Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

A simple way out of the pension mess

Cut-off dates have brought in complete mayhem in the system.

The law of proportions is not in place both on the civil and the military side. For example, there are cases wherein the differentia of a thousand rupees or so operative on 31-12-2005 has gone up to more than ten thousand a day later on 01-01-2006. There were other freak cases on the civil side wherein a person who was in receipt of Rs 12999 as pension on 31-12-2005 had been placed @ Rs 29379 the next day while a person who was getting a rupee more at Rs 13000 had been placed at Rs 40000. Hence a difference of one rupee on 31-12-2005 had translated into a gap of about eleven thousand a day later on 01-01-2006.

I think the simplest way out would be to base pensions of various grades (who retired before the date of implementation of a particular pay commission) on a percentage basis with reference to the highest grade in the govt. For example, if the highest grade in the govt (Chiefs of Services and the Cabinet Secretary) is placed at a pension of Rs 45,000, then the next below (Apex) can be placed @ 95% of the same, the HAG+ can be placed @ 90%, followed by slabs going down till 15% for an employee of the lowest grade.

This would not only bring standardisation but also kill the cut-off date chaos. This would also simplify the issue for all times to come with very minor adjustments. The govt has already donned the simplification glove by dispensing with the 33 years’ requirement for earning a full pension and abolishing the system of weightages by simply granting full pension on completion of 20 years, it is time to go a step further. The proposed percentage slabs can be decided by using the law of averages and empirically adapting data from all previous 5 Pay Commissions with a little tact here and there. Parity would be inbuilt in the system and relative disproportionate increase or decrease with reference to various grades and ranks would remain curtailed. The system can be implemented for all central govt employees with an added MSP fitment for defence personnel.

I would love to hear from our experts on the subject.

58 comments:

Harry said...

@ Maj Navdeep

Sir,

1. Its an EXCELLENT (and practical) idea and needs to be seriously considered. Way to go !!

2. Sorry for digging up old issue
but whats the latest on so-called High Level Committee to sort out Grade pay fiasco? Remember 8000 Grade Pay for Lt Cols was an 'INTERIM' measure till final decision on Grade Pay anomaly was taken? Has everybody forgotten it?
I know public memory is short but surely things concerning ones izzat should not be compromised. Do update us on that if there is any further development.

Thanks !

manav musings said...

Yes sir,
its an excellent suggestion.

But even if the govt thinks to consider it, the ultimate spoiler--- the implementors, i.e. bureaucrats will spoil everything beyond recognition.

I worry this only.

Anonymous said...

@Navdeep
The abolishing of weightage is wef 1.1.06. An officer who retired after 20yrs service on 31.12.05 gets a pension of 21028, while an officer who retired on 1.1.06 after 20yrs service gets 25700. Taking 27% DA into account, the difference in pension is around 6000. And all because of one day!

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anony 8.56

That problem would also be killed for all times to come by observing such a system. While pensions of post-CPC retirees could continue to be calculated at 50% of last drawn emoluments, the pensions of all pre-CPC retirees could be placed at percentage slabs which would then keep the difference between pre and post-CPC retirees at the barest minimum. It would be de facto OROP which would be acceptable to all sections of retirees with only an added MSP fitment for faujis.

Anonymous said...

Major MRP said....

Dear Major Navdeep,

Your suggestion is not only excellent but practical to solve problems of pensioners for all time and closing litigation and thereby saving millions to the GOI and amount saved can be utilised for welfare schemes and enrgies of pensioners can be utilised in positive manner than to waste their years in agony and harassment in Couts and appeals to the Govt.

Wishing you all the best and pray that such a noval idea can be implemented by benevolent Govt.

vipin said...

sir
i dont think 50% pension has been granted to those with less than 33 yrs of service and retired between 1.1.06 and 1.9.08.
is the matter under consideration.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Vipin

The matter has already been considered and accepted in principle by the Committee of Secretaries.

A B Mehta said...

Navdeep has given a very practical suggestion.
The bank staff are so confused, inspite of the govt orders as forwarded by PCDA, that they have paid some Lt Col (eq) 40% of old pension and recalculated on the basis of PB4 from 1/1/06! They have yet to pay full 60% to others.Since there would not be any PPO this is likely to drag on.
In the suggested method PCDA could just indicate rankwise pension before and after the due date for all for PDAs to pay. I presume that this will benefit both the civil and defence staff and thus may not be opposed. Person retiring one day after the date of implementation would in any case get 50% of the last pay drawn.
Gp apt A B Mehta

Prakasa Rao said...

A Very Good suggestion. Hope those who matter in decision making hear and implement it.

bala said...

Any rational,logical and just approach is welcome.
Presently ,existing cut of dates and fixation of pensions has only created so much of disparity and anomalies leading to increased litigation and dishormony in human resources of the NATION .
DRAFTING OF THESE POLICIES/RULES/LAW IS ABSOLUTELY POOR.
Even some school children can suggest better ways and methods.
It is sad reflection of governance.

Ajit said...

A good suggestion but I am not at all optimistic if anyone who matters is listening/interested

Anonymous said...

Quoting Maj Singh : "I would love to hear from our experts on the subject"

Well Major Singh, I don't think there is any better expert on the subject than you. You are just being humble.

Let me tell you, in my 40 years of dealing with the subject both from the Central Govt. side and pensioners' associations side, I am yet to come across a better proposal.

Such implementation would not only meet the requirements of justice but also eliminate litigation and heart-burn. With your permission, I plan to send it to the Finance Ministry and the PM. The people in our Secretariats do not usually want simple systems in place since it threatens their discretionary powers and their power of being a thorn in a bed of roses. That is our undoing because simple procedures means lesser reliance on the govt. and lesser reliance means lesser power to the hordes of desk officers, section officers and under secretaries who put up proposals to the top brass (yes i agree with your previous article on this) who do not have time to apply full mind to such proposals.

Embracing the proposal proposed by you would end all our woes. Let us carry this forward my friend.

Nathan

Anonymous said...

navdeep sir, the best solution till date from any quarter. Hope to see it through during my service career. If not this time, we should push for this in the next Pay Commission. I would request you to present a formal paper on this if you have the time to do it. thanks once again.

Ramani said...

This cut off date business affects all in every way. a guy born on 31 dec and a guy born on 1 jan. gets different treatment in the mater of employment, college/school admissions and so on.
so where do we draw a line.
As far as Navdeep's suggestion goes, it is the most practicable and sensible one that I have come across so far.
However I think the Mandarins in the def(ia)ence ministry will not see it that way.

Anonymous said...

Sir,

1) A very good practical suggestion,

2) Infact the ideal concept should be ONE GP ONE PENSION (OGOP )which will put to rest, cut off dates, and all other issues.

hope the govt implements the same post haste

Thanks

Prakasa Rao said...

A VERY USEFUL AND GOOD SUGGESTION.HOPE THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION HEAR AND ACT!

Col NR Kurup (Retd) said...

There are many such atrocities. For example an officer who has been drawing the highest of his scale of pay continuously for many years and half that pay as pension after 33 years of service is put at the minimum of the scale of pay after every pay commission. Imagine the plight of someone like me who has undergone 3 such pay rivisions after retirement. If not a fixation at the same highest of the slab at least we deserve at least a point to point fixation aqnd not fixation at the lowest.

GaviniVN said...

Sir,

I had been expecting such a MARVELLOUS solution to the pension woes from your side, and now elated since U did it. In one of my earlier views expressed in this blog, I had mentioned your name (yourself) to be a part of the ARMED FORCES PAY COMMISSION, (IN 2016?) THE GOVT RECENTLY AGREED AND LIKELY TO BE CONSTITUTED WHEN NEEDED, as Member to represent the Pension/legal issues of the Pensioners. I pray and wish this to COME TRUE BY THE GRACE OF GOD.

Sir, Just Imagine, if such Govt's orders issued, -THE SAVINGS - the MANHOURS of an Army of Govt employees engaged in this work, Let go of the Drafting/finalising policies, reports, orders, recommendations, corrigemdums, clarifications, Saving of postage/courrier charges, Save charges on Telephone Conversations/clarifications, .
Save Tonnes of paper, Energy/money and Spare the administration to do other important work. The Savings on this count could run into tens of thousands of Crores of Rupees, which the Govt can easily foot the Pension Bills to a considerable levels.

This kind of SIMPLIFICATION OF PROCEDURE is a real PANACEA to the GOVT OF INDIA. If ONE such idea/suggestion from EACH MINISTRY/DEPARTMENT OF GOVT OF INDIA comes out and applied, then the Savings ploughed back into the govt spending can MAKE OUR NATION A NUMERUNO IN A FLAT 100 YEARS.

THANKS AGAIN, SIR AND GOD BLESS U.

Anonymous said...

@ Harry

Para 2
Was it, really?

The one man who could have helped to remind the babus is in the kiwiland.

Only hope is the 18 yrs' rumour. Anything on this?

Anonymous said...

Sir

May I know the present status of recommendations on delinking the requirement of 33 years of service for full pension.

pramod said...

ramani @8.13PM

>>>> def(ia)ence ministry....

awesome ;)

Jassi said...

Dear Navdeep,
It is an excellent and innovative idea which can only grow in a brilliant mind.If implemented it save us preparation of so many tables which create more problems than the number of their columns rows giving sleepless nights to those who w/o any say in the system.My only worry is whether it will be acceptable to the medicrity that rules the system.

Anonymous said...

From a civilian pensioner point of view, I too think it is a brilliant idea.

We need to place all pre VI CPC retired pensioners into one grade of pension based on a percentage system. The same percentage can then be a determinant of pension of previous retirees after every new pay commission. The pension can still be kept subject to minimum of 50% of the newly implemented scales and everyone with 20 + years of service can be given the same fixed pension on a percentage formula. Our defence brethren can be given an additional step-up based on Military Service Pay, that is, Rs. 3000 per month for commissioned officers and Rs. 1000 per month for Group B and Group C officers (J.C.Os and Jawans). The figures of MSP should ideally be upwardly revised too.

This would kill the need for any fitment / pension tables and also kill the need of hankering by various organizations at present and for the future. All defence and civil pensioner organizations including defence, railways, postal, IESM, IESL etc etc should work on this very apt line provided by Maj. Navdeep Singh. The govt. should take notice, this would save the govt. from heartburn amongst pensioners and also complications in pensions and also save money by reducing litigation. Moreover all employees recruited after 2004 are already on contributory new pension scheme.

ONE GRADE ONE PENSION based on % basis is the idea which can be implemented if the govt. takes notice – till date the best idea from any side. Well rounded, equitable and implementable. Thank you for providing food for thought. Sujan

SATTY'S CORNER said...

A very good solution to the ailing probs.On the civil side the grades are well defined and implementation would be easier.For the AF, we have to sort out the GP based on length of service with min datum line.eg Majs are worst sufferers having put in more than 26 yrs service because of AV singh report and fitment post 6 CPC.Once this is resolved percentage based pensions should be the order of the day.Will cut down lot of anomalies.Good going

BC said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
The idea of granting pension on % basis is an excellent proposal. Let me tell you the idea has been well taken by the environment. Can this issue be taken up in some official forum, at some appropriate level. Maj Navdeep please guide us in this aspect.
Really, the credit goes to you for this.
Regards.

Anonymous said...

EVEN A FIFTH CLASS DROP OUT CAN GIVE ALL THESE IDEAS. BE REALISTIC A PERSON RETIRING DECADE BACK SHOULD NOT TAKE THE SAME PENSION, AS THE REQUIREMENT DEFERS AS YOU AGE.

DONT PUBLISH THIS ALSO LIKE MY OTHER COMMENTS, BE HAPPY LIKE A CHILD. MATURED CITIZEN VALUE VIEWS! REMEMBER IF U WANT TO RISE, OTHERWISE CHANDIGARH IS THE BEST CITY.

TRULY YOURS, ATLEAST YOU HAVE COURAGE TO SPEAK AND ENTERTAIN A FEW VIEWS.

GOD BLESS YOU. AN ADVISE... TAKE UP ISSUES WHICH ARE MAKING US TO LAG BEHIND OUR CIVILIAN COUNTERPARTS.... IT WILL TSKE US OUT OF WELL AND BE REALISTIC.

GOD BLESS U AND I HOPE ... U WOULD BE ABLE TO DO BETTER IN FUTURE.

NOT ALWAYS YOURS

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anony @ 10.39

Though I would not like to dignify your comments, but let me state that it is people like you who portray us like a laughing bag to the 'outside' world. Do you think people like you deserve not to lag behind our 'counterparts' ? Truly sad. And now I fully understand why our elders say that the quality of intake in the forces has gone down.

Hony Lt S N Dubey said...

Why such differences in the pay of Honorary Officers.
By- Hony Lt S N Dubey
When I see a quotation of Commanding officer when Subedar Major of Bn awarded Hony Lt rank ,” It is easy to become a General for a gentleman cadet but too tough to become an Hony officer.” Vth CPC fixed Rs 10500/-pm and Rs 10800/- the pay of Hony Lt and Hony Capt and pension was Rs 5250/- and Rs 5400/- while pay of Lt was 8250/-.It shows the difference in pay was Rs 2250/-pm. It was a respect to that Rank. There was no comparison of pay with ranks.
In 6thCPC the pay of any rank is not fixed why ? When we multiply 10500*1.86 the sum comes Rs 19530 and 10800*1.86=20090.00( for fitment of the pay).But it is not so.I want to show a calculation of the pay of a Sub of X and Y group awarded Hony Lt:-
(a) A subedar of X group whose service was 28 yrs, pay as on 14 Aug 2009 was Rs 15710+4600(GP)+1400+2000=23710.00
Pay of Hony Lt on 15 Aug 2009 was- 21710.00*1.03=22370.00, Basic pay-Rs 16370+5400(GP)+6000(MSP)= 27770.00
(b) A Sub of Y group having service of 28 Yrs , pay as on 14 Aug 2009 was Rs 14320+4600+2000=20920.00

Pay of Hony Lt on 15 Aug 2009 becomes - 18920*1.03=19490.00, Basic pay Rs14890.00+5400+6000= 26290.00
Difference in the pay of same rank is –Rs 1480.00 pm
Next example of Subedar Major of X and Y group with service of 34 years awarded Hony Lt on 15 Aug 2009-
© Pay of SM of X Gp- 17650+4800+1400+2000=25850.00
Pay of Hony Lt on 15 Aug 2009- 23850*1.03=26630.00, Basic pay becomes Rs 20430+5400+6000=31830.00
(d) Pay of SM of Y group on 14 Aug 2009- 16850+4800+2000=23650.00
Pay of Hony Lt on 15Aug 2009- 21650+1.03=22300.00 Basic pay becomes Rs 17500.00+5400+6000.00=28900.00
Difference in the pay of same rank is- Rs 2900.00 pm
And difference of Pay of Hony Lt( from Sub and Subedar Maj) is too much . Why?

Why the same rank is honoured with such differences? Who will think? Was Post Pay Commissions wrong who fixed same pay of Hony ranks for all ie; Subedar and Subedar Maj? Is 6th cpc right who gave a clear differences in the pay of same ranks? We are not talking about post 2006 but for today which is going on the ground.
It is requested to put up the point before our leaders and ask clearifications why it is so? Surya bhagwan hamesa sabko ek aankh se dekhate hain. hamari supreme cdr kyon nahi?

shyam said...

Dear Maj Navdeep

Excellent idea.. pls continue to push it and we wish you the best

Rgds
Shyam

Anonymous said...

% based pension is a very good idea and is implementable but comments by annonymous at 10.39PM seems to be of an babu who sees this as a threat to his powerful domain of red tapism.

Anonymous said...

This may be a great idea for the civil services but will be another kick in the butt for the Armed forces. Just look at it - 14 years a civil services chap makes it to a JS while it takes nearly double that time to make it to the grade equivalent i.e. Maj Gen. Now with NFFU all civil servants will make it to the JS level within 2 years of the IAS chap making it.
What about the poor fauji? The bulk of them would not even have crossed Lt Col Level - which going by the guts & intellect of our services will eventualy be equated with a Dy Secy even though he is senior to the Dy Secy. Another bone of contention for the VIIth PC.
Firstly the civil services never have been affected nor have they asked for OROP. So why INCITE them when they have not been affected and were not bothered. Very much like the subvertion tactics of involving the CPOs & PMFs in the SCPC tirade against the Armed forces. Even the MNS were not spared despite the fact that the Babus keep the civil Nurses heirarchy at an arms length.
The average pensionable grade level of the civil service is unattainable by the majority of the Armed forces.
Even this 95% and 90% doesn't gel. Take a JS of 14 years service who will carve out a slab of say 57000-67000 for himself and equate that with a Lt Col of 14 years who will be in the slab of 37400 - 47000. ILLOGICAL!
The Service man will still retire on a much lesser pension. Why can't we understand such simple basics?
Last time we had the Cabinet Secys Committee which was formed to rectify the anomalies for the rmed forces but all it did was recommend better pay for the civil services. They need to be taken to court for dereliction and incompetance based on the report of the CoS. Either these Babus feel they own the country or their arrogance is a result of their incompetant service upbringing.
I totally disagree with such a proposition. It is on the same lines as the CoS which did nothing for the Armed forces but walked away with the goodies.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anony at 1.41 PM

Why be so bitter?. That is the reason this blog-post is here, to hear varied responses and to identify the loopholes. Instead of just trashing it, it would have been better if you had simply stated that there should be some kind of a non-functional financial upgradation on the civil service lines for the defence services so that we do not lose out on pension as is the case with pay. Apart from that, your contentions are also technically incorrect. Civil service officers do not make it to JS to GoI in 14 years as you may have seen from an old post on this blog, the current going rate is 20 - 22 years for the IAS. The upgradation to SAG in 14 years was reversed. Moreover, please do not forget that apart from the Indian Administrative, Police and Foreign Services, there are scores of others who do not make it further than the DS GoI/Dir GoI level. Even NFFU is only applicable till PB-4 and not beyond that. Also NFFU is most beneficial to Gp A officers with 15-16 years of service since they are upgraded to PB-4 in that bracket with the assistance of NFFU.

Anonymous said...

Ref Maj Navdeep Singh's reply to Anonymous @ 1.41 pm. Firstly Anonymous shouldn't be cynical about an excellent proposal posted by the host. Let's all discuss it and bring it into the official domain, with a reasonable and logical approach, so that the argument can be won. Maj Navdeep Singh may however note that the bureaucracy of the Services is more cynical than the Civil Services, in mooting a proposal that can result in the larger good. Remember what has happened to the Non functional financial upgradation, by way of DACP, for our Doctors?

rajeshdua said...

Dear Navdeep,

I feel this is an excellent idea and we need to pursue it vigorously. Yes, there may be some anomalies; which are there in any case even in the present system. However, this will be a more equity based system, the anomalies get resolved.

Col Rajesh Dua

Anonymous said...

This idea of Navdeep will not address at least the problems of armed forces.

Most of us (around 80%) would either retire as Col Sel or at Col TS with a grade pay of 8700, on the other hand most of our Jawans (around 85 %) would retire in pb1.

Our civilian counter parts on the other hand almost all of them at officer level would make it to a gp of 10000 and the so called staff would never retire less than in pb3 except for class IV employees.

Point to ponder!

Navdeep kindly comment.

Anonymous said...

Your gen on Col @ 18 is still awaited. Any chance of it coming on Vijay Divas?

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anony at 10.33

The lag of the military officers vis-a-vis their civilian counterparts especially from the IAS and IPS needs to be separately addressed for sure, and perhaps for pensionary purposes a scheme such as the NFFU should take care of things. Most of other civil servants retire with a GP of 8700 (same as us) or 10000.

There are no Class-IV employees on the civil side now and the career progression of Group-C employees vis-a-vis our Jawans is not very different. In fact their career progression varies steeply from organisation to organisation. It would be incorrect to suggest that the entire civilian staff retires in PB-3. With ACP in place (though a reduction in time frame is desirable), Jawans are at a comfortable situation except for the truncated career.

What I have provided is merely a broad idea and delicate modalities and pitfalls need to be visualised and catered for. No system can be foolproof but atleast such a proposal can eliminate the problems caused due to cut-off dates of implementation. Let us analyse the status and pay progression issues separately for they surely need to be taken care of, but this proposal needs to be, at this point of time, seen at the backdrop of the current system in vogue which has resulted in a Major drawing a pension in 14000s, a Lt Col 25700, Col 26050, Brig 26150 and Maj Gen 26700. The ratio and proportion of the difference in their pensions till the 6th CPC has gone to the winds. It is for this reason, a check based on percentage may be required.

VNatarajan said...

Dear Major Navdeep/ others interested,
All confusions are created only because of the ad-hocism, autocratic decisions, ambiguously worded stipulations, misapplications etc.

There are only two aspects- on which APEX COURT HAS GIVEN CLEAR CUT JUDGMENTS REPEATEDLY.

FOR THE HOMOGENOUS CLASS OF ALL PENSIONERS (e.g. say those belonging to old pension scheme)

1.CUT OFF DATES/ DATUMS OF PENSION REVISIONS CAN NOT DIVIDE THEM.
2.PARITY HAS TO EXIST AMONG EQUALS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DATES OF REVISIONS.

Always Pension is defined in terms of PAY/EMOLUMENTS in terms of applicable PAY/ PENSION Rules and their revisions- and not in terms of bands, ribbons, hair clips as being done now by those who do not understand simple words/ expressions of English. Why do they attempt framing rules and draft OMs etc?

A SIMPLE FORMULA OF 50 PER CENT OF LAST PAY DRAWN IS A LOGICAL AND BEST TIME-TESTED SOLUTION AND WHY ONE CAN NOT SEE THE RATIONALITY OF HAVING SUCH A UNIFORM RULE FOR ALL?

IT IS A BOGUS ARGUMENT THAT FOR OLD PENSIONERS - DETAILS OF LAST PAY DRAWN ETC WILL NOT BE AVAILBLE. SILLY EXCUSES!PPOS will be available at some source in most cases. IN THIS AGE OF COMPUTERISATION, NOTIONAL FIXATIONS CAN BE ARRIVED AT FOR ALL OLD PENSIONERS EASILY & QUICKLY.

Atrocious upward revisions have been made for upper echelons with a prescription of MINIMUM OF PAY IN THE PAY SCALE FOR THEM- where the scale starts at 80000 or close to it (say at 75000!!!) and end at 79000! For others it proceeds downward of the revised scales to the MINIMUM OF THE PAY BAND!

LET US NOT HAVE TOO MANY FORMULAE.

LET US HAVE ONLY ONE 50% OF THE PAY FORMULA OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR PENSION BASED ON LAST PAY DRAWN (BASED ON ACTUAL OR NOTIONAL) WITH NO EFFECT OF CUT OFF DATES!

vnatarajan.

IT WILL

Anonymous said...

Can anyone quote the Govt order on
dispensing with 33 years requirement
and earning full pension after 20 years ?

VNatarajan said...

Dear Anonymous

Pl consult OM F NO 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dt 2nd Sept 2008 issued by DOPPW/Min of PPGP reg revision of pension rules for post 2006 civil retirees. Similar orders were perhaps issued for Defence personnel also.

Under sub-heading PENSION, under para 5.2, it reads "LINKAGE OF FULL PENSION WITH 33 YEARS OF QUALIFYING SERVICE SHALL BE DISPENSED WITH.ONCE A GOVERNMENT SERVANT HAS RENDERED THE MINIMUM QUALIFYING AERVICE OF TWENTY YEARS, PENSION SHALL BE PAID AT 50% OF THE EMOLUMENT OR AVERAGE EMOLUMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE LAST 10 MONTHS WHICHEVER IS MORE BENEFICIAL TO HIM"

The crux of the problem is the exact implementation orders are yet to follow due to some critical factors like applications retrospectively wrt dt of 2nd Sept 2008. The reco of Com of OROP route was taken to resolve some aspects.VRS Retirees of civil brand get priority! I think still final orders are perhaps to come precisely!

Hope it helps.

vnatarajan

Anonymous said...

i agree with mr natrajan that revision in pension should be based on 50% of last pay drawn. revision of pension after every pay commission should be suitably increased using a multiplication factor commensuarate with increase in pay given to serving employees.

Anonymous said...

dear sir,

the best solution as an outcome of this latest suggestion by major, would be One GP One Pay OGOP (P for Pay), which consequently leads to OGOP (P for Pension) ie One GP One Pension.

One GP one Pay, doing away with increments would be the best answer for serving personnel and One GP one Pension for all retired Personnel

This would rationalise both the Serving as well as the Retired Personnel,in their pay as well as pension.

with regards

bala said...

A GOOD and viable proposal and merits support .
Must pursue with full support and force/strength.
Negetive and pesimistic thinking ,such as Govt is not going to accept ; should be set aside and overlooked .Afterall,the so called Govt is not foreign but of people.
Yes ,the contention by V NATRAJ does bring out simple truths without confusing with all sorts of imaginary variables and factors.
WHY NOT SIMPLY FOLLOW THE LAID DOWN RULE AND PRINCIPLE OF NOTIONAL PAY AND PENSION AT 50% OF THAT NOTIONAL PAY FOR 20 YRS SVC AND ABOVE WITHOUT CUT OFF DATES...etc.
ULTIMATELY, the best should emerge for implementation in this system of Govt of ,by , for the people .It is not going to be given in hand unless people derive the same by diverse approaches and methods.
Thanks to Maj NAVDEEP and BEST WISHES to veterans.

Anonymous said...

VNatrajn : Sir, the 50% formula was only reliable till there were separate pay scales for each grade. Now since we have a running pay band, the 50% formula is going to lead us into nothing but confusion and litigation. Now the 50% of NFSG, DIG, SAG is the same since the pay band is the same and as a result they are getting almost the same pensions. Even the pensions of JTS, STS and JAG are almost not too apart.

If the 50% time tested formula is to be kept in place then we require separate scales for all grades. However while 50% seems to be good for pensioners, running pay bands are good for serving employees. SO there is a need for balance, and that balance is that running pay be maintained for serving employees while percentage system be implemented for pensioners as put out by the author of this blog. It is much simpler than having thousands of fitment tables. I have dealt with the subject in detail while posted in lok nayak bhawan and this proposal must I say is totally practical and implementable.

VNatarajan said...

Dear Anonymous/Maj Navdeep,

I have nothing to say against Maj Navdeep's idea. His idea of rationalisation is perhaps based on an uniformly reducing % slab factor wrt a constant pension amount to start with. But as you know the administrators are not prone to revolutionary changes.I have drawn attention to the basic time-tested Rule.

Running Pay Bands are easier to operate.Slight misunderstanding is there in Anonymous's first para.

After retirement all Pensioners do form only one class- a Homogenous class of a particular Scheme they belong to- governed by one set of Rules only. Past two pay commissions have destroyed the sanctity of this main structure and its edifice, by bringing in factors like Modified Parity- application of concept of Pay Band instead of Pay Scales etc.

I have mentioned that the pension is wrt last pay drawn and there can not be any ambiguity when the would be retiree's last pay is in the running pay band and fifty percent of it will be the pension.Pensioners with longer service, irrespective of their heirarchial status, will get their eligible pension without discrimination and thus length of service is rewarded! Only factor to be ensured is: Pay Band can do justice to all past and would be pensioners only if the same/UNIFORM Rules are applied for e.g. to both pre & post 2006 pensioners. Not like the present imposition of "MINIMUM OF THE PAY BAND" for pre 2006 pensioners and "MINIMUM oF 'THE PAY' IN THE PAY BAND " for the post 2006 retirees. (eg COs of Military/ segments of Civilians; PBORs are exempt as their pensions are determined wrt max of the respective pay scales- now they have to be determined wrt notional MAXIMUMs in the respective pay bands wrt pre-revised scales!!!! what a complication???? huge waste of time/ delay/ frustration/ complexity due to comparisons etc etc). Sorry for the lengthy write-up!My personal views are not sacro-sanct.

Anonymous said...

On Anony November 13, 2009 1:41 PM

Maybe the cynicism is based on the fact that Services have been repeatedly decieved by the Bureaucracy and Brass that does not stand and fails to comprehend financial workings.

VNatarajan said...

Dear Anonymous
You are absolutely correct. A few top BRASS must get into the business and take all the issues by the horn. The monopoly exhibited for revising the few elite scales smacks of a highly deplorable attitude. Vast segments of COs will suffer substantial losses in revised pensions compounded by the prorata DR losses every six months, ultimately resulting in an eroded base when next revision comes for them- because of what I mentioned in my earlier post. A section victorious in legal tussle after more than half a decade is kept in suspense again and again! It is a sorry state of affairs so far as poension revisions are concerned whether it is Military or Civilians except the class you meant and I confirm!

Lt Col A S Nijher said...

root cause of the problem is fixing pension at the minimum of the new scale and in this formula a retiree looses the service benefit in terms of length of service may b he was at the top of last pay band with stagnation increaments
why can,t he b given benefit of service by upping the minimum pension according to service length

VNatarajan said...

Dear Col,
Exactly you got the point. Retiree at the top of the pre-revised scale/ even the one with Stag Increments in the pre 2006 era is brought down effectively to the bottom of the pre-revised scale- in some cases to the bottom of the lower most pre-revised scale in the Pay Band and thus the said pensioner's pension is REDUCED against all norms & rules!

Without suffering Court Martial or Disciplinary Proceedings- that too after retirement!

Bunching of increments within a scale followed by the Merging of scales into a Pay Band is the DOUBLE-EVIL perpetrated by the PAY COMMISSION EXECUTORS of the Sixth CPC and all the oldies are the innocent victims!

Anonymous said...

VNatrajan sir,

I respect ur argument at the same time I would like to bring that the pension drawn by a IV OR V pay COMMISSWION retiree has taken a quantum jump with out their own imagination. It is unfortunate the some of us are still on comparision drive with youngers.

Sir, the reqirement for the younger generation is totally different than veterans both in terms of need and exposure.

We should not mathematically try to win, as in our social supportive structure it does not stand. WE ARE NOT AMARICANS.

I hope u understood.

With best regards.

VNatarajan said...

Dear Anonymous
Why our pensions got a quantum jump as you say? It is because those in service got more than double quantum jump in revised salary!. WE ARE ONLY DRAWING A FACTOR OF THEIRS as our pensions. But then why discriminate among the pensioners even in that ratio and divide them? Benefits of revisions are to be justly/evenly ensured for all!
My arguments are purely on the point that same class of pensioers being treated equally and honourably at all times, so long as they live.Justice is same for all!. Not younger or older- not Non-Indian or Indian ( I think even foreign prisoners in our jails draw better pension from our resources???? am I correct)!Our Constitution has guaranteed all citizens (including pensioners!) equality and our Supreme Court/ Other Courts have upheld repeatedly the said principles to be applied for pensioners. Whether a pensioner needs more or less, it is a separate issue. MAY BE I MAY NOT NEED THAT MUCH PENSION PERSONALLY- BUT THE PENSIONER-MEMBERS IN MY ASSOCIATION- FAMILY PENSIONERS WHO APPROACH ME FOR redressal of DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT-have to be voiced!Pl do not mistake my arguments on principles of equality/ justice for all pensioners of all colours at all times!.Regards

VNatarajan said...

Dear Anonymous,

This is updated info wrt your
enquiry on 14 Nov 2009 reg any OM on dispensing the linkage of 33 yr service for pension benefits etc.

There is an OM dt 11.12.2008 issued by DOPW/MIn of PPGP for post 2nd sept 2008 applications. For defence personnel, pl check separately.

You may like to consult the same.

Regards
vnatarajan

Lt Col A S Nijher said...

Dear Mr Anonymus
It is not that pensioners got quantum jump for nothing and r still demanding.Why pay scales r revised every 10 yrs is due to loss of rupee value ,imagine gold at 3000/0 in year 2000 and today at 17000/0
Every body needs money retired or serving /young or old to cope up. Talking of America,there is no inflation/DA yes recesion has come but after a long period and is in every country but it is being looked after by state who pays to those laid off because of recesion , out of social security funds by govt,So demanding a better pay or pension is some thing natural to keep up living comfortably, Look where the prices have gone today ( sky high )There is nothing like pay commissions every 10 years in America,Canada and Australia since labour ministry controls wages of all class of workers who r paid honestly So i don,t think ir is relevent to refer to other countries while discussing our own emoluments

VNatarajan said...

Col NIjher's arguments are very apt.

Pension is nothing but monthly redemption of the Pensioners' Own Corpus withheld by the Govt. built up from the undisbursed Govt's part of the matching PF ( the GPF mode)contribution, which is again related to an uniform stipulated percentage of contribution from the respective pay. (Not out of tax-payer's money as the Employees are paid. Pension therefore CAN NOT BE RELATED TO FINANCIAL BURDEN OR FINANCIAL IMPLICATION. Govt. has to make provision compulsorily for pension payment first in every Budget. If they do not do so it is a grave OMISSION.). That is why every pensioner has to be treated equally for every increase. Similarly every Rule has to be applied uniformly- irrespective of any cut off date. Many pensioners/public believe it is tax payers' money/ the Govt is over-burdened with pension payment liability etc - wh is all a cock and bull story !. Fair and Just Rules made by Govt. in consultation with Military & Civil Pensioners will be the best solution for pension revsiions.

Anonymous said...

Every time some kind of revision of emoluments/DA is anounced it is also brought out at the same time that this increase will mean an extra burden of so many crores to exchequer or tax payers money but where from is this exchequer getting the money ?so is a negative comment
V all including pensioners pay taxes not only centrally but also locally like sales tax VAT/ service tax (which is extra to the labour charged )and others as laid by respective states like enry tax(meaningless), at barriers on roads after every 50--60 Kms ,work with any department means money(fee)
So what I mean it is the same money collected through various means (honest or otherwise which is partly given back(or recycled ) as pay/ pension and exchaquer is a central controlling agency for its effective distribution and utelisation
Hence pensions r not a burden on any body and it is Desh ka paisa recycled for good purpose to which pensioners also contribute

danny said...

dear sir

how will MSP, NPA AND Classification allowances which are reckoned for military pensions be factored in. Categories like PBOR who draw pension on TOP of scale will also need some additional compensation.

regards

VNatarajan said...

Dear Mr Danny

No problems. Basic formula (50% of last pay/ max pay) is applied on the Pay/ Emoluments. Whereever Spl Benefits/ Allownces are given to either Military/ Civil personnel and if they are reckonable for pension purposes, they are accordingly provided. Till now there had been no complication in the system!. Recent confusions created through multi-defined/ ambiguously worded orders related to revised pay structuring vis -a vis pension formula, have led to a lot of confusioin in pension revisions on the civilian side and so also on the military side wherever the same basic factors are to be considered!

Anonymous said...

just what has happenned to the so called one rank one pension trumpetted in the parliament by no less than the President of India,along with the finance minister as well as the defence minister? The announcementwas made in jun/jul2009.Hpw much more time before orders are issued.Or this report is also like many govt commissions died a natural death. May god bless the babus and grant them the courage to release the GO/ army instruction
chandrasekaran