Sunday, March 29, 2009

Bank Wage Revision – Pension Option for PSU Bank staff : An Update

The All India Bank Officers’ Confederation has talked to  Sri Amitabh Verma, Joint Secretary, Banking Division, Government of India at Delhi on 20.03.2009 in this regard. 

The full text of the communication to the members of this association is published below for the interest of the viewers.

To

All Office Bearers & E.C. Members

 

Sub : Wage Revision – Pension Option

 

We reproduce hereunder the full text of letter No.KSS:25:101:AINBOF dated 23.03.2009 issued by the General Secretary, All India Nationalised Banks’ Officers’ Federation addressed to Com. G. D. Nadaf, General Secretary, All India Bank Officers’ Confederation on the above subject for information of all concerned.

                                                                                                            SD/-

                                                                                                  S Roy Choudhury

                                                                                                  General Secretary

All India UCO Bank Officers' Federation.

Quote

“Further to our correspondence with you on the above matter, we have to inform you that the undersigned alongwith Sri P. K. Bhat, Secretary of our Federation met Sri Amitabh Verma, Joint Secretary, Banking Division, Government of India at Delhi on 20.03.2009. We had detailed discussions with him on the matter of negotiations on wage revision and also fresh option for pension.

 

Sri Verma stated that the Government is willing to give the fresh option as requested by us and also wants to conclude the wage revision on a positive note. He emphasized that the negotiations should be carried on to resolve the contentious issues and assured to speak to the IBA also in this regard.

 

The only precondition of the Government to resolve the above issues, as we could make out, was our agreeing to the new pension scheme as introduced in the Government, for future recruitees. Sri Verma stated that the unions could agree to this new scheme in principle for recruitees from a future date even from the year 2011 or 2012 by which time large chunk of the recruitment in the industry will be over. He stated that while the Government is determined regarding the introduction of the new scheme, the date of commencement of the new scheme and general guidelines for the working of the scheme can be negotiated by the unions even after the settlement of the wage revision and pension option, once the unions agree to the scheme in principle.

 

He also explained the advantages of the new scheme in the future scenario and offered to hold a seminar to clear the apprehensions of the unions in this regard.

 

From the above discussions it is apparent that there is a real opportunity to settle the issues of wage revision and pension without delay, in the context of the decision already taken in the Meeting of the General Secretaries of affiliates of AIBOC.

 

We need not further reiterate that the membership is losing patience and we need to move ahead quickly to retain their confidence.

 

In the above meeting we also could discuss the pending appointments of officer directors in different nationalised banks and have been assured of clearing same by streamlining the procedure in the light of the discussions.

 

This is for your kind information and early action.

 

With greetings,

 

Yours comradely,

            Sd/-

( K. S. Shetty )

General Secretary”  


Source : All India UCO Bank Officers' Federation.                        

48 comments:

K said...

K BALSUBRAMANIAN

BANK WAGE REVISION TALKS ARE GETTING POSTPONED SINCE JAN 2008 . BETTER WAGES AND SECOND OPTION FOR PENSION WERE UNDULY DELAYED FOR THE REASONS BEST KNOWN TO IBA/GOVT. DURING 1977 BANK OFFICERS SALARY LEVEL WERE REDUCED ANDSTANDARDISED TO THAT OF GOVT OFFICERS LEVEL STATING THEY ARE OF EQUAL RANK. THE IBA CAN GO BACK TO THAT RECOMMENDATION AND COMPARE THE ERSTWHILE SCALES TO THE PRESENT LEVELS AND REVISE THE SCALES SUITABLY. EVRY EMPLOYEE WILL GET MORE THAN 30% INCREASE ALL THE INJUSTICE MET TO THE BANK MEN SINCE 1986 WILL BE RECTIFIED AUTOMATICALLY . SINCE HUGE WRITE OFF RUNNING INTO HUNDREDS OF CRORES ARE GETTING WRITTEN OFF EVERY YEAR THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO BRING THE COST FACTOR/CAPACITY TO PAY ETC.IT IS A SERVICE ORIENTED INDUSTRY AND THE GOVT HAS TO LOOK IN TOTHAT ASPECT ALSO. THE POLICIES HAS TO BE LOOKED INTO AND WHEREEVER NECESSARUY SUBSIDY HAS TO BEPROVIDED TO MEET THE DEFICIT, WHEN THE ENTIRE WORLD IS AFFECTED PARTICULARLY THE FINANCIAL SECTOR ONLY INDIAN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ARE STANDING TALL LIKE ROCK WITHOUT AFFECTED IN TERMS OF MONETARYLOSSES HATS OFF TO THE BANKMEN WHO STOOD LIKE ROCK AND RESISTED THE REFORMS LIKE EQUITY DILUTION ETC. THEY DESERVE PARITY WITH SIXTH PAY COMMISSION AND AS MODEL CODE OF CONDUCT IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE THEY CAN ISSUE SUITABLE DIRECTIONS TOIBA AND COMPLETE NEGOTIATION AND ALLOW LIBERAL WAGE REVISION / ONE MORE CHANCE TO PENSION OPTION/UPGARDATION OF YTHE RETIREES PENSION LIKE GOVT COUNTERPARTS MUCH BEFORE THE ELECTIONS SO THAT THEY CAN ALSO FEEL HAPPY LIKE THEIR GOVT COUNTERPARTS AND OTHERPUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEES

KBALASUBRAMANIAN CHENNAI

Alert_Banker said...

Dear Friends
Ask following question to your UFBU leaders

1. How many of UFBU Leaders are currently in Bank's Service ?
2. On 12 Feb 09 meeting When IBA Chairman Said , I Quote
"IBA indicated that the issue can be resolved on the same basis as will be finalised for existing PF Optees who are in Bank's Services. It was decided to discuss the issue further." Why ? Why it was not accepted immediately. That means retired employee should not share burden while current employee as already agreed should share the pension Burden.
3. Why after above meeting (12 Feb 09) UFBU Started raising Future employee Pension. What happened thereafter Retired employee pension option contribution was never discussed or brought to general member notice.
4. ON UFBU & IBA meeting held on 12/01/09 UFBU Asked IBA
“ We wanted the IBA to come out with their offer as to how much additional wage increase can be given by them. IBA assured that in the next round of discussion they would give their reactions in this regard “

Why after one and half year UFBU had first time asked for wage revision from IBA ?

5. After 12/01/09 IBA Offered on 10 % wage Hike
6. After 1996 two Bank wage revision has already happened . Why now pension option that too for retired employee also.
7. Fund allocated for wage revision, why it should be shared for retired employee Pension ? Is it a wage revision ?


Friends Please read through all circulars issued by UFBU, you will find UFBU in this wage revision is trying to get only pension for retired employees, they are not bothered about current employee. You will find always in their wage revision circulars either retired or future employee discussion. They do not care for current employees plight.

When Wage revision talk started in Nov 2007, market was rising , election was on the card, Government was ready to negiotiate, UFBU Has

UFBU Leaders are bent on cheating gulliable members. Member should now be alert, as they are opening being cheated by their sol called leaders.

Alert Banker Association

subadra said...

I would like to know if officers who opted for golden hand shake but had not opted for pension in 1994, are eligible to give in their pension option now?

The said...

Alert Banker 2

I totally agree with Alert Banker. These fuc.... retired netas are taking the in service employees for a ride. We should create awareness in this regard. Also, I would call upon the members not to participate in the strikes called for by the unions and loose your hard earned money for a negligible wage rise until unless UFBU comes with a transparent agenda as to what their demand is and how much wage increase is expecetd after surrender of arrears and a part of your basic pay as committed by UFBU. It is our union and we will not let any ...... expoit us for his own benefit.

C N Venugopalan said...

If Subhadra retired sans Pension, she would well be eligible to Pension. She can go through the blog www.bankpension.blogspot.com. She can also search the item "banking on consensus" and also put search item" C N Venugopalan on bank Pension" For any clarification contact 09447747994

Rajesh said...

BANK’s WAGE REVISION Mathematics


1. Initially IBA has agreed for Rs 6000/ Crore as wage revision Burden due external relativity (6th Pay commission recommendation). Later on improved up to Rs 7800 Crores.

2. Employee Unions raised the demand for pension Option. Option was converted into Pension burden calculation and sharing of Pension burden. Silently and conveniently External Relativity was ignored and lost.

a) Initially for current employee Pension burden (Rs 6000/ crore )
b) later on even for employees retired after 1996 pension burden Rs 3000 Crores.

3. Mathematics of pension is as follows
Assumption Rs 250/ crores is 1%

Phase 1 (figures in Crore)
Total Wages offered by IBA = Rs 7800/- (Approx 31.2 %)

Total Burden of Pension = Rs 6000/-
Out of which
IBA agreed pension burden = Rs 4200/ (deducted from wage offer)

Wage revision offer shown to us = 3600 Crores (7800 – 4200= 3600) (actually 14.4 %)

Employee to bear Pension burden = Rs 1800/

Net (Actual ) Wage revision offer is only = Rs 1800/
(Rs3600 -1800= 1800) = 7.20 %


High Lights of wage revision Agreement :-

1. IBA was ready to pay 31.20 % rise Rs 7800/ Crore
2. Full pension burden is adjusted from wage hike in either way.(7800-6000)
3. Unions wants to help even retired (after 1996) employee from this wage revision.
4. Net Wage revision offered is meager Rs 1800/ Crore (Aprox 7.20%)
5. If pension is actually given as an option Employee would get 31.20 % rise in wage which when compared with external relativity (Central Govt employee was given 33 % to 40 % Rise.) may be in acceptable limit.
6. Pension burden is fully loaded on Bank’s employees.
7. Decision of Retired employee burden (RS 3000/ Crores ) sharing is not clear.
8. In desperate bid to obtain 2nd pension Option, Union have opened a new way to IBA for sharing the future wage revision burden by employees.
9. This is not the pension option, it is burden sharing by Current employees.
10. Unions are silently playing against current employee interest, Members needs to be alert of development, and read all UFBU circulars carefully. And Act if necessary.

Rajesh said...

Wage Revision –Past, Present and Future

Past :- Pre to post Pillai Committee Report, We have seen the negotiating skills of our union leaders. Bankers were getting more pay then Central Government employee. Due to UFBU Leaders negotiating skill, we are now getting just half of central Government employee pay. This is sufficient to Judge the Union leaders Past performance.

Present :- Since most of UFBU Leaders are retire, they are interested party in wage revision. Even though they are retired, still they want maximum share from current wage revision. And They have agreed to share the wage revision bill toward filling the shortfall in Pension fund. Result 1/5th portion is left for wages and 4/5th portion is appropriated towards pension. We will be getting meager 7% rise in wages, that too on March 2007 salary.


Future :- They have taken the bait of pension from IBA and gleefully agreed to share even the future wage revision towards shortfall in pension fund. So IBA has very intelligently hedge the Mismanagement, Inefficiency and corruption in Management of pension fund. Any shortfall in pension fund due to mismanagement, inefficiency and corruption , will be deducted from our future wage revision.

Result :-

IBA has won the battle by driving UFBU leaders to accept the bait for pension from wage bill. Instead of giving actual pension option, UFBU leaders have made current employee to share wages for present as well as in future.

Though IBA appears to have win the battle, but in long run it will destroy the banking industry. Bank will be able to hire only inferior talent from market due to low wages.

Social status of Banker would decline very sharply, as Bank’s General Managers would stand a notch lower than the Section officer of Central Government.

Bank Clerk salary would be lesser than central government Sub (Peon) Staff.

We should emphasis to our UFBU leader to please fight for Proper Pension option. Do not agree for Sharing of Wage fund to meet the shortfall in pension fund.

GRR said...

R RAO
BANK OFFICERS WAGE REVISION IS BEING DELAYED UNNECASSRILY.PENSION OPTION LEGALLY NEEDS TO BE GIVEN SINCE EVEN TODAY THERE ARE MANY ORGANISATIONS WHICH GIVE THE OPTION JUST BEFORE THE RETIREMENT DATE. OUR FAULT WE DID NO OPT SINCE ORIGINALLY THE MENTIONED THAT IF U OPT FOR PENSION U CAN'T GO ON STRIKE WHICH IS FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG IN OUR DEMOCRATIC SETUP. REGARDING THE COST WHICH IS ANOTHER AREA FREQUENTLY DISCUSSED TO GIVE ANOTHER OPTION. PLEASE NOTE TODAY AFTER THE 6TH PAY COMMISSION NO ONE WOULD LIKE TO PREFER TO JOIN BANKS. IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO BANK OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES DO PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTRY HENCE GOVT IN ITS OWN INTEREST SHOULD COMPLETE THE PROCESS OF WAGE REVISION AS OUR PATIENCE IS RUNNING OUT SINCE THE INFLATION RATE IS GOING UP AND IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO SUSTAIN ON THE SALARY NOW BEING PAID AS PER THE LAST SETTLEMENT.

vinjamur_sriram said...

Hi

The content of this blog is real good and it gives a lot of info on pension for bankmen. I am one of those missed out men who moved out of a PSU Bank, resigned after 20 years of service. I am a PF optee. I am still unclear whether am I eligible for pension as all info available in the public domain talks about the VRS retirees and no where talks about resignees.

Some of my friends say as I served for more than 20 years, I am eligible.

Can anyone clarify my doubt whether I am eligible for the proposed pension.

BALAN said...

dear sriram

you are very well eligible. pension option covers retirees also. nrs is a form of retirement only. not only that anoythe notional service of 5 years will beadded to your qualifying service for determining the quantum of pension payable; be happy

k balasubramanian

vinjamur_sriram said...

Balan,

Thanks for the update. It is heartening to here that Resignees are eligible in the second Pension option to be given to bank employees. Now some of my friends who quit the bank services after serving more than 15 years asking me whether they are eligible for pension. As they have not completed 20 years, there is doubt.

Can you enlighten me about all aspects of the eligibility of resignees vis a vis Bank Pension?

Chan said...

Hi, In the present Bank Wage settlement, the option for pension has been opened( reopened?) for the erstwhile bank employees. There is no doubt about the eligibility for the same for vrs/retirees. But , what is the criterion for resignees?. I have opted to resign after 18 and 1/2 years of service as officer. I received PF/CPF and gratuity. Am I eligible for pension and what is the minimum years of service that qualifies for pension in Banks(PSUs).

PNV Raman said...

Actually many officers did not join Pension scheme as per Unions call only. It was said that PF is more beneficial. Now many officers have resigned after serving for over 27 years There is no provision for PF optees to go in VRS Now what is there position? When retrospective date is given for second option, it is fair if the wording is given as those in service as on 1995 cut off date are eligible if they satisfy the pension norms

eyunny said...

state clearly that resigned employees with 20 years or more are eligible for second pension option

roly said...

We ( present employees who are pension optee) should not share pension load at any cost. Those retired and now want to opt for pension must share the total burden. We are not at fault they had taken decision to opt for CPF. How long they can keep sucking blood of present pension optee. Let us unite and file a writ. Call on 09948915606

aaaa said...

Roly it is very sad that you have made the statement without knowing the facts and the historical mistake done by IBA and UFBU in the past, I will give you the brief details about the history of pension in our banks there may be some mistakes for which I regret
First of all all young officers should know that the pension is not paid by the respective banks. In fact the pension is paid by the respective banks pension funds set up as per the govt. guidelines and managed by trustees so in future even if a banks goes bankrupt as in the case of US the employees will get their pension.
The banks had contributed to the fund to the extent of 10% of basic pay of all pension optees and the pension has to be paid out of this fund only and not from the banks P&L accounts.(this 10% is fixed because the same 10% is being given to PF optees )
Later on during the period of 7 th bipartite the IBA has realized that the 10% contribution is not enough to pay the pension and a minimum 26.5% of basic pay is required to pay pensions . At this point of time the excess 16.5% of basic pay should have been deducted from each pension optee every month and the same should have been credited to the pension fund but this has not happened instead out of the 16.5% all employees including the PF optees had shared the burden of 8.25% which was set aside from the settlement amount and 8.25% was given by IBA to the pension fund. This is what is called the historical mistake.
The cost of pension went on increasing to 30.5% and at present to 36% and all the increase was shared by all employees including the PF optees for all these years.
So friends that is why the retired employees were also give the option for pension as they have contributed to your pension fund in their service period.
So by now I think you should have understood why you should contribute now. You are just repaying the debt taken from the PF optees all these years and any writ petition would not stand in the court of law.

Note: Nearly 40% of arrears of all employees will go to the pension fund.

Sundar said...

I did not opt for Pension in 1995.
I completed 17 years of service and took VRS in 2001 and got PF amount. During 20-Dec-2000, IBA issued a circular that those who have completed >15 years of service and opt for VRS will be eligible for Pension and the Pension Rules will be amended.
1) Am I eligible for under the new Pension option now?
2) How much do I need to pay for Pension fund short fall 30% of retired employee contribution. My guess is that it will come to Rs.1.5 lacs if 66000 retired and Rs.3.0 lacs if 31000 got retired?

BANGALORE'S MUSHROOMING GROWTH said...

I resigned from a nationalised bank in Jan.97 after completing 17 years and 2 months of service. (Since I had not completed 20 years of service then to apply under VR, I had to submit my regignation only). I had opted for PENSION and not PF. I was given eligible gratuity and employees contribution of PF only. I had to my credit about 135 days of PL, which was not allowed for encashment by the Bank.

In the special VRS scheme 2000, initially employees with less than 20 years of service, though eligible for VRS, were not eligible for pension under Pension Regulations, 1995. In order to set right this anomoly, Ministry of Finance vide its letter dt.5.9.2000 advised IBA for amending Regulation 29 of the Pension Regulations, 1995 so as to include employees with 15 years of service also to be eligible for pension. However, the amendment was carried out under Regulation 28 which stated
"Provided that pension shall also be granted to an employee who opts to retire before attaining the age of
superannuation, but after having served for a minimum
period of 15 years in terms of any scheme that may be
framed for the purpose by the Bank`s Board with the
concurrence of the Government."

Further Supreme Court has also upheld addition of 5 years of notional service in calculating the length of service for those who had completed 20 years of qualifying service. This I suppose is to give weightage for those who have completed 20 years and above and not to those from 15 years to 20 years.

Now I wish to know
a)whether I would be eligible for pension by taking recourse under section 28 (as I had completed 17 years and 2 months of service before resigning from service)
b)As already said, I resigned from service as there was no provision of submitting the application under VR, reason being non completion of 20 years of service. (However, amendment to section 28 (in 2002 with retrospection effect from 2000) just said “pension shall also be granted to an employee who opts to retire before attaining the age of superannuation but after having for a minimum period of 15 years………………”). Here I fail to understand the meaning of retirement - I feel resignation also – someone to clarify.
c)Inspite of the above, if I am not eligible for pension, will I be eligible for getting employer’s contribution of PF, which has not been paid due to my pension option.
d)Am I eligible for encashment of accumulated privilege leave (about 135 days) at my credit at the time of my resignation.

I would be happy to know of any case covering or similar to my position

BANGALORE'S MUSHROOMING GROWTH said...

I resigned from a nationalised bank in Jan.97 after completing 17 years and 2 months of service. (Since I had not completed 20 years of service then to apply under VR, I had to submit my regignation only). I had opted for PENSION and not PF. I was given eligible gratuity and employees contribution of PF only. I had to my credit about 135 days of PL, which was not allowed for encashment by the Bank.

In the special VRS scheme 2000, initially employees with less than 20 years of service, though eligible for VRS, were not eligible for pension under Pension Regulations, 1995. In order to set right this anomoly, Ministry of Finance vide its letter dt.5.9.2000 advised IBA for amending Regulation 29 of the Pension Regulations, 1995 so as to include employees with 15 years of service also to be eligible for pension. However, the amendment was carried out under Regulation 28 which stated
"Provided that pension shall also be granted to an employee who opts to retire before attaining the age of
superannuation, but after having served for a minimum
period of 15 years in terms of any scheme that may be
framed for the purpose by the Bank`s Board with the
concurrence of the Government."

Further Supreme Court has also upheld addition of 5 years of notional service in calculating the length of service for those who had completed 20 years of qualifying service. This I suppose is to give weightage for those who have completed 20 years and above and not to those from 15 years to 20 years.

Now I wish to know
a)whether I would be eligible for pension by taking recourse under section 28 (as I had completed 17 years and 2 months of service before resigning from service)
b)As already said, I resigned from service as there was no provision of submitting the application under VR, reason being non completion of 20 years of service. (However, amendment to section 28 (in 2002 with retrospection effect from 2000) just said “pension shall also be granted to an employee who opts to retire before attaining the age of superannuation but after having for a minimum period of 15 years………………”). Here I fail to understand the meaning of retirement - I feel resignation also – someone to clarify.
c)Inspite of the above, if I am not eligible for pension, will I be eligible for getting employer’s contribution of PF, which has not been paid due to my pension option.
d)Am I eligible for encashment of accumulated privilege leave (about 135 days) at my credit at the time of my resignation.

I would be happy to know of any case covering or similar to my position

Dignity North Centre said...

I took VRS in 2001 March and am a PF optee. Now I will be eligible for pension as per Nov 29 2009 settlement.I seek clarification regarding effective date of pension payment which should be from the date of retirement I presume and hope.
Narasimhan

C N Venugopalan said...

They know not what they do is the position with IBA and Banks. Though banks function on the sole premises of some law or other, bankers do not follow or comply with any law in matters of compensation to labour. All things are arbitrary and depends on mere luck of the employees. There is no one to question

C N Venugopalan said...

VRS 2000 can not be called a voluntary process since it was an induced one by giving a special compensation. Resignation is a real process of voluntary quitting. In matters like Pension, what matters sshould be qualifying service and not the mode of exit, which may differ from case to case

Padmaja Iyengar said...

1. I worked in 2 pSU banks for 10 years and 22 years respectively.
2. I was in the categoy of Orthopaedically Handicapped Employees in the second bank.
3. I did not opt for pension the first time.
3. After protracted correspondence for voluntary retirement which was declined, I had no option but to resign in 2005.
4. Can I now exercise option for pension in both the banks or atleast the 2nd bank where I served for 22 years?
Will greatly appreciate clarification. Thanks

C N Venugopalan said...

The case of Padmaja is a genuine case where they should give you option for Pension. Even otherwise, when qualifying service vesting with Pension is fixed (Originally 20 years, then 15 years and afterwords 10 years), the employee is to get Pension. Mode of exit should be immaterial . All th so called VRS are induced and abated ones since they involve inducement. Neither the Leaders nor Banks are reasonable and they ignore all ethics becoming arbitrary in actions. Courts too may not be of much assistance for procuring justice since the process of filing suit and getting a decree are prolonged processes. The dexterity of the counsels play an important part than the real merits. Yet an attempt is worthwhile.

Padmaja Iyengar said...

Dear Resigned Bank Employees with Qualifying Service,

Pl visit this link where a group of resigned employees are actively
considering legal redressal:

http://groups.google.co.in/group/bankresignee

All of us should strengthen this group and fight for our pension. I've joined the group.

Best Wishes for peaceful retired life from 2010 onwards>

Padmaja Iyengar

nagesh said...

LET ABOVE -50- YEARS OF AGE BANK STAFF BE OFFERED ANOTHER VRS TO SAVE THEM FROM THE PRESENT EMBARRASSING TREND - OF TECHNOLOGICAL UPGRADATION
AS THE MODREN BANKING IS MORE EFFICIENTLY HANDLED BY YOUNGER GENERATION PEOPLE ONLY

nagesh said...

LET ABOVE -50- YEARS OF AGE BANK STAFF BE OFFERED ANOTHER VRS TO SAVE THEM FROM THE PRESENT EMBARRASSING TREND - OF TECHNOLOGICAL UPGRADATION
AS THE MODREN BANKING IS MORE EFFICIENTLY HANDLED BY YOUNGER GENERATION PEOPLE ONLY

solmar said...

TO UFBU LEADERS
WHAT IS THE DATE OF NEXT ROUND ?
WHETHER IT IS SMALL COMMITTEE MEETING OF FULL NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE MEETING ?WHY SMALL COMMITTEE MEETINGS ARE CALLED FOR WHEN IBA IS INSISTING FOR FULL NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE MEETING ?THIS APPEARS TO BE PLACING THE BALL IN OTHER PARTYS COURT.NO CONCRETE DECISION IS TAKEN SINCE 27-11-2009.COMMON MEMBERS WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY MORE EYE WASH BY UFBU AND IBA.WHETHER SETTLEMENT WILL BE SIGNED WITHIN STIPULATED PERIOD OF 90 DAYS ? YOU HAVE WASTED VALUABLE TIME JUST IN DILLYDALLYING TACTICS.PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU ARE SITTING ON THE MOUTH OF VOLCANO WHICH IS GOING TO ERRUPT ANY TIME AFTER 25-02-2010.TILL THEN ENJOY PARTY WITH IBA/GOI.

chandan said...

Referring nagesh 15, 2010 8:23 PM:

Younger generation, who joined in bank in last five years are not the cream of society in academic count.

alokkumar said...

NO BODY IS INTERESTED ABOUT PENSION OPTION TO RETIRED BANK STAFF. ALL RETIRED BANK PERSONNEL SALUTE TO SO CALLED UFBU LEADERS FOR THEIR ARBITARY NEGOTIATION WITH I B A . THEY ARE ENJOYING BHARAT DARSHAN AT THE COST OF BANK MEN I. E. FREE BHARAT DARSHAN. WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY SO MUCH TIME IS WASTED. STLL BANK UNION LEADERS ARE GOD FOR US. I B A IS NOT EXCEPTIONAL

alokkumar said...

NO BODY IS INTERESTED ABOUT PENSION OPTION TO RETIRED BANK STAFF. ALL RETIRED BANK PERSONNEL SALUTE TO SO CALLED UFBU LEADERS FOR THEIR ARBITARY NEGOTIATION WITH I B A . THEY ARE ENJOYING BHARAT DARSHAN AT THE COST OF BANK MEN I. E. FREE BHARAT DARSHAN. WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY SO MUCH TIME IS WASTED. STLL BANK UNION LEADERS ARE GOD FOR US. I B A IS NOT EXCEPTIONAL

ravinder said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
C N Venugopalan said...

Kudos to UFBU for the good work. Strikes called for now and then are withdrawn granting IBA time and opportunity to make them traverse through their dotted lines. The future of bank men is safe in their hands. The retired who have paid them subscription all along till retirement are deserted in life and their right to Pension which is a legally vested one is being sold part by part. Redefining trade union roles in keeping with time. Leaders get their salary as gift for signing muster roll. Whatever they get is a gift in their hands and they know not the real value of the sweat of the members. The leaders who not at all knew the meaning of the dictum " Equal pay for Equal work" so far have started raising the slogan and forming a new orgnisation viz. All India Nationalised Bank Officers' Association to establish parity of pay for SBI and other Banks after working as leaders for decades. Old wine in new bottle. God pardon them.

蔡依林Jolin said...

That's actually really cool!!AV,無碼,a片免費看,自拍貼圖,伊莉,微風論壇,成人聊天室,成人電影,成人文學,成人貼圖區,成人網站,一葉情貼圖片區,色情漫畫,言情小說,情色論壇,臺灣情色網,色情影片,色情,成人影城,080視訊聊天室,a片,A漫,h漫,麗的色遊戲,同志色教館,AV女優,SEX,咆哮小老鼠,85cc免費影片,正妹牆,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,情色小說,aio,成人,微風成人,做愛,成人貼圖,18成人,嘟嘟成人網,aio交友愛情館,情色文學,色情小說,色情網站,情色,A片下載,嘟嘟情人色網,成人影片,成人圖片,成人文章,成人小說,成人漫畫,視訊聊天室,性愛,a片,AV女優,聊天室,情色

C N Venugopalan said...

C N Venugopalan
Ex-Manager, Union Bank of India
Nandanam
Kesari Junction,
N Parvoor,
Kerala – 683 513
Phone. 0484 2447994 Mob: 9447747994 E-Mail: ceeyenvee@gmail.com

No.20100611 11th June, 2010

The Hon'ble Minister for Finance,
Govt. of India,
New Delhi

Sir,

Fresh Pension Option to Bank Employees –
Government shall not offend the Constitution and substantive law

I invite your kind attention to letter No. PMO ID No.9 3 2010 – PMP4 164953 and 164954, both dated 2nd June, 2010 from the Prime Minister's Office, forwarding my letter Nos. 20100511 and 20100511 (a) dated 11th May, 2010 to your office for appropriate action.

The Government that evolves out of the magnificent Constitution of the nation has the responsibility of conserving and protecting its grandeur by ensuring various guarantees like right to equality of the citizens besides its own sanctity. For the very same reason, the Government has to secure the various assurances and guarantees relating to equality of the people of all manners to place itself at the pinnacle of glory. The Government itself becoming a party to creating circumstances in which a certain community feels totally aggrieved will not be able to retain its sheen. The aggrieved will tend to make a hue and cry and will ultimately be driven to Courts of Justice for redressing their grievance resulting in huge influx of petitions in Courts that are already saddled with heavy backlog of cases.

IBA and Bank Unions have concluded an agreement to extend a fresh Option for Pension to those who could not exercise it when offered in 1995 because of the presence of an adverse chapter providing for forfeiture of entire past service of an employee in case one participated in strike any time. Though fresh option was legally mandatory to be extended to them when the particular clause was scrapped from the Pension Regulations in February, 1999, Public Sector Banks fraudulently kept the amendment in camera and failed to comply with the legal requirement and deprived majority of bank men of their legitimate right. Albeit the fact that the draft Pension Regulations of 1993 and the Final Pension Regulations sanctioned by the Government categorically stated that "an option once exercised shall be final and irrevocable", banks revoked the options of some employees (including me) exercised in response to the draft Regulations. This was done at the behest of IBA which is a mere voluntary organization of banks and had no powers to overstep the authority of the Government. IBA and Bank Unions, through their whimsical actions, evolved several queer banking equations, proving themselves as totally incompetent to address wage related issues of bank men. If the government goes by the recommendations of IBA – to be better called Indian Blunder Arcade- its very image will be get tarnished soon. It has become imperative that the Government set up a separate Pay commission for the Bank employees for determining the compensation for labour in the industry as in the case of Government servants.

C N Venugopalan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
C N Venugopalan said...

Now that the Government is examining the modalities of extending fresh Option for Pension, it is inevitable that the absurdities are eliminated and full justice is rendered to the people who have been stranded in life for want of income after serving the banks for making what they are now. I felt is desirable that proper feed back on items of strategic importance be given to MOF as otherwise, the wrong implementation of the scheme may generate an impression among the banking community that the MOF and the Hon'ble Minister heading it are devoid of the requisite faculties of mind. With a view to preventing fresh anomalies in the process of implementation, the following items deserve special attention:-

1. Banks are alleging deficit in Pension Funds and lack of financial muscles and make an attempt to recover from the beneficiaries of Pension Scheme a substantial amount from their wages. This has no locus-standi. The simple question that pops up is "what banks and Government would have done if every one had opted for Pension when offered initially?"
2. The recovery of Provident Fund (employer's share) paid at the time of retirement together with 56 percent on it from the retired is a gross anomaly. While commissioning the Pension Scheme in 1995, all those who retired from 01 01 1986 were given its coverage on refund of the CPF paid on retirement along with 6 percent simple interest. This is having precedence and if it is done, it will bring in some amount of fair play. One who retired 10 years back paying 56 percent of the CPF ( say on Rs.2.50 to Rs.3.5 lakhs) may not be suffering much, but one who retired recently say in 2009 also paying back the same 56 percent ( say on Rs.7.00 to Rs.9.00 lakhs ) will be the worst victim of the stipulation. The former must have at least enjoyed the interest on the amount while the latter has not at all. Subjecting the latter to such an irrational payment is vitiated by gross injustice. The envisaged recovery as also its modality is equally not maintainable.
3. Pension is payable under one and the same Pension Regulations. Recovery of a levy from one segment is illegal as another set of employees are paid pension without the levy.
4. While concluding the pact on Pension, the date from which Pension is payable to the already retired is reportedly fixed as 27th November 2009, the date of signing the pact. This deprives the beneficiaries of the Pension payable to them from the date of retirement to such arbitrary date, albeit their legal eligibility to get the same. In my own case, the amount of Pension forfeited through the pact would be Rs.9.00 to Rs.10.00 lakhs for the past eight years. If the bank and the government are to snatch away the pittance payable to an employee on retirement for its functioning, it poses a big shame to the great nation. The wage pact was one to be signed much earlier and the undue delay in signing the same has also put the beneficiaries to the loss of pension for the delayed period as per the "black pact". When one set of people who have done the same work for the organization are paid pension from the date of their retirement, denying the pension payable to the others till the arbitrary date is quite unfair from legal and social angles. It is heard that the date is agreed upon at the instance of the Hon'ble Finance Minister after the parties to the pact consulted him. If so, it can cast a shadow on the reputation of the Minister who himself is a legal luminary and a versatile genius and the decision takes things to the nadir of ethics

C N Venugopalan said...

5. As per the Pension Pact, the commutation will be allowed as on the date of the option and not on the basis of the age at the time of retirement. This runs counter to Pension Regulations as subsequent amendment of the Regulations in any manner infusing fresh conditions will be as futile as patching a hole with darkness. Commutation is, in all fairness to be reckoned on the basis of the age at the time of retirement and not from the date of option as there is no enabling provision so far in the Pension Regulations. .
6. Recovery of 2.8 times the revised pay of November, 2007 from those who are in services is also not justified in any way as their counterparts who are already in Pension Segment are not made to pay the levy. Fact remains that when pay revision took place every time, a portion of the load factor was taken from the PF Optees and Pension Optees uniformly and placed in Pension Fund of Banks. Courts have viewed Pension as deferred wages and once again taking a fresh levy, that too from CPF optees alone for placing them in Pension Scheme is irrational. A number of suits are already filed in different parts of the country already by the victims.
7. The key industry is perpetrating inequality in compensating labour since three retirement benefits viz. Pension Gratuity and CPF are paid to employees in government run Allahabad Bank while those in other stronger PSBs banks paid two benefits only. The position obtaining in State Bank of India is also similar to that in Allahabad Bank. How can one reconcile if pay and allowances in MOF is different from that obtained in another Ministry.


The various legal aspects relating to the fresh option are reportedly being examined by the MOF in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice now. In order that righteousness is established in the process of implementation and the possible huge influx of petitions in various High Courts are prevented, it is felt essential that the recovery of 56 percent from the retired, 2.8 times pay from the working etc. are dispensed with and commutation is permitted on the basis of age at the time of retirement while extending fresh option. It is my humble submission that the Government shall not inflict an injury to the Constitution of the Country and to substantive law placing itself on Achilles' heels while dealing with the banking community that has contributed their mite to the Financial Sector in a great way. If instructions have already been issued, they may please be revised in a befitting way.

C N Venugopalan said...

It is also pertinent to say here that the six days working bank men are paid a pay hike of 17.5 percent alone when the five days working government employees were paid 40 percent hike which is 229 percent higher than that of bank men. The proposed variable pay in baking industry is also fraught with serious repercussions as it will result in erosion in income when those who pleased the immediate boss will be paid lavishly.
.
I am enclosing a copy of the letter, Former Justice of Supreme Court Mr. Krishna Iyer had addressed to the Hon'ble Prime Minister in relation to fresh Option of Pension to be extended to bank men. A copy of my letter is also marked to the Ministry of Law for their information for doing the needful. It is my earnest desire to roar the slogan "Bharat Mata Kee Jai" as done hitherto and not "Weep, Weep Mother India".

I earnestly request you to consider the various matters at length and to have me a line in reply.

Thanking You,

Yours faithfully,



C N Venugopalan

cc.to:-

The Hon'ble Minister for Law and Justice,
Government of India, New Delhi

akgoel said...

Mr. VENUGOPALAN,
KIndly accept my salutations for the valuable communication addressed to Hon'ble Finance Minister for the welfare of the bankers.
banks are writing off thousand crores of poor man's deposits every there and then.
You are right when you disclose that it is a matter of shame to the nation when banks have decided to snatch a handsome amont of 9 to 10 lakhs from the retiree, if he now enter in to pension fold. The law of pension is clear that pension will be started from the date of actual retirement and not from any other tailor-made date.
There cannot be any entry load like a mutual fund.
how funny is that banks are demanding 56% of bank's share of provident fund inclusive of interest accrued up to the date of retirement. Courts will ask the GOI/IBA/ that when you are asking for a 56& as a penalty/entry fee /( we may say interest amount for 8 to 9 years ) of the bank'share of PF recd. by a retired employee. why the learned banks association not paying the amount of pension from the date retirement and how a imaginary date ie. 27.11.10 had been invented?
My Dear Friend VENUGOPALAN taken up the matter with socialistic govt. of my beloved country.
BHARAT MATA ZINDABAD.
BANK EMPLOYEES ZINDABAD.
COM. VENUGOPALAN ZINDABAD.
JUDICIARY OF THE FREE INDIA ZINDABAD.
regards to all the bankmen/retirees/ resignees/family pension holders.
akgoel

ashok said...

C N VENU, A ONE MAN ARMY,
THE VOICE OF UNSPOKEN MAJORITY,
SUCCESS OR NO SUCCESS THE UNJUSTICE BEING FOUGHT
A BIG SALUTE TO HIM

ashok said...

C N VENU, A ONE MAN ARMY,
THE VOICE OF UNSPOKEN MAJORITY,
SUCCESS OR NO SUCCESS THE UNJUSTICE BEING FOUGHT
A BIG SALUTE TO HIM

balasundaram said...

whether it is ONE MAN Mr.VENUGOPALAN or ufbu the right thinking banker should encourage and support the person who is doing and fighting for Justice to all.Hats off Sir

balasundaram said...

whether it is ONE MAN Mr.VENUGOPALAN or ufbu the right thinking banker should encourage and support the person who is doing and fighting for Justice to all.Hats off Sir

ashok said...

Dear reaspected ones,
May someone enlighten me , if I correctly understood the income tax exemption limit enhanced to 10 lacs for the employees retired on 24-05-2010 and after.
But the person retired before 24-05-2010 during the same financial year 2010-2011 has to pay the tax on gratuity amt above 3.5 lac ( less amt of gratuity received during the same financial year as per gratuity amendment act 2010 that too taxable )
Please let the rationale behind it or it is an error.

C N Venugopalan said...

C N VENUGOPALAN WHO FOUGHT FOR THE ISSUE FOR NINE YEARS REQUEST YOU TO PLEASE SPEND 10 MINUTES AND TEN RUPEES AND SEND A LETTER TO MOF UNDER RTI SO THAT MINISTRY GETS FLOODED WITH SUCH REQUESTS AND THEY ACT APPROPRIATELY BY CUTTING THE LEVY OF 2.8 TIMES PAY , 56 PERCENT OF CPF ETC. WORKING PEOPLE MAY SEND IT IN THE NAME OF SPOUSE/RELATIVES OR FRIENDS WITHOUT GIVING THEIR OFFICE ADDRESS


From
…………………………… Place:
-------------------- Date:




The Central Public Information Officer,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Economic Affairs,
North Block
New Delhi 110 001


Dear Sir,

Requisition of Information under RTI Act, 2005

We invite your kind attention to letterNo.20060611 dated 11th June, 2010 Shri C N Venugopalan of Kerala has addressed to the Hon'ble Minister of Finance pointing out the anomalies in extending fresh option for Pension in Public Sector Banks.

The following anomalies in the proposal made by IBA have been listed out and brought to the attention of the Hon'ble Minister for his consideration:-

1. Recovery of CPF and another 56 percent on it as a contribution for pension coverage to retired
2. Recovery of 2.8 times November, 2007 pay in the case of the working people
3. Forfeiture of Pension from the date of retirement to the arbitrary date of 27 November, 2009 in the case of the retired.
4. Releasing commutation benefit without reckoning the age at the time of retirement.

Pension is an already sanctioned benefit to the bank employees which had been taken away illegally through the wrong implementation of the scheme and is not at all a new benefit. Whereas the Pension Scheme has been one and the same and Government and Public Sector Banks irrationally burdening one segment of employees alone totally lacks propriety. Such an action will constitute an offence upon the magnificent Constitution of the great democratic nation and on substantive law. Government approval for the illegal recovery recommended by IBA will go to prove that the oath of office the Hon'ble Minister has taken while swearing in "to treat people of all manners alike" gets breached.

I request that the action the government has taken to do away with the anomalies and to render justice to the bank men may please be intimated. The action report on the letter either separately or in the form of the notings on the letter under reference may be made available to me. In case the anomalies are eliminated in tandem with the provisions of the constitution and of substantive law, furnishing of the information sought will stand waived.

The prescribed fees for supplying the information is sent herewith


Thanking You,

Yours faithfully,



(Name)

Encl: Postal Order No.___________ dated _________ for Rs.10/- payable at N Delhi in favour of CPIO, MOF

alokkumar said...

MAY I BE ALLOWED TO PUT QUESTION BEFORE THE RESPECTED CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS OF MINISTRY OF FINANCE WHY RETIRED BANK STAFF PENALISE TO PAY 56%EXTRA BURDEN OF BANK CONTRIBUTION TO PAY INDIAN BANK ASSOCIATION WHO HAS NO CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS ECONOMIC GROWTH RATHER A 100% BURDEN OM EXCHEQUER THIS IBA &UFBU HAS TREATED RETIRED BANK OFFICERS AS DOG OF THE NATION. MOREOVER IT IS VERY SAD THAT OUR RESPECTED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT ARE NOT UTTERING SPECIALLY RESPECTED LEFT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT HAVE NO VOICE AGAINST INDIAN BANK ASSOCIATION & THEIR BRANCH UFBU. IT IS SHAMETHAT RETIRED BANK OFFICERS TREATED AS CRIMINAL AS THEY HAVE NOT GIVEN PENSION FROM RETIREMENT DATE. MAY I APPEAL TO OTHER RESPECTED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT SPECIALLY HONOURABLE RAILWAY MINISTER TO ASK MINISTRY OF FINANCE WHAT SIN RETIRED BANKSTAFF HAS MADE. PLEASE SCRAP INDIAN BANK ASSOCIATION IMMEDIATLY WHO HAS NO FUNCTION FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH. ALL MEMBERS IBA SHOULD BE TRANSFERED TO BRANCH PRACTICAL BANKING OPERATIONAL CELL TO RURAL SEMIURBAN BRANCHES.

akgoel said...

DEAR FRIENDS
Bank Unions settled wage pact in the Industry conceding to 17.5 percent hike and Fresh Option of Pension to the retired and working. The hike is not so higher ever in the Industry as Union claim. When the pay hike of 40 percent to five days working Government employees is considered, Bank employees got 56.5 percent less. The working has to pay 2.8 times of the November, 2007 “Pay” to gain entry into Pension Scheme. The retired has to pay back 156 percent of the CPF paid to them on retirement. They further lost the Pension from the date of retirement to 26th November, 2009, an arbitrary date which has no relevance. It appears all concerned worked hard(ly) to prolong the agreement to hype the arrears to please the bankers.

One has to think why Pension Option ,that was due to us upon scrapping the forfeiture of service clause,, was not pressed by the parties to the previous settlements until 2007. Why did Parties to the settlements drive all the retired to Courts to stage a bad show and get adverse judgments? Supreme Court rejected intervention in the appeals in 2001 closing the issue for ever. The parties to the settlement that were silent on Pension Option agreed with IBA in 2005 not to open the issue any further. It was again brought to lime light by a one man army viz. C N Venugopalan, Ex- Manager, Union Bank of India from Kochi. He took VRS in 2001 at the age of 49 and left no stone unturned in reviving the lost dream of the banking community. His inspiring and deep rooted letters and other communications compelled the the IBA/Parties to the settlement to once again dwell upon Pension Option for the benefit of all. Zeal and enthusiasm were the weapons of the fighter and he used them well to make the Parties to start fight for Pension again. Now the lost social security benefit has reached all of us again.

The working who have to pay only 2.8 times of Pay are the more benefited than the retired who have to surrender 156 percent of the CPF received. The worst sufferer is the architect of fresh option who abandoned his job forgoing future promotions and emoluments of about Rs.60.00 lakhs for 11 years and spent out of pocket huge money out of his terminal benefit for the great cause of redeeming the legally due benefit. It is our responsibility to acknowledge the work and to adequately compensate him. When participants in reality shows even get rewards of Crores of Rupees, bank employees and the retired who benefited out of his strenuous work will render themselves a thankless lot if they do not reciprocate the great work.

Now that IBA is snatching away 2.8 times of pay from the working and 156 percent of CPF and Pension from the date of retirement to the date envisaged in the settlement preventing the logic implementation of the Pension regulations once again, it has to be challenged in the Court. Since Mr. Venugopalan has taken up this challenge by making statements to that effect it is our responsibility to extend him all support for the mission. I (we) hereby call upon all dignified bank men who make profuse contributions acknowledging his work and inspiring him further to go ahead with his mission.

DO WHAT EVER YOU CAN DO . IT IS OUR BOUNDEN DUTY TO SAY THANKS TO SAY THANKS. HE IS THE BOAT-MAN OF OUR PENSION-BOAT..
WE SHOULD URGE HIM TO PREPARE FOR LEGAL ACTION TOO. IF YOU FEEL YOU CAN HAVE HIS VIEWS BY INVITING HIM ON G MAIL TO CHAT.
HIS ID IS. CEEYENVEE@GMAIL.COM

You can make a LEGAL FUND POOL BY SENDING remittances to him at his address C N Venugopalan Nandanam, Kesari Junction, N Paravoor, Kerala 683 513 and to Current Account No. 337804010040001 with UBI N Paravoor .


Published by Hail Venugopal Committee N Delhi

Search the web

Custom Search

Contact Us

Viewers may share any information with the administrator in this email shyamali00@gmail.com.
Any news, if approved, may be published in this blog under his /her name.

.................RECENT HEADLINES

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Blog Archive

Do You Know These?:

Bookmark This Page

Bookmark and Share

Google+ Badge

All the information published in this webpage is submitted by users or free to download on the internet. I make no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this page and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. All the other pages you visit through the hyper links may have different privacy policies. If anybody feels that his/her data has been illegally put in this webpage, or if you are the rightful owner of any material and want it removed please email me at "shyamali00@gmail.com" and I will remove it immediately on demand. All the other standard disclaimers also apply.