apply to the pensioner. Minimum pension is the need based requirement of a pensioner, whose family includes his spouse who is fully depended upon his pension income. However, taking into account the fact that the superannuation age of retirement being 60, no pensioner in the normal circumstances may have dependent children. The logical conclusion that emerges is that the minimum pension must not be less than 60% because the family of the pensioner shall have 1.8 units which is just 60% of the family units of a working employee. We request therefore, that the concerned may be advised to determine the minimum pension at 60% of the minimum wage, which will work out to Rs. 10,800 p.m.

8. Restore the commutation value of pension after 10 years.

The restoration of the commutation value of pension is made after 15 years. The 5th CPC had pointed out that the period of 15 years is too large in as much as the Government recovers the advance with interest in less than 11 years. Accordingly the 5th CPC recommended restoring the commuted value on completion of 12 years, so that full pension is restored. After the subsequent revision of the commutation value factor, the period by which the government could recover the full amount with interest has further been reduced to 10 years. The recommendation of the 5th CPC was not accepted by the Government. With this decision, the Government is presently recovering almost one and half times of the commuted value along with interest, interest being charged on fictional amount of principal. There is absolutely no justification for the stand taken by the Government in the matter. The Pensioner community feels that the Government is behaving like a cruel and parsimonious money lender. At no point of time, the Finance Ministry has been able to advance any logical argument in support of their reluctance to reduce the period from 15 to 10 years. This apart, quite a number of pensioners will not be able to receive the benefit of restoration as they may not be able to live even up-to 75 years. We, therefore, request you to kindly direct the Finance Ministry to issue orders for the restoration to 10 years.

9. Provide increased rate of pension on attainment of 70 years of age.

Taking into account, the increased financial requirement of a pensioner, the earlier Pay Commission had recommended to raise the pension by 20% on attainment of age of 80. This recommendation was implemented. Many of the pensioners are compelled to spend huge sums of money on health related problems and other debilities once they attain the age of 70. The Pensioners Associations had represented before the 7th CPC to increase the pension by 20% on attaining the age of 70 and a periodic rise to reach 100% on attaining the age of 90. The CPC however, on obtaining the opinion from the Defence Ministry turned down this request, even though the Pension welfare department had suggested to increase the pension on attainment of the age of 75. On such a crucial issue, it was unfortunate that the Pay Commission instead of arriving at an independent decision relied upon the opinion of the Defence Ministry. We are not aware of the circumstances under which the Defence Ministry came to such an unhelpful conclusion. Over the years, as your goodself is aware, the Government had been reducing the rate of interest on fixed term deposits, which had adversely affected the Pensioner community as most of the Pensioners have chosen to invest their retirement benefits on these instruments. While the constant reduction of interest rate by the RBI and consequently by the Financial institutions may be in consonance of the sound macro economic policy matters, there is no way the pensioners could compensate for their reduction in monthly income. They face a piquant situation in as much as they face reduction of their income and an increase in their financial requirement simultaneously. At the advance age, there is no cushion for them to absorb the unanticipated expenditure. Having recognised the fact that the advanced age poses problems it would be in the fitness of things, that the pensioner is granted a small increase in their pension income. We, therefore, request that the suggestion put forth by the Pensioner Community to increase the pension as suggested above.

10. Withdraw the contributory pension scheme and restore the defined benefit pension to all
Central Govt. employees.

The main objective of introducing the new contributory pension scheme in 2004 was stated to be to arrest the financial outflow on account of the constant increase in the pension liability of the Government. The IMF had earlier advised the Government to do so as a measure to contain the fiscal deficit in the Union Budget. The employees organisations had been consistently opposing this move and had been presenting the obvious fact that the pension liability of the Government would not be abated by this move, rather it would only register an increase. The 6th CPC set up a Committee to go into the matter headed by Dr. Gayatri. The Committee’s conclusion was akin to what the employees organisations were all along making. The matter came up for the consideration of the 7th CPC again as by that time the new scheme had been in operation for more than a decade. The Commission received many complaints and suggestions from the stake holders. These had been enumerated in their report. Instead of making any recommendation, the Commission suggested to the Government to set up a Committee to go into these complaints and take remedial measures. Govt. set up such a committee under the Chairmanship of the then Secretary, Pension, who heard the presentations made by the Service organisations and the Pensioners Associations. One of the suggestions made before the committee was to guarantee a minimum pension or a minimum return for the investments being made by the employees during their service career. It is reported that the Committee has submitted its report to the Govt. But the same has not come to the public domain so far. The Pensioners are, rightly so, apprehensive of the continuation of the present defined benefit pension system, they enjoy. The employees, who are recruited after1.12004 are highly agitated as the new scheme guarantees no mimum annuity nor does the projection made by the PFRDA gives them any hope for a decent return for the contribution they make every month which is presently 10% of their Pay + DA. The facts now available with the Government over the financial outflow from the exchequer both in respect of the Pension liability of the employees who were recruited prior to 1.1.2004 and the contribution the Government is to make under the new contributory scheme must convince that the decision taken to introduce the new scheme in replacement of the erstwhile defined benefit scheme had been flawed. If that be so, the scheme requires to be scrapped lock stock and barrel as it has not benefitted the Govt, nor the subscribers, i.e. the employees. The discontent over this ill advised decision is growing day by day and the younger generation of workers and officers have become highly critical. We, therefore, request you to kindly cause a revisit with a view to bring back the defined benefit pension scheme for all Central Government employees.

K.K.N.KUTTY
Secretary General

Big Demonstration of Pensioners in Athens

07 Sunday Oct 2018

Posted by in Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Big Demonstration was held on October 4th by the Athens Pensioners’ Unions. The mobilization is part of the new round of action with which the pensioners’ struggle against the policy of the government that hits pensioners and pensions, against old and new pension cuts. Pensioners claim to abolish all reactive health and insurance policies as well as they demand increases in pensions.

INDIA PENSION SCANDAL – Article by Prabhat Patnaik

07 Sunday Oct 2018

Posted by in General

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Incredible as it may seem, the union government of India provides a pension to the elderly which amounts to an absurd sum of Rs 200 each per month, and even for accessing this the beneficiary must belong to the BPL population which, as is well-known, is notoriously underestimated. True, the state governments add something to this amount, but, their resources being meagre, the additions cannot be large. What is more, this figure of Rs 200 has remained unchanged since 2006-07; even the elementary courtesy of indexing it to inflation has not been accorded to the elderly.

This is truly a scandalous state of affairs, not just because the sum is laughably paltry, the beneficiary list absurdly truncated, and even elementary protection against inflation missing, but above all because of what it reveals about the government’s attitude. This attitude sees the payment of pension as a largesse on the part of the State, an act of charity towards a set of mendicants. But an adequate old-age pension is actually a right. It is a right not just in an abstract “ought”-sense, but in the concrete sense of being an integral part of the social philosophy which underlay India’s anti-colonial struggle and upon which the Indian constitution is founded.

This philosophy which the Left has always espoused holds that the plight of an individual in society is determined by the social arrangement within which he or she lives. For instance unlike the colonialists of the pre-independence era who attributed the misery of the Indian people to their “laziness”, or lack of enterprise, or subservience to tradition, the anti-colonial struggle advanced the proposition that it was the colonial arrangement that caused the abject poverty afflicting India, whence it followed that this arrangement had to be altered by overthrowing colonial rule and erecting an alternative social arrangement that would guarantee a minimum standard of life to every Indian. The Karachi Congress Resolution in 1931, which outlined what free India would look like, held out this promise, among others. The mass participation in the freedom struggle that occurred in the 1930s was fired by this promise, which thus became a sort of “freedom charter”, upon which the new nation was founded. It acted as a precursor to the constitution.

Even though the constitution did not explicitly codify a set of fundamental economic rights, as it codified a set of fundamental political rights, the former cannot just be wished away, both because they form part of the “freedom charter” underlying the new nation, and also because the latter cannot be enjoyed without the citizen also enjoying a set of de facto economic rights. The assertion of one’s role as a citizen in a democracy cannot occur unless one enjoys a degree of economic security. Hence even though economic rights are not codified as such in the constitution, they are implicit and as fundamental as the explicitly-codified fundamental rights.

Adequate pension to the elderly is one such economic right. It is inherent in the promise underlying the constitution of free India which is visualised as a fraternity of equal citizens. Within this fraternity of equal citizens, nobody is doing anyone else a favour by accepting a legitimate demand for a minimum livelihood.

If adequate pension is an economic right, then it must be universal, like the fundamental political rights enjoyed by all. The pension scheme cannot be either contributory or means-related. It cannot be targeted, not just because any targeting invariably leaves out many deserving beneficiaries, but, more importantly, because it violates the principle of universality that must characterise all rights of citizens. To be sure, in fixing the amount of pension, the fact that a person is already drawing a pension from some other source must be taken into account; and once deduction is made on that score some will automatically get excluded or drop out, but that does not amount to an infringement on a person’s right. Likewise the pension paid by the State to every elderly person as a right must have nothing to do with any contribution from the person concerned. If someone is part of some other contributory pension scheme, he or she may opt out of the State-funded pension, or the pension amount may be suitably adjusted to prevent double benefits; but State-funded pension must be a right for every person, and it must be financed by budgetary sources, unrelated to any contribution from the beneficiary.

The provision of a laughable pittance as pension, as is the current state of affairs, is therefore a violation of the spirit of the Indian constitution, a throwback to feudal times when rulers occasionally showed kindness to the ruled by bestowing favours upon them, of the sort that our governments think they are doing in providing a pittance for a pension.

The Pension Parishad, a network of several groups, organised a dharna in Delhi on September 30 and October 1 to demand an adequate universal rights-based pension. The principle enunciated by the Pension Parishad is that the amount should be half the minimum wage, but in concrete terms the demand was for a pension of Rs 3000 per person per month. The Pension Parishad has organised a similar dharna in 2012 when the demand had been for a universal pension of Rs 2000 per month. Taking into account the price-rise in the interim, the current demand of Rs 3000 is roughly equivalent to the demand of Rs 2000 at that time.

The appropriateness of this figure can be seen from a different angle. Since poverty in India is defined in terms of a daily calorie-intake norm, namely 2100 calories per person per day in urban India and 2200 calories in rural India, the monthly per capita expenditure at which the calorie intake just met these norms could be taken as the pension amount. NSS data from quinquennial consumer expenditure surveys were used to determine these cut-off levels, and, expressed at prevailing prices, they came, in round numbers, as a weighted average between urban and rural areas, to Rs 2000 per month in 2012, which would work-out to around Rs 3000 today.

The number of potential beneficiaries was estimated by the Parishad in 2012 to be around 8 crores, which by now might have increased to about 10 crores. The annual amount required for providing old-age pensions at Rs 3000 per month to these beneficiaries would therefore come to Rs 3.6 lakh crores; allowing for a 5 percent deduction on account of voluntary drop-outs, what is required is just about 2 percent of the country’s current GDP for financing a universal rights-based pension plan.

The question often raised against such a plan is that the country cannot afford this amount. But 2 percent of GDP, it should be noted, is less than a third of the annual increment that occurs in GDP at present. The provision of this amount of pension, if it is financed through taxes paid out of incomes, would not imply any decline in the average post-tax income of the non-pensioners compared to the preceding year. On the contrary it would still mean that compared to the preceding year their per capita post-tax income would increase by about 3 percent. The payment of pensions on this scale therefore does not require any absolute sacrifice by the non-pensioners compared to the preceding year, only a smaller increase in income than would have occurred otherwise. Nobody in short needs to be squeezed in absolute terms for paying out pensions that provide a minimum living standard to the elderly.

We have assumed above that pensions would be paid out of taxes on incomes; but this is unnecessary. A Tobin Tax on currency transactions, or an increase in the existing tax-rate on stock market transactions, or a straightforward wealth tax would be a far more appropriate way of raising resources for pensions, since it would simultaneously serve other purposes such as curbing speculation or reducing wealth inequality. In fact if we assume, somewhat conservatively, that private wealth amounts to four times the GDP, and that the top 1 percent of households in India owns 62 percent of the total private wealth, then a mere 0.8 percent tax on the wealth of just the top 1 percent of households would be quite enough to finance a universal rights-based old-age pension scheme providing minimum benefits. India’s pension scandal can thus be ended quite easily; why it persists is not any shortage of resources but sheer class-antagonism, since the overwhelming bulk of potential beneficiaries are, or would have been, workers, artisans, craftsmen, peasants, and agricultural labourers.

Reintroduction of Old Pension Scheme – Minister answers Lok Sabha Question

11 Saturday Aug 2018

Posted by in General, Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

The Central as well as state government employees’ organisations are demanding that the PFRDA should be annulled, NPS (New Pension Scheme) dropped and that the old defined benefit pension should be restored. They have called for a strike on 15th November, on demands including the above. The pension through NPS will be far less than the defined benefit pension and even is not fully assured. But the government is sticking for NPS. The reply in the Parliament shows the government’s defence of the indefensible. We fully support the demand of the central/state government employees for restoration of the old defined benefit pension scheme.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES

LOK SABHA
UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 4075

TO BE ANSWERED ON AUGUST 10, 2018/SHRAVANA 19, 1940 (SAKA)
REINTRODUCTION OF OLD PENSION SCHEME

Shri Rakesh Singh

Will the Minister of FINANCE be pleased to state:

the details of drawbacks of the New Pension Scheme (NPS) introduced for the Government officials; whether the NPS is not as beneficial monetarily as the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) and if so, the details thereof; whether the Government employees are disgruntled with the NPS and if so, the details thereof; and whether the Government proposes to reintroduce the OPS replacing the NPS, if so, the details thereof and the action taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER

The Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance
(Shri Shiv Pratap Shulda)

(a) & (b) National Pension System (NPS) has been designed giving utmost importance to the welfare of the subscribers. Government has made a conscious move to shift from the defined benefit pension scheme to defined contribution pension scheme i.e. NPS, due to rising and unsustainable pension bill. There are a number of benefits available to the employees under NPS. Some of the benefits are enlisted below:

§ NPS is a well designed pension system managed through an unbundled architecture involving intermediaries appointed by the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) viz. pension funds, custodian, central record keeping and accounting agency, National Pension System Trust, trustee bank, points of presence and Annuity service providers. It is prudently regulated by PFRDA which is a statutory regulatory body established to promote old age income security and to protect the interest of subscribers of NPS.

§ The pension wealth which accumulates over a period of time till retirement grows with a compounding effect. The all-in-costs of the institutional architecture of NPS are among the lowest in the world.

§ Contribution made to the NPS Tier-I account is eligible for tax deduction under the Income Tax Act, 1961. An additional tax rebate of Rs.50000 is also allowed for contributions made to NPS Tier-I under Section 80CCD (1B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

§ Subscribers can withdraw up to 25% of their own contributions before attaining age of superannuation, subject to certain conditions. Further, PFRDA vide “PFRDA (Exits and Withdrawals under the NPS) (First Amendment) Regulations, 2017” dated 10.08.2017 has liberalized norms for partial withdrawals which also include reduction of requirement of minimum years of being enrolled under NPS from 10 years to 3 years from the date of joining.

§ PFRDA has increased the maximum age limit from 60 years to 65 years for joining NPS-All Citizen Model and Corporate Sector Model, vide “PFRDA (Exits and Withdrawals under the NPS) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2017” dated 06.10.2017.

§ PFRDA vide “PFRDA (Exits and Withdrawals under the NPS) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2018” dated 02.2018 has facilitated easy exit & withdrawal in case of disability and incapacitation of the subscriber covered under NPS.

§ Transparency and Portability is ensured through online access of the pension account by the NPS subscribers, across all geographical locations and portability of employments.

(c) & (d) Representations have been received which inter alia also include the demand that the Government may revert to old defined benefit pension system. However, due to rising and unsustainable pension bill and competing claims on the fiscal, there is no proposal to replace the NPS with old pension scheme in respect of Central Government employees recruited on or after 01.01.2004.

Meeting with Secretary, DOT on Pension Revision of BSNL Pensioners.

27 Friday Oct 2017

Posted by in AIBDPA - BSNL DOT Pensioners, Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Coms.V.A.N.Namboodiri, Advisor, K.G.Jayaraj, General Secretary and R.A.Nair, Treasurer, AIBDPA had a fruitful meeting with Smt.Aruna Sundararajan, Secretary, DoT on.25-10-2017. The delegation handed over a detailed letter on Pension Revision of BSNL retirees with 15% fitment on IDA pattern. They also pointed out that since the pension is being fully paid by the government, the same need not wait for the wage revision of the workers. The Secretary agreed to do the needful in the matter.

The representatives also brought to her notice a very heart breaking case in Tamil Nadu Circle wherein the Principal CCA has returned the files of 687 Pensioners for 78.2% IDA pension revision with the directive to resubmit by deducting the extra increment already calculated for pension revision on 68.8%.The Secretary stated that she will examine the case.

The recently published book “P and T Trade Union Movement – A Saga of Struggle and Sacrifice” written by Com. V.A.N.Nambbodiri was presented to her which she appreciated much.

BSNLEU and AIBDPA – Crusaders of DOT/BSNL Pensioners

07 Thursday Sep 2017

Posted by in AIBDPA - BSNL DOT Pensioners, BSNL, BSNLEU, Pension

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

BSNLEU and AIBDPA – Crusaders of DOT/BSNL Pensioners
• Though the III PRC has put the affordability clause for the wage revision of employees, the case is different for the BSNL pensioners. It is not BSNL which pays the pension and the affordability clause cannot be applicable to government. 60:40 condition has been removed and the entire pension is to be paid by the government. In this situation, the 15% fitment as recommended by the III PRC for PSUs should be made applicable for the BSNL retirees and pension revision made accordingly. This demand has already been placed by AIBDPA. This has got full justification. It is also a continuation in IDA pension fixation as before. This is a better and more justified demand than the demand for 14.29% fixation recommended by VII CPC. Shifting from IDA pension to CDA pension has got its own ramifications and future complications.

A fully unjustified and baseless campaign is being made by some vested interests against BSNLEU and AIBDPA stating that these two major organizations of the BSNL employees and BSNL/DOT pensioners are not taking up the issue of pension revision of BSNL pensioners effectively.
We thank these friends for the acceptance that these are the two major organizations of the BSNL employees/ pensioners and also for the opportunity given to us for explaining the actions taken by these two unions on the issues of the pensioners.
First of all, let us understand that these organizations have their respective positions only because of the whole hearted support given by the employees and pensioners due to the excellent performance for settling their issues and taking the correct and progressive path.
Let us examine the issues with reference to our past experience for arriving at the correct line and approach.

1. The unions in DOT which merged together and formed BSNL Employees Union after formation of BSNL, had strongly opposed privatization of telecom services and had organised three-four strikes alone, and then jointly with the 3 Federations, against privatization. They never agreed for formation of a PSU for telecom services. Corporatisation was agreed to by the three recognized Federations, which made it easy for the government to corporatize telecom services six months earlier than scheduled. (The first proposal was to corporatize by the financial year w.e.f. 01-04-2001).

2. Though agreement for payment of pension was made by the Federations with DOT, there was no mention about periodic pension revision. This was utilized by the government which created a serious problem after the wage revisions in BSNL. When the deficiencies in the agreement was brought to the notice of the Member (Finance) at that time by the E.III(N) union, he had stated that the Federations made the agreement in a hurry and that even he had his own reservations.

3. In the meeting called by the Communications Minister after formation of BSNL, V.A.N.Namboodiri, General Secretary, E.III (N) Union, raised the issue of the pensioners. He pointed out the delay in the payment of pension and pensionary benefits and demanded that the pensioners should not be compelled to go round and round the office for getting their pensionary benefits. He demanded that on the last working day of the retiring official, he/she should be given a farewell function by the SSA head and all the pensionary benefits like GPF, Gratuity etc. should be handed over by cheque/cash and that the official should be given the Pension Payment Order and a certificate thanking for his services, a shawl, a suit case with documents and Rs. 1,000 as a token of appreciation. The Minister fully agreed and modified only the amount to Rs.1,001 as it is more graceful. All these are being implemented in BSNL. The token amount has been gradually increased after the matter was taken by BSNLEU.

4. The agreement with the 3 Federations on corporatization was that an amount of Rs. 1,000 / Rs. 1,500 will be paid to all officials in addition to the CDA pay scale. BSNL Employees Union demanded that since BSNL is a PSU, the IDA scale, which is higher than CDA scale, should be given, instead of CDA pay plus Rs. 1,500. This was accepted by all the unions and the wage revision on IDA scale was granted after hard bargaining. All the pay scales were upgraded with the lowest from Rs. 2,400 to Rs. 4,000. However, there was problem in fixing the pension as the DOT was not prepared to pay pension on IDA scale. The government stand was to pay pension on CDA scale only. After continuous pressure and agitation, the issue was settled after a Cabinet decision. This gave a good rise in the pension of the BSNL retirees from that of DOT retirees. Had we accepted O.P.Gupta formula, the pension should have been much less. The initiative was taken by BSNLEU and was accepted by all other unions.

5. As BSNLEU was the only recognized union, the second wage negotiation took place with it. Citing loss to the company, what the management offered was minimum increase of the pay scale, increments, maximum scale etc. Two strikes were organized by BSNLEU and its allies, to pressurise the management for granting better pay scale etc. However, a few unions, instead of supporting the struggle, pressurized the management to implement the pay scales etc, what was offered by the management on the plea that even that payscales may not be feasible if the company continues in loss. However, BSNLEU struck to its points and the management was compelled to sign an agreement, which gave 30% fitment and also a better pay scale than most of the other PSUs, w.e.f. 01-01-2007.

6. The issue of pension revision came up again after the second wage revision. BSNLEU and the Joint Forum/Forum of BSNL Unions/Associations had to take up the issue with the Minister and organized two strikes to get the cabinet nod and the pension revision. This was much appreciated by the unions and workers, even those who had criticized the prolonging wage negotiations. The difference between the pension of BSNL and DOT retirees increased. AIBDPA which was formed by that time, also organized its own agitational programmes for achieving the pension revision.

7. Next came the issue of 78.2% IDA Pay fixation ( 9.4% IDA pension fixation in addition to the 68.8% already achieved). BSNLEU and Forum demanded for 78.2% IDA fixation for employees and after continued struggles, it was achieved, but was not granted to BSNL retirees. Sustained agitation and two days strike on 21-22 April 2015 by the employees only clinched the issue. AIBDPA orgnised several agitations, including an historic Sanchar Bhawan March on 20-11-2014, and participated in all the programmes organized by the Forum, with full solidarity and support. After the meeting with the DOT Secretary by all the unions and Associations on 01-05-2015, the issue was clinched. There was some more delay due to the change of Secretary, DOT, but the matter went up to Cabinet and was settled. BSNLEU and AIBDPA were in the fore-front of all these struggles.

8. BSNLEU, Forum and AIBDPA fought against the unwarranted condition of 60:40 imposed by the DOT, which stipulated that if the pension is more than 60% of the payments made by BSNL to the DOT on dividend, licence fee, taxes etc., the rest of pension will have to be paid by BSNL. At the time of formation of BSNL, the situation was that BSNL was paying more than Rs. 12,000 crore to the DOT and the pension payment was about Rs. 1,000 crore only. Even then BSNLEU had raised the issue and in one meeting with the Secretary DOT, the latter agreed to cancel the same and issued a letter accordingly. But in the absence of cancellation/annulment of the original order it was very much in prevalence. By 2010, the pension payment has increased more than the total amount of payments by BSNL, due to the large number of retirement and the increased pension as also the lesser payments by BSNL. The issue became critical by the time of the demand for 78.2% IDA fixation. AIBDPA met Secretary, DOT and Communications Minister several times and the issue was got focused in the Parliament by Left M.Ps.

9. For payment of the 78.2% IDA pension fixation as well as payment of II Pension revision, many agitations were organized by AIBDPA including Sanchar Bhawan March participated by thousands of pensioners. Many dharnas and demonstrations were held. In addition, volunteers of AIBDPA helped the CCA in many places to ensure early payment.

10. The Medical Allowance for BSNL retirees was agreed to by the management after the issue was taken up by BSNLEU, the recognized union. However, this was stopped later by BSNL on the plea that the company is in loss. Due to the continuous pressure of AIBDPA, the management stated that the employees will oppose if it is restored only for pensioners. The Staff Side (BSNLEU and NFTE, the recognized unions) took up the case in National Council and stated that they have no objection in restoring the medical allowance for the pensioners first. Accordingly, it has been restored to the BSNL retirees from 01-04-2017 which is a great relief.

11. It was on the demand of BSNLEU that the funeral expense was increased to Rs. 15,000. AIBDPA has demanded that this funeral expense should be granted to the family of pensioners also when the pensioner passes away. The argument of AIBDPA that how BSNL can deny funeral allowance to the families of retirees, who have done yeoman service for more than 30 years, when even the family of a new recruit is granted, was appreciated by the management.

12. Now let us come to the latest issue, the pension revision of the BSNL pensioners w.e.f. 01-01-2017. Let us understand that BSNL employees have opted for IDA scale, fought for it, got it and the pensioners also got good benefit out of it. However, there is uncertainty in the minds of the pensioners, whether there will be any wage revision in BSNL and if not, what will be the pension revision for BSNL retirees? This certainly is a serious issue.
Let us look in to the matter thoroughly. The III Pay Revision Committee for PSU executives has given its report and the government has accepted the same. There are certain stipulations in it like no pay revision for loss making PSUs and also an affordability clause for wage revision. As per these conditions, it will be difficult for the BSNL employees to get wage revision from 01-01-2007, since the company is in loss for some years.
The Forum of Unions/Associations of which BSNLEU is a part and its General Secretary is the Convener, has demanded that wage revision for BSNL executives and employees should be granted without delay. While the report of III Pay Revision Committee is for executives, the wage revision for non-executives is according to settlement in wage negotiation with the recognized union/unions ie. BSNLEU and NFTE. Both have demanded early wage negotiation.
The pension revision for BSNL retirees was implemented both times earlier ( w.e.f. 01-01-2000 and 01-01-2007) after the wage revision of employees in IDA scales.

13. There is a feeling among some pensioners’ organizations that since the wage revision for BSNL employees may not be there, how we can get pension revision and why can’t we demand the pension revision on the basis of the VII Central Pay Commission? It means that IDA pension till this time has to be changed to CDA pension revision.

14. In that case, what will be the pension for the employees retiring now? If there is no wage revision, their salary will not increase, many of who are already in the stagnation level, especially those in the lower pay scales and their pension will be less. On what basis their pension revision will be fixed? These are questions which have to be sorted out.

15. The other aspect. If there is no wage revision now, it may be difficult for another wage revision later. This will adversely affect the pension revision of all those retiring after wards (DOT recruitees). Leave encashment, gratuity and all pensionary benefits, including pension will be lower. Accepting such a position will be dangerous and ignoring the future of all the DOT recruitees still in service. Such employees may be there up to 2035, may be less in number. Can we ignore their future and pension?

16. About 50,000 BSNL recruitees are there at present. They will start retiring probably by 2030 or earlier. There are regularized casual labours, about 4,000 or so, who may start retiring by 2020 or earlier. If there is no wage revision for them, what will be their condition? Will they be in the same payscale/promoted pay scale without any wage revision till they retire as is the case of the employees of the ITI, HMT etc. This is a proposition that a trade union worth its name cannot accept.

17. The pension of the direct recruitees are fixed on the basis of pension contribution by the management as per EPF rules. This comes less than Rs. 1,000 at present. That is why the trade unions had demanded earlier that at least Rs. 1,000 should be paid as EPF/NPS/EPS pension.(now the demand is for increased amount). The demand of BSNLEU and other unions/Association for 30% pensionary benefits is not yet accepted. From the present 18%, they have agreed to increase 4% which is completely insufficient. The newly recruited employees cannot be cheated of their justified pension. Either they should be paid defined statutory pension just like BSNL retirees or 30% pensionary benefits should be granted. Even in this case, unless there is a wage revision, their wages and pension will be much less.

18. In such a case, the logical demand that should be placed is the immediate wage revision for the BSNL employees and pension revision accordingly, which will benefit the present pensioners also, as was the case with the last two wage revisions. This may be difficult in the present circumstances, but not impossible. BSNL Unions have the tradition of making impossible in to possible and a history of fighting against the wrong policies of the government. For instance, despite government decision, it could not implement VRS/Retrenchment of one lakh workers, unbundling of cables, selling of shares, disinvestment to the extent of 10%-25% etc. The issues of II wage revision in 2007, 78.2% pay fixation as well as IDA pension fixation, Bonus even when BSNL is in loss, group insurance, supply of watch etc. etc. have been settled despite initial denial.

19. There is full justification for wage revision of BSNL employees. If the profit and loss of the company is taken for its 16 years of existence, it is almost equal. During the last two years, there is operational profit. The net loss has come down. The loss is only due to the huge depreciation. Services have improved despite lack of equipment, workers etc. The wage bill has not increased for the last 5 years, due to the retirement of large number of employees. The productivity is one of the highest in the PSUs. The workers are making maximum effort for improving the services and finances. The CMD BSNL had stated that the company will be in profit during the year 2017-18, (but may not happen due to demonetization and entry of Reliance Jio,), but any way will be profitable by next year. It is not because of the workers, but only due to the anti-PSU policy of the government that the company has become loss-making. Government is in a move to assist the private telecom companies by reducing their dues to the government in ADC, USOF etc.; why not such relief should be provided to BSNL and make it profitable. BSNL management has already approached the government to waive the affordability clause. The assurance of financial assistance at the time of formation of BSNL should be honoured. The excess land and building assets of the company can be leased/rented and income ensured. There are a lot of ways to assist the BSNL to make it better and profitable. These issues are already raised by BSNLEU and other unions/associations.

20. When the workers are in a bitter fight to get their wages improved, it is the duty of the pensioners to support and give all solidarity to them, which will benefit the pensioners also. It is only through the glorious struggles and strikes of the employees that many of the pensioners’ demands have been achieved. Even now, many of the pensioners demands are being taken by the unions/associations of the employees. The pensioners’ organizations can not accept defeat, even before serious struggle has taken place.

21. Though the III PRC has put the affordability clause for the wage revision of employees, the case is different for the BSNL pensioners. It is not BSNL which pays the pension and the affordability clause cannot be applicable to government. 60:40 condition has been removed and the entire pension is to be paid by the government. In this situation, the 15% fitment as recommended by the III PRC for PSUs should be made applicable for the BSNL retirees and pension revision made accordingly. This demand has already been placed by AIBDPA. This has got full justification. It is also a continuation in IDA pension fixation as before. This is a better and more justified demand than the demand for 14.29% fixation recommended by VII CPC. Shifting from IDA pension to CDA pension has got its own ramifications and future complications.

22. For pension revision, whatever the method be, it will require serious struggles not only of the pensioners, but also of the workers. Pensioners’ organizations cannot think only of their own demands, but also has to see the future of the new pensioners. That is why the demand for the wage revision of the employees also becomes a priority.

23. BSNL retirees are eligible for getting the benefits of the Pay Commission recommendations as per Pension Rules, other than pension, which is fixed according to the last pay drawn. The government has accepted the III option recommended by the V CPC, although they refused to implement Option I, recommended by the VII CPC. Implementing Option III, the comparison with the present pay of the employees in the same grade may come in to the picture. If the employee does not get wage revision, what will be the exact benefit that the new pensioner will get? It will be a permanent loss. The existing pensioners will also not get benefit under Option III, since the employees on retirement will not be getting higher wages, which is to be considered for Option III.

24. Pension and pensionary benefits have been won after continued struggles. The case of family pension is also there. The discrimination in pension between Class III and IV etc. could be removed only after sustained struggles. The pensioners were workers and the workers are future pensioners. There is a clear bond between them. Any move to create difference between them will be suicidal.

25. Finally, it can be seen that in all the struggles and actions on the demand of the pensioners, BSNLEU and AIBDPA have been in the fore-front. Individuals may come and go, but the organizations continue for the cause of the workers and pensioners. Any weakening of these ties will be utilized by the government to deny the rights of both. The entire strength of the workers and pensioners will be required to achieve the demand of the pensioners and retirees.
………………..

Pension Revision in BSNL – Illusions and Realities – Article by Com.K.G.Jayaraj, GS, AIBDPA

19 Monday Jun 2017

Posted by in AIBDPA - BSNL DOT Pensioners, Pension

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Dear Comrades,
I am herewith posting the full text of the Article published in the ‘Telepensioner’ June issue, written by Com.K.G.Jayaraj, General Secretary, AIBDPA. It is educative and gives the correct approach to the issue of Pension for BSNL employees.

Pension Revision in BSNL – Illusions and Realities.

K.G. Jayaraj, General Secretary, AIBDPA

When BSNL was formed as a fully government owned PSU under Company Act on 01.10.2000, the employees were offered pension from the consolidated fund of the government. And for this, rule 37 A was incorporated in CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The pay scales of BSNL employees were also upgraded from CDA to IDA scales. There was a strong argument during this time from certain union leadership, particularly Com. O.P. Gupta that pension should be paid on CDA scales. This argument was unitedly resisted and defeated under the leadership of Com. V.A.N. Namboodiri and the progressive section with the all round support of the other unions. If the argument of Com. O.P. Gupta was agreed to, there would have been huge loss in the pension of BSNL pensioners.

The issue of pension revision arose after the pay revision in BSNL and other CPSEs w.e.f. 01.01.2007. The DoT as well as the government refused to revise the pension for the pre-2007 BSNL pensioners on the plea that there is no provision for pension revision in the Rule 37 A. This was fought tooth and nail by not only the pensioners organisation but all the serving employees unions and succeeded in getting pension revision.

Then came the issue of pension revision on 78.2% IDA or benefit of the merger of 50% IDA with pay. The BSNL employees were granted this benefit notionally from 01.01.2007 with financial effect from 10.06.2013. But the government was not prepared to implement it to those retired before 10.06.2013. The main hurdle pointed out was 60:40 condition for payment of pensionary benefits. Still, with the serious intervention of the employees organisations, powered with two strikes, compelled the government to scrap the 60:40 condition and granted the 78.2% IDA fixation to BSNL pensioners.

During the course of this long and sustained struggle, some people advocated the idea of 7th Pay Commission fixation formula for the BSNL pensioners. What made these people to prefer such a demand was the continuous loss incurring of BSNL. It is more or less the same demand Com. Gupta had put ward and rejected by all. So now these people say that 7th Pay Commission fixation should be implemented on IDA scale. The justification for such a demand is that BSNL pensioners are covered under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Yes CCS (Pension) Rules ensures BSNL pensioners, all the pensionary benefits being granted to central government pensioners, but barring pension, and medical facilities (IDA pattern). As far as pension is concerned, BSNL retirees are governed by Rule 37 A, amended during formation of BSNL. Even if, the government agrees for fixation formula on 7th Pay Commission recommendation, it would become imperative to be downgraded to CDA scales as per existing rule.

It was just a couple of years ago that MTNL retirees were granted pension and other benefits at par with BSNL pensioners, but only after downgrading the pay scales to BSNL pay scales.

Let us come back to BSNL. These people had written off BSNL stating that even ‘God’ cannot revive BSNL and bring it to profits. And on an occasion CMD BSNL said that there will be no pay revision in BSNL w.e.f. 01.01.2017, these people became very jubilant and were in a celebrating mood. But the continued efforts of the employees, spearheaded by all the unions and the Management brought out a wonderful turn around posting operational profits of Rs.672 crore in 2014-15 and Rs.3,856 crore in 2015-16. This made the CMD BSNL to change his earlier stand and assured a decent pay revision in BSNL. The survival of BSNL as a government PSU is very much warranted to ensure telecom services to the people at affordable rates and save them from the sheer exploitation of the greedy private telecom companies.

After the 3rd PRC submitted it’s report, both BSNL Management and DoT had taken a positive stand on pay revision in BSNL, despite the affordability condition in the PRC report. However, it is reported that in the Secretaries meeting under the chairmanship of the Cabinet Secretary held on 12.05.2017, the Additional Secretary of Department of Telecom took a passive stand. All the unions and associations under the leadership of BSNLEU therefore has decided for a phased program of agitation, culminating in a strike on 27.07.2017, demanding pay revision and pension revision. Affordability conditions are nothing new. There had been such affordability condition in the 1st and 2nd PRC also. The 3rd PRC in its report itself has reproduced the operational portion put forward by the 1st and 2nd PRC.

Ist PRC – 2.4.8(a) Affordability.

CPSEs which did not make profit during the last three years would also be allowed to adopt the same recommended pay scales, but with the approval of the administrative ministries in consultation with DPE.

IInd PRC – 2.4.10(a) Affordability.

The parameter for deciding affordability was that by implementing the pay package, the dip in the profit of CPSEs for the year 2007-08 should not exceed 20% in respect of executives. If the dip is more than 20%, then the pay package would not be implemented in full, but in different part stages.

As for scoring, the CPSEs were categorised into five groups. A+, A, B, C and D. The 2nd PRC recommended 5 sets of pay scales for five categories. It also recommended different fitment method.

But after the struggle of the workers, the government was compelled to reject the categorisation and a uniform pay scales was prescribed.

Fitment was also made uniform with @ 30% of BP + DA. The 3rd PRC in it’s executive summary, para 5, has recommended that “Affordability condition shall not be applicable to such CPSEs which are formed to perform specific agenda of the government”.

The CMD BSNL in his DO letter dated 07.06.2017 to Secretary, DoT, with copy to Secretary, DPE has quoted the above recommendation and has effectively pleaded that it is very much applicable to BSNL. BSNL is committed to implement the Telecom Policy, 1999. BSNL is incurring loss for keeping up the social obligation of the government by giving landlines in rural areas. And it is no private telecom company but BSNL alone restoring the telecom services where national calamities strikes the country. Also it is the BSNL which is extending telecom services in the terrorist / naxal affected areas by installing sufficient number of towers. CMD also has specifically mentioned about the urgency of pension revision of 2 lakh BSNL pensioners along with the wage revision.

Pay Revision is very much possible, so also pension revision.

Therefore, there is nothing to be disappointed but to be confident that we shall achieve pay revision and pension revision through united and sustained struggle of the workers and whole heartily supported by the pensioners. There would not be much difficulty in the pension revision, once the pay revision is implemented, as there is no 60:40 condition. On the contrary 100% liability is with the Central Government.

Those who have no faith in organization and the struggles, through which only, we have achieved all the genuine demands of both workers and pensioners, may continue to spread rumours and half truths to confuse the pensioners. The legacy of Com. O.P. Gupta was “it is not the responsibility of unions to fight against government policies and that is the job of political parties.”

These people are least concerned about the continuance of BSNL as a government PSU to ensure telecom services at affordable rates to the common people. They are also not concerned about two lakh BSNL employees. And their mindset has narrowed down to ‘let the BSNL and it’s employees go to the hell but give us our pension revision at any cost’.

Let us focus on the programme of struggle already chalked out by all the unions and associations for pay revision and pension revision so that it is made a grand success.

And definitely victory will be ours.