The four-month extension of the 7th Pay Commission may prove to be a breather for the government in its efforts to settle the one rank one pension
The four-month extension of the 7th Pay Commission may prove to be a breather for the government in its efforts to settle the one rank one pension (OROP) issue besides providing more time to look at the ways to generate additional money required to fund the pay-hike burden of the central government employees due to the Commission’s recommendations.
The government would do well by referring the OROP to the 7th Pay Commission quickly — the thought is already floating in the top government circles — as its recommendations will have a bearing on the demand of the defence veterans as salary and pension hikes for the current employees would mean that the gap between the pension of those who have retired earlier and those retiring from next year onwards will widen further even if they held the same rank.
In fact, the OROP was dropped in 1973 following the 3rd Central Pay Commission recommendations, and the demand for reinstating it has been there since then.
While Prime Minister Narendra Modi has accepted the OROP, in principle, it would be a good idea to let the 7th Pay Commission find a way to implement it in a manner that is practical in terms of bearing its burden and a reasonable linking of the pensions of the past and future retirees.
The recommendations of the commission, if the government accepts it, would be applicable from January 1, 2016.
As it has got an extension till December 31st now, the government will have to provide for the additional burden on the exchequer in the next budget.
In its medium-term expenditure framework statement laid before Parliament this month, the finance ministry has pointed out: “An important requirement for projections of salaries is to adequately provide for the increase in Dearness Allowance and normal annual increments. However, the projection period falls under the award period of the VII Central Pay Commission (VII CPC). In view of this, a higher than normative growth over the outlay of 2015-16 (B.E.) has been provided for 2016-17; whereas, a normative growth has been provided in 2017-18 (second year of projection period)..…It is pertinent to mention here that, award of VII CPC and its impact on Government finances poses a risk”.
Similarly, for pensions too, which includes both Defence and Civil pensions — higher than normative growth has been provided for the projection of outlay on Pensions during 2016-17.
The expenditure on central government employees’ salaries is projected to grow to Rs 116510 crore in FY17 from Rs 100619 crore budgeted for FY16.
READ ALSO : Central Government has unequivocal commitment in implementing One Rank One Pension- Defence Minister
In case of defence, the statement says: “Defence expenditure on Revenue account mainly comprises of salary expenditure of armed forces and their operational expenses. In view of the likely impact of the award of the VII CPC, higher than a normative growth over the base of Rs 1.52 lakh crore (B.E. 2015-16) has been provided during the first year (2016-17) of the projection period”.
READ MORE AT : The Financial Express
Get Free Email Updates
Follow us on Telegram Channel, Twitter & Facebook and Whatsapp Channel for all Latest News and Updates
While pursuing my BSc I was lured by the attractive advertisement of the Air Force. Immaturity of my age drew my attention to join in the Indian Air Force as a Technical Airman. Now, look at the benefits of joining in the Indian Air Force as a technical airman:-
(a) My discharge book says, I am released from the Air Force after completing my initial bond. That means, although I am drawing a government pension, I was on a contractual job, not a permanent job. (Long sigh!)
(b) Being recruited as a diploma qualified person, I was called a ‘Fitter’ in the Indian Air Force.
(c) I was an OR in the service and after the retirement also facing the same discrimination whenever I visit to a CSD canteen or an ECHS polyclinic. Still I am recognised as an OR in those places.
(d) I served in the Indian Air Force for twenty years as a group ‘X’ technical airman (equivalent to a diploma engineer) and thereby did the servicing, maintenance and repair of two modern aircrafts but enjoyed the restriction to remain in the lowest pay band throughout my career. Now, I am drawing very less pension accordingly.
(e) I am now thinking that was it difficult for me even to get a clerical job, in which I could have reached to the Pay band 3 or pay band 4 in due course, whereas the highest rank of an airmen also can’t reach in pay band 3.
(f) I am now cursing me for spoiling my life by taking the decision of joining in the Indian Air Force as a technical Airman.
(g) I am not thinking of OROP or Pay Commission because nothing is going to benefit me unless the pay anomalies of the technical airmen are removed as early as possible.
What are the benefits of joining in Indian Air Force as a Technical Airman? Long training, long working hours, maintaining and repairing the highly sophisticated and costly machines, but restricted to remain in the lowest pay band, starting from joining to leaving the service (initial bond of 20 years). This may be also a reason that very few of these highly skilled and experienced Technical Personnel of the IAF, extend their services after completing their initial bonds. The service loses the experience and the skills, but who cares? It takes years to know the sophisticated airborne machines thoroughly and by the time he learns, the initial bond ends and he finds no reason to extend his service further, because of the low salary and the very least chance of getting any further promotion. Is it the loss of the nation or the organization?
Technical Airmen of the IAF are either a civil diploma holder or 10+2 in Science. After their training, they become equivalent to a civil diploma engineer but the reason is unknown why they are placed in the lowest pay band (5200-20200) with an X group pay of 1400 Rs. only. The civil diploma holders are directly placed in PB-2 with a Grade pay of 4200 Rs. Can I say that, this is gross injustice and discrimination towards the Technical Personnel of the IAF?
Further, a civil diploma engineer starts getting degree engineer’s scale in 10 to 12 years, after getting promoted to an Asst Engineer or an engineer, but for a Technical Airman, even to get a diploma engineer’s scale, he has to complete a minimum of 13 years of service, clears all the relevant exams and becomes a SGT (Supervisor), but does he get the diploma engineer’s scale then also? You will be astonished to know the fact.
In 5th Pay Commission: Civil diploma engineer: 5000-150-8000 / Pay of technical SGT: 4670-85- 5945. Later upgraded to 5000-100-6500 (Why? Who cares?)
In 6th Pay Commission: Civil diploma engineer: 9300-34800 with a grade pay of 4200 Rs. / Pay of Technical SGT (fact but true) 5200-20200 with a Grade pay of 2800 Rs. only. Why this sort of discrimination and injustice? For how long this exploitation will go on? Thanks God, the attained basic pay can not be reduced.
The 5th and 6th Pay Commissions did not look into this matter. I had a great expectation that the 7th Pay Commission will ultimately take care of the Technical SGTs of the IAF, but as usual, it also did not remove the above mentioned pay anomalies. There is no dearth of good politicians and bureaucrats in our country. Why they have not intervened so far? Why the every Pay Commission has neglected the status and pay of the Technical Airmen of the IAF? There can not be any argument that higher ranks deserve higher pays, but does that mean the subordinate staffs need to be suppressed and paid less? I request to the PMO and the competent bureaucrats please intervene at the earliest and remove the pay anomalies of the Technical Airmen of the IAF.
Now come to the point of Military Service Pay. What does that pay means? Commissioned officers 15500/-, military nursing officers 10800/- and the ranks, placed below the commissioned officers, only 5200/-? The subordinate ranks, including the JCOs, SGTs are less military than the military nursing officers? Do the JCOs, SGTs take command from any military nursing officer? During the war or exercise, will the military nursing officers guide the JCOs or the SGTs what to do? If no, then how a non combatant staff will draw more MSP than the Combatant Personnel? If this pay is related to the status and rank, then why this pay is waived off for the higher ranking officials? I suggest renaming this pay as military status pay, else MSP must be made equal for each and every combatant member of the armed forces.
The pay anomalies of the Technical Personnel of the IAF must be sorted out at the earliest, because sense of prejudice, sense of neglect and low morale may become a cause for any fatal accident, involving the experienced men and the costly flying machines and the nation will ultimately bear that loss. It then needs to repurchase those costly machines again and again, for smooth functioning of the organization. A developing nation, like us, can not afford that. (Views expressed are my personal)
Just a thought
(67 years of independence. Still we could not become a developed nation. Is there anything wrong in our thinking? Are the rich becoming richer and the poor poorer day by day? Are all the citizens treated equally? A copier’s brain can not be compared with that person, who invented that machine. Why we don’t move forward with our own thinking? Why some of us still follow the selfish mentality of the pre-independent British people, in our own Independent country, when they themselves do not maintain that in their own country? Leave aside any reason, I just want to see my country a mighty developed nation before my death. If I happened to visit any developed nation, the people from that country must look at me with respect and say, “See, that man is from India, a mighty developed nation, like us.” For that, we need to change our thinking. The country first, self afterwards.)
One rank one pay-some suggestions
There is a lot of discontent in the armed forces about the way they are being paid pension. The Govt. of India is worried about the pension out-go in case the OROP is made more gracious and naturally a way-out is required so that a solution emerges which affords a win-win situation for both.
2/There are about 4 lakhs of vacancies in the Central police organizations and the State Armed Polices in the country.
3/ Army-men retiring from the defence forces every year are precious trained personnel. Govt have spent a huge sum in training them in weapons and tactics and they are extremely useful not only for the CPMFs but also for the State Armed Police Reserve.There is no reason why they can’t be absorbed in the vacancies already existing in these organizations in similar capacity as determined through their respective pay-scales and pay at the time of their demitting office from the army. There will be no need of retiring these army-men. State police can actually stop recruiting even for their district police and even these vacancies can be filled through the armed police man-power. This will require working out certain modalities but it is obviously very much possible. This will also help the CPMFs and state police to ensure that there are no vacancies in these organizations.I do not think that the state government will oppose this.
4/ If we accept the proposal in the preceding para, it will not only take care of all the army-men upto the age of 60 yrs but also reduce the pension out-go of the defence services and afford a liberal OROP for all the personnel above 60 yrs and not worry the Govt.of India about the expenditure at all. Money saved can in fact be used for upgrading and strengthening the CPMF and state police. After this the applicable pension for Govt servants can take care of everyone above 60 yrs on same footing without any discrimination against any-one.
I am sure the proposals merit serious consideration and action in national interest.
(NANDAN DUBE)
Retd DGP MP
Bhopal
The defence officers have always tried to gain through the PBORs for any kind of gain, and are now trying to fire from the shoulder of PBORs. The officers know very well that if they do not try their luck with jawans they can not claim orop. They, therefore are trying to piggyback on jawans for orop. the govt must be vary of the tantrums of the officers, who doesn’t deserve to get orop when compared to jawans. The govt should release orop for jawans first and discuss a different formula for officers taking the age factgor, later on.
If govt think that orop to be decided by vii cpc. This time like vi th cpc government should not allot fund to defence and left in the hands of officers to distribute, if govt does so once again, diffence offrs will get it distributed among themselves and nothing will be given to jawans, sailors and airmen. So, govt should ensure that vii cpc distribute every bodys pay and perks judiciously while sustaining pressure of diffence officers and should not let down the moral of ors.
I suggest to have an urgent meeting of Ex-Servicemen representatives of NCO,SNCO AND JCO (ALL TOGETHER KNOWN AS PBOR),EX-OFFICERS,DEFENSE SECRETARY,FINANCE SECRETARY,DEFENCE MINISTER,FINANCE MINISTER,ALL THE THREE SERVICES CHIEF(ARMY,AIR FORCE AND NAVY),LEADER OF OPPOSITION OF BOTH THE HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT short out OROP FORMULAE.
although govt is seen financial burden in orop but it is interconnected nation security issue also.as veterans sitting at jantar mantar but their 2nd and 3rd generation is serving in the armed forces.The issue is moral effected of the fighting forces of the country.so it is better to implement the orop by clearing the hurdle of bureacry.
If orop decided by 7th pay commission or by government it must effect from 01_01_2006.
Working on the behest of govt. To mislead us , last dec. onwards it was known to handover to 7th pay commission ?
I would suggest OROP for all w.e.f 1.1.2006. Arrears in the form of LIC policy. LIC can be paid this amount in 5/10 instalments. This way retired people will get two pensions sufficient for their survival. Government may discuss these modalities with LIC and other stakeholders in the fray.