tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post5815582027248896206..comments2024-02-08T22:01:40.101+05:30Comments on Indian Military : Service Benefits and Issues: Guest Post: BeeCee’s views on post retirement occupation, legal redressal and status+protocol issuesNavdeep / Maj Navdeep Singhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11481215977936848477noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-11927563486414732852012-12-16T10:47:06.426+05:302012-12-16T10:47:06.426+05:30Dear All,
As for restriction on the kind of job ...Dear All, <br /><br />As for restriction on the kind of job you can take up once you retire, it is very much prevalent in the corporate too. Most companies explicitly mention in their employment contracts that if the employee chooses to quit the company he/she will not join a competitor (in some cases names are provided too) for a stipulated period of time, in most cases it is about three yrs. <br /><br />Regards,<br />HimanshuAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-76176563462061410872012-12-02T10:55:02.253+05:302012-12-02T10:55:02.253+05:30Navdeep's note - Agree, but the point to be ma...Navdeep's note - Agree, but the point to be made is that it is the job of Service HQs to rationalise existing orders and also to point out to the MOD/GOI when such orders make no sense or deny fundamental rights without due compensation for such restrictions that have an impact on your employment options.<br /><br />Penmil - Generally agree with what is stated but such a system is already in existence as per CPC norms and mil.ranks can be easily dovetailed into it. Our problem is that Services have refused this option. Public posturing is at complete variance with what is actually sought from CPCs.<br /><br />MRP - I think we inhabit completely different universes. But we could discuss after you read some of the earlier posts on the subject and once the Rank Pay imbroglio is over.<br /><br />Maneesh Joshi - Rajat Gupta's case I presume is mainly about insider trading, the use of privileged info for financial benefit. Such laws are in existence everywhere and is equally applicable in all sectors. If you want to draw a parallel, our guys would have banned such class of people from trading in shares/stocks instead catching the individual who was at fault.<br /> <br />BeeCeeBeeCeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-22332527385397532692012-11-27T17:10:09.134+05:302012-11-27T17:10:09.134+05:30Sir,
Point No 1 made by BeeCee is valid. The GOI ...Sir,<br /><br />Point No 1 made by BeeCee is valid. The GOI should have no business with what one does after ones's service ends unless there is a conflict of interest with regard to national security issues i.e it would be highly incorrect for a former COAS to join the ISI as a consultant! <br /><br />In the case of Point No 2, I beg to differ but with a caveat - in almost all highly specialised domains in the corporate world, a worker is barred from practising in that domain for monetary gain only if found guilty of professional malfeasance. Rajat Gupta may well face this situation in the days ahead.<br /><br />Point No 3 has been superbly analysed by BeeCee in the write-up.<br /><br />In fact, if one goes by the "Contact With Foreign Nationals" manual of the Army, not a single veteran or her/his kids would be able to secure any employment at all!Maneesh Joshihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02382678667634536989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-32184828970707164352012-11-18T17:32:39.412+05:302012-11-18T17:32:39.412+05:30Can organisations like AFNHB / AWHO be taken to co...Can organisations like AFNHB / AWHO be taken to court of not delivering Dwelling units on time or escalating cost of the house by several Lacs.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09114787865617944017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-89257881921680285912012-11-17T13:24:54.767+05:302012-11-17T13:24:54.767+05:30A jawan signs a bond for 20 years (IAF)at the time...A jawan signs a bond for 20 years (IAF)at the time of recruitment and hence after discharge he remains eligible for grp "C" & "D" category jobs only. If the bond get reduced to 10-12 years, there will be absolutely no problem with re-employment.Today's Jawans are enough qualified and they are well prepared to compete with rest of the world if they are given opportunity to do so even if no post is reserved for them. As no restriction is imposed in respect of job in private sectors, a large number of Jawans are doing very well there from bottom to top level.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-15973866502164472712012-11-14T13:57:16.942+05:302012-11-14T13:57:16.942+05:30A happy Diwali to all readers.
It appears that se...A happy Diwali to all readers.<br /><br />It appears that senior officers have been unable to stem the rot, barring a few instances, like the one referred to in this blog, and the senior service has been the culprit more often than not, even though other two services have also been equally responsible. I have seen Flag officers bending backwards to babus well below their status to satisfy their egos to avoid upsetting them and this is what has caused most of the problems. I am sure equating pay and not rank, to positions will help, but can it be done, is a million dollar questions!! I guess we need to think out of box, like Major Dhanpalan did when he decided to take up the matter in court, at tremendous personal cost, I beleive.PK Tyagihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03541755615814852987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-18351334459883755462012-11-14T11:38:25.337+05:302012-11-14T11:38:25.337+05:30Awesome is the word !!
but are the ol' foggi...Awesome is the word !!<br /><br /><br />but are the ol' foggies listening or will they cry foul when they become veterans or ill-treated personally.<br /><br />good post sir ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-54355801612647569832012-11-13T16:43:46.265+05:302012-11-13T16:43:46.265+05:30Agree with the comment of Penmil that we need to &...Agree with the comment of Penmil that we need to 'de-link rank progression from pay progression'. The issue of status and consequently heart burn crops up only because we have to link our pay with our rank. Promotion to a new rank should have nothing to do with pay progression. In my view, the pay progression should happen so as to be effective from the date the officer fulfills the eligibility criteria (for Captains to Lieutenant Colonels and for time scale promotions) and thereafter the date on which had been adjudged to be competent to hold the next higher rank i.e. the declassification of the selection board results.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-47590605907598285502012-11-13T13:38:46.682+05:302012-11-13T13:38:46.682+05:30A happy and prosperous Diwali to all bloggers.
MR...A happy and prosperous Diwali to all bloggers.<br /><br />MRP said....<br />Sir, <br />I agree with comments of penmil but so far as integrated pay scale introduced by IV CPC was one of the best thing happened in the history of Armed Forces. i say so because in III CPC maximum officers were stagnating in their respective ranks without any stagnation increments because pay scale for each rank was shortsighted. Of course it would have been better if the rank pay element been included in the integrated pay scale and benit of FR 22C would have been given on each promotion. The real disaster was V CPC because again truncated pay scales were created for each rank.The present sufferings caused by VI CPC are the result of past mistakes of Service HQs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-9223592455661952372012-11-12T16:44:28.685+05:302012-11-12T16:44:28.685+05:30Though out of context here...
Can any one tell me...Though out of context here...<br /><br />Can any one tell me why is it that Defence Services have lower retiring age. If the answer is to have a younger force then we have CRPF, BSF, Assam Rifles etc who do an equally physically demanding job but retiring at 60 years. I have never heard anyone demanding equivalent retirement ages. <br />Moreover if BPET defines physical fitness levels, then atleast till 45 yrs a person is considered capable of acceptable Battle Proficiency - why should then he be retired at 35 years.<br />The age enhancement would resolve many problems we are currently faced with.Synapsenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1503293844377013031.post-8514572807513528212012-11-12T16:35:00.195+05:302012-11-12T16:35:00.195+05:30Sir,
A happy Diwali to all bloggers!
Thanks for an...Sir,<br />A happy Diwali to all bloggers!<br />Thanks for an interesting post, on burning issues.<br /><br /><><br /><br />This brings out a need (at the Service HQ) to continuously balance pay progression as well as rank up gradation. Failure to keep the balance will either result in lower pays, as it happened at 4th CPC, or rank vs. length of service mismatch, as it happened during AVS Reforms.<br />Instead of rigidly linking pay with the rank, if the Services de-link rank progression from pay progression (without introducing a disaster like the 4th CPC Rank Pay),the situation will be more comfortable.<br />An officer is to be promoted to a higher rank as per the needs of the organization and not for higher pay whereas the pay progression as well as the pay scales should follow the prevalent civil pattern.<br />That is, one should get promotion twice at each stage. First, a promotion in pay when the equivalent Civil Services get it (so that a balance with the Civil, is maintained all the while).Next the officer is to be promoted to a higher rank only when the Service needs him to take up higher responsibilities.<br />Thus the Services, while dealing with the civilians, can talk of equivalent pay, but while dealing, internally within the Service(s), consider only the rank.<br /><br />Similar arrangements (of de linking pay and appointment) are there in the civil and might have been there in the past too.<br />Penmilnoreply@blogger.com