Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Details of Talks with IBA on 13th April, 2010. IBA proposes to sign settlement on 20th April.


We reproduce herein the text of UFBU Circular No. 3 of date on the details of the discussions held between UFBU and IBA today (13th April, 2010) at Mumbai.

Pension related issues: While the draft of the Pension Option Settlement has been discussed and finalised, important issues of sharing the deficit / gap were discussed today. Various proposals of sharing method were discussed by us in the UFBU meeting including differential formula for pension optees and PF optees and taken up with the IBA. However, having regard to certain legal and other implications, it has been finalised to have a uniform sharing formula. The details are given in the UFBU circular herein.

Improvements in pension scheme: UFBU has also decided to take up various issues relating to improvements in the Pension Scheme like periodical updation of pension along with wage revision for serving employees, 100 % DA to be paid to all pensioners, common indexation of pension, increase in commutable portion of pension, increase in Ex Gratia for Pre-1986 retirees/widows, higher pension for pensioners above the age of 80, etc.

Final Settlement: Various informations are being floated amongst the employees that the 9th Bipartite Settlement would be signed on 15th, 17th, 25th, etc. As of now, IBA has proposed that the final settlement can be signed on 20th April, 2010 since according to them all the issues stand resolved and the draft is also getting finalised. However, from our side, there are very important issues like IBA’s proposals on outsourcing and increase in duties of Single Window Operators, Head Cashiers and Special Assistants without increase in Special Pay on which there are serious differences with the IBA. Without resolving these issues it would not be possible for AIBEA to sign the Settlement.

We will keep members informed of all developments. Units and members are requested not to be carried away or provoked by attempts from any quarter to create confusions and diversions.

Text of UFBU Circular No.3 dated 13th April, 2010.

Another round of bipartite talks was held between IBA and UFBU constituents at Mumbai today. IBA was represented by Mr. Ramakrishnan, Chief Executive, Mr. Unnikrishnan, Dy. Chief Executive and Mr. M. Venugopalan, Officer on Special Duty. From UFBU, representatives of all the 9 Unions were present.

In today’s meeting, issues relating to settlement on pension option were taken up. The draft Settlement was discussed in details and finalized.

Regarding retirees, the formula for contribution of Rs. 934 crores ( 30% gap ) of the deficit after refund of the PF amount (Bank’s contribution), it has been decided that the retirees will contribute as under:







Refund of PF amount (Bank’s contribution) actually received  at the time of retirement  (no interest is payable on this amount)
Rs.  X
Plus: 56 % on this amount of Rs. X
Rs.  Y
Less: Commutation amount Receivable from the Bank
Rs.  Z
Net Amount refundable to the Bank ( X + Y – Z )
Rs ……

Regarding existing employees / officers, out of the net gap of Rs. 6000 crores, Banks would contribute 70 % i.e. Rs. 4200 crores. For the balance of Rs. 1800 crores ( 30%) employees / officers would contribute as under: ( This will be a onetime contribution and would be recovered from the arrears.)

For existing employees/officers - 1.6 times of “ Pay ” payable for the month of November, 2007.

For employees who have joined the banks after 1st November, 2007 their contribution would be proportionately reduced.

Date of effect of pension option: IBA reiterated their stand that pension option would be effective from the date of the Settlement while we have explained our viewpoint that it should be w.e.f. 1-4-2008. Difference on this issue persists. UFBU decided to take steps to find a solution to this issue.

Improvements under Pension Scheme: We took up with IBA various improvements in the Pension scheme like periodical updation of pension along with wage revision for serving employees, 100 % DA to be paid to all pensioners, common indexation of pension, increase in commutable portion of pension, increase in Ex Gratia for Pre-1986 retirees/widows, higher pension for pensioners above the age of 80, etc. After discussion it has been decided to submit a memorandum on these issues to the IBA and the Government and to be pursued further.

Source : AIBEA

SBI officers protest wage settlement, quit association.

[Our gratitutude to Mr P. Mohan for continuously updating us regarding 9th Bipartite.]

121 comments:

SHYAM SINGH said...

Oh my God ! My 71% arrear is gone in various deductions like under:-

Gross Arrear 94495.45
Less:-
PF -17916
TDS -9000
Leavy -3779
Pension fund gap -36304
Net Arrear in hand 27496.45
that is 29% only of gross arrear !

SK said...

Why can't these great leaders sign the MOU on 20.04.2010 as proposed by IBA and subsequently fight for change in effective date of pension and other related issues etc.? Outsourcing etc is overdue since last decade .

Is there any restricition for non-rectification of any anomely after signing the agreement ?

Is there any compulsion to sign pension deal alongwith 9th BPS only ? Why not after or before ?

UFBU has already messed the 9th BPS by mixing pension issue with wage revision and they appear to be in the mood of further delay . This attiude will not be tolerated. If you have fear of God, please sign Wage Revision by 20/04/2010.

Whether our great leaders are afraid of refusal of pension benefit by IBA in case of finanlisation of BPS ? If not then why they are causingh further monetory loss to members ?

It is already too late .

akhilesh said...

I retired from Allahabad Bank on 30th jan. 2010 as P.F. op-tee.Shall I will be treated as retired for taking 2nd
pension option as I was in service on Nov2007.56 percent of Bank contribution
comes about more than five laths. It is too much.

akhilesh said...

Please advice what percent will be taken for commutation of pension.

suresh bandaru said...

pl send thre formula to be calculted of pension receivable to the retired officers
suresh bandaru

chandan said...

QUOTE FROM AIBEA WEBSITE:


"For employees who have joined the banks after 1st November, 2007 their contribution would be proportionately reduced.'

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With this line it is now clear that existing pension optees are also to contribute 1.6 times.Definitely it invites legal recourse and for existing/retired PF optees that will create nightmare in no doubt. Like bank resigner we existing pension optees are to form a forum and fight tooth and nail. UFBU/IBA can't play with us. Let's move to the apex court and spoil all this second pension option. For this we already faced a lot of problem and our salary revised in a lower end.

Rest on Next.

Thanks.

Shridhar said...

I am a retired officer retired on 30-04-2009.I have received banks PF
Rs.8,92000/-.I was on the establishment on 01-11-2007 whether I will treated as retirees or what?If retirees as per agreement I have refund banks pf Rs.892000/-plus 56% means nearly 5,00,000/- so totally i have to refund Rs.13,92,000/-for getting pension option is it true or any thing else pl explain me if somebody got the correct picture.It is mentioned that int is not payable so from above int amt is to deducted pl explain.Thanks

rishikesh said...

with reference to 9th BPS, one of union says that it will not sign on 20.04 unless issues related to Spl pay, single window, dt of pension,outsourcing etc is resolved.
o.k. u will not show your strength,nor agitate just sit tight with finalisation as since last 2 n 1/2 yrs nor UBFU can make a consensus.It is just iba proposes than some section of ubfu reacts on some issues.
Better next time leave it entirely upon IBA only.
SBI sr officers are resigning from association. Talented Young and jr employees see banks as a stop gap arrangement.This is high time that IBA as guardian of banking industry should look beyond just acting as sarkari agency.

Sanjay Bhatt said...

Simply UFBU made fool us on both Pension and Pay.

PLEASE DON'T PAY LEVY AND UNION FEES.

Leaders are SHAMELESS.
In reality they are not a leader but like us common member without collective bargaining guts,without any power,no fighting mood,no quick decision taken person,chances losers.

If they have no abilities than Why represent for us for BPS talks.

God and Members and their family will not forgive them for their bad(wrong) workout.

We all will going to pay 40% of our Arrears for Pension.

What type of Pension Scheme and What type of 2nd Pension Option?

What is the meaning of this type of pension for employees.

Pension cost 30% is not included in 17.5% of wage revision,But When it will be deducted from our Arrears means Pension load's 30% is already included in 17.5%.UFBU has make us very cutely fool.

At least I will not forgive UFBU leaders for this time work.

Till today Special Allowance Rs.1000/- also not cleared with What conditions.

Leaders may sold all members independence and primary rights to IBA on title of OUTSOURCING And PARITY in Special Allowances.

BEWARE FROM DOG(LEADERS)

Leaders are not repeating GOLDEN PAST but Presenting What they are and What is their cost,meaning,power etc.

I am PF optee but I don't want to take pension now,because of high part of cost.


Can We considered deduction of pension from Arrears as Out of 17.5% ?

arunkumarbhattacharyya said...

ARUN BHATTACHARYYA
BEING A PENSION OPTEE SINCE INCEPTION OF PENSION REGLATION, I SHALL GET LESS AMOUNT THAN A CPF OPTEE IN SAME SENIORITY ,SAME BASIC ETC, AS BECAUSE THE CPF OPTEE EARNED EXCESS INTEREST AGAINST CPF CONTRIBUTION(BOTH BANK @ SELF)AFTER SURRENDERING banks' portion of CONTRIBUTION TO PENSION FUND w.e.f next date of settlement. This is the tragedy what CPF OPTEE contribute to the Pension optee .Shame to the Union Leaders of the then supporter of CPF . Carry on the Leaders of those unoins who always misled the Bank employees since their birth.

MADAPPA said...

REFERING UFBU CIRCULAR No.3D ATED 13th APRIL, 2010.

MY DEAR FOLLISH UFBU LEADERS,

AS PER YOUR CIRCULAR, THE PENSION IS PAYABLE FROM THE DATE OF SETTLEMENT. YOU ARE AWARE THAT POSTPONING THE SETTLEMENT ANY MORE WILL BE A LOSS TO THE EXISTING RETIRED EMPLOYEES AND ALSO TO THE EMPLOYEES RETIRING THIS MONTH SINCE THEY WILL NOT GET ANY PENSION TILL THE PENSION AGREEMENT IS SIGNED.

MOREOVER, THE EMPLOYEES RETIRING THIS MONTH AND SUBSEQUENT MONTHS TILL SIGNING OF SETTLEMENT HAVE TO COUGH UP 56% OF THE BANK's CONTRIBUTION ADDITIONALLY. IF THE AGREEMENT IS SIGNED IMMEDIATELY, THE EMPLOYEES RETIRING THERE AFTER HAVE TO PAY ONLY 1.6 TIMES OF THE PAY AS ON 01-11-2007

THE DELAY IN SIGNING THE AGREEMENT IS CAUSING MULTIPLE LOSSES TO THE MEMBERS AND YOU PEOPLE ARE ENJOYING THE FUN AT THE COST OF THE MEMBERS. IF YOU WANT TO DO ANY IMPROVEMENTS, YOU FIRST SIGN THE AGREEMENT, ALLOW THE MEMBERS TO HAVE PENSION BENEFIT AND YOU CAN TAKE UP THE UNFINISHED AGENDA THER AFTER WITH IBA/GOI. THERE IS NO BODY ON EARTH WHO CAN PREVENT YOU FROM PERSUING FOR BETTER WAGES AND WORKING CONDITIONS. NOW ALL MEMBERS HAVE LOST PATIENCE. PLEASE DONOT TEST THE PATIENCE OF MEMBERS. YOU PEOPLE MAY FACE DIFFICULTY IN WALKING ON THE STREETS. IF IT IS A FACTORY OR ANY OTHER ORGANISATION INVOLVING LOWER EDUCATED CLASS, BY NOW, YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN IN HOSPITALS WITH HEAVY BANDAGE FROM ALL SIDES.IT IS BECAUSE OF THE ELITE BANK EMPLOYEES YOU AR SAFE. NOW ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, STOP YOU FOOLISH GAMBLING WHICH WILL BE COUNTER PRODUCTIVE.

Ramachandran said...

I am really surprised as to how these leaders have arrived at the formula for retired employees who have not opted for pension but now want to opt for the same.

They have themselves stated that the gap of 30% is 934 crores and the number of retired employees all put together is 65000/-.Then how is it that they have arrived at this 56%.What is the logic behind this figure.If somebody can please explain for my sake.

To my knowledge the service regulation is that in case a retired employee opts for pension he has to return the banks contribution with interest along with 6% simple interest until the date of return of the amount.Now how is it that this service regulation is ignored and the leaders are not questioning the conduct of IBA (to the detriment of retired employees) who are the authors of the service regulation.

Then another important point is that they are treating all the retired employees alike.i.e an employee retired on 31.10.2007 and an employee who has retired say 5 years or 10 years before.

I would request the blog readers to please elaborate on the above points particularly this 56%.

Those who have retired in 1995-96 they have received less by way of banks contribution but they have used the banks contribution received by them for a longer period and earned interest where as an employee retired in say 2005 has received more by way of banks contribution but less by way of interest .

Therefore the equitable way of calculating the gap of 30% is to divide Rs.934 crores by 65000 which is coming Rs.144000/- per head and this is how this should be calculated I feel.

In case of an employee who has retired on 31.10.2007 and is in PF and opts for pension now probably he may have to refund more than what he will be getting by way of PF contribution plus commutation.

SNEHA said...

you leaders (BASTARDS) FIRST RESIGN FROM THE UNION LEADERSHIP, IF WE HAD ELECTED LADY LEADERS IT WOULD HAVE BETTER WAGE REVISION.
OTHER GOVT. EMPLOYEES ARE MAKING HUMILIATING COMMENTS ON OUR BANK STAFF LEADER SHIP SAYING THAT " OUR UNION LEADES ARE EUNUCHS( KOJJAS) THAT OUR LEADERS HAVE NO DARE TO GO FOR INDIFINITE STRIKE FOR BETER WAGE REVISION THERY ARE ACTING AS BROKERS

SHANKAR said...

The formula for sharing 30 % burden for retirees opting pension now is unscientific and discriminatory and illegal.There should not be much difference between a person just retired before signing of the pension settlement and a person who retire after signing the pension settlement. For example,
Mr A
Retired in March 2010 and got Rs 8 lakhs as Management contribution which he has to refund with additional 56 % which works out to Rs 4.48 lakhs.Total is Rs 8+4.48=12.48 lakhs
Mr B
Retired after signing of the settlement and got Rs 8.00 lakhs as management contribution. He has to refund Rs 8+(1.6 times his Basic as on November 2007, which works out to Rs 56,000.00(Assuming his basic salary as on November 2007 is Rs 35,100.00)
He has to refund only Rs 8.56 lakhs
(Commutation amount almost equal in both cases)
Just because Mr A retired before signing the settlement,the difference between Mr A and Mr B of Rs 4.48-0 minus 0.56 lakhs =3.92lakhs is not justified
This anomoly if not rectified,may invite numerous legal hurdles.All those who are connected with settlement process should work out scientifically and take remedial steps immediately.
However, if only those officers who were not in the service of the bank as on 01.11.2007 are treated as "Retirees" this formula may work out. Still 56 % additional cost is too much for anybody. Rs 934 crores devided to 65000 employees works out to Rs 1,44,000.00 where as some retirees are required to pay between 6 to 8 lakhs as proposed by IBA.This is abnormal

shilpi said...

badhe chalo

Gyan Cghand Kumbhat said...

Oh God what a leadership

"ANDHER NAGRI CHOUPAT RAJA -
TAKE SER BHAJI TAKE SER KHAJA"

What a formula sir-ji. Have you ever seen this type of distribution of pension fund Gap among the pension optee's and non pension optee's. Where the wordings of Mr. Venkatachalam has gone that existing pension optee's have to bear a nominal share against incremental cost.

G.C.Kumbhat

Swami said...

Dear Comrades,
Read my comments given few days before regarding our contribution towards Pension Corpus. It is for this great shock our leaders have silent.
It is unfair that Scale 1 to 3 Officers given 15% load, 4&5 25% load and 6 & 7 given 50% load. Then Why Nadaf accept 1.6 times of Nov 07 BP for all. Mr. Nadaf DEDUCT 1.25 TIMES FOR SCALE 1 TO 3, 2 TIMES FOR GRADE 4 & 5, AND 3 TIMES FOR GR. 6 & 7. When all our money is loaded on Chief Managers, AGMs, DGMs, and GMs why bloody they pay equally 1.6 times.
Regarding RETIREES, THOSE who were in service in 1995/1996 old pension date and retired in APRIL, 2010 ALSO 56% addl of their PF. TOTALLY UNFAIR. 1996. 100%, 1997, 95% LIKE THAT IT SHOULD COME AND SHALL BE EQUAL TO 1.25 TIMES OF THEIR BASIC PAY.

Swami said...

STAGNATION INCREMENTS are not sanctioned like annual increments. In CLERICAL 1 addl and in OFFICERS 2 ADDL stagn increments. It will be sanctioned later and they will receive separate arrears after wage revision arrears including retirees on or after 1.11.2007. Then they can very easily skip paying 1.6 times of NOV. 2007 PAY ie., NEW STAGN PAY. They get more money. But contribute less for PENSION CORPUS. Then when and how 1800 crore corpus will become full. Again the shortage will fall on our head.

Swami said...

DEDUCTION FOR PENSION CORPUS.
DEAR LEADERS, DONT PICK POCKET OUR VALUED ARREARS in the name of UNITY. For those who are going to Serve the bank longer, should subscribe less than 1.6 times according to remaining service available and in future settlement we have to share your burden. Those retiring by 2012 should subscribe DOUBLE. ARISE AWAKE ALL.

MADAPPA said...

MR CHANDANJI,

EVERY AGREEMENT WILL HAVE SOME DEFICIENCIES GIVING RISE TO LITIGATION. WE KNOW THE UFBU AND IBA HAVE CONSPIRED TO DISCOURAGE / DENY PENSION OPTION TO RETIREES BY RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 56% OF MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION. THE IBA WAS NOT WILLING TO EXTEND THE PENSION TO RETIREES AND THEIR AIM WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY SUCH HIGH COST/RECOVERY AT THE SUGGESTION OF THE UFBU. NOW, UFBU IS HELPLESS SINCE IT IS THEIR OWN SUGGESTION.

NOW, THE MEMBERS SHOULD EXERCISE PATIENCE AND FIRST OPT FOR PENSION. RETIREES AND SERVING MEMBERS CAN LATER ON FILE WRIT IN A HIGH COURT CHALLENGING THE ILLEGAL RECOVERY TOWARDS PENSION CORPUS.

IT IS IMMATURE TO THINK OF LEGAL RECOURCE AND GETTING THE PENSION AGREEMENTS STAYED AT THIS JUNCTURE WHICH THE IBA WILL WHOLE HEARTEDLY WELCOME. WE SHOULD ALWAYS THINK OF DOING GOOD TO OUR OUR FAMILY MEMBERS AND OUR BANKING COMMUNITY. EVEN IF WE HAVE TO SACRIFICE FOR THE TIME BEING WE SHOLUD NOT HESITATE. IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO GOOD TO YOUR COMMUNITY PLEASE KEEP QUITE BUT DONOT HARM THEM BY FILING WRIT AT THIS TIME.

WE KNOW WHAT THE IBA/UFBU ARE DOING IS ILLEGAL. IF THE MATTER IS PLACED BEFORE HC/SC THERE IS FAIR CHANCE OF WINNING THE CASE. HOWEVER, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE AN ILLUSION THAT THE COURT WILL CERTAINLY GIVE JUSTICE. YOU ARE AWARE THAT WHEN THE ISSUE OF SECOND OPTION WAS RAISED BEFORE SC AFTER THE STRIKE CLAUSE WAS REMOVED, THE PLEA WAS NOT ALLOWED. WE CANNOT ANTICIPATE FAVOURABLE COURT JUDGEMENTS WHEN THE MATTER IS OF FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS.

PLEASE WAIT. LET THE PROCESS OF PENSION OPTION TO COMPLETE. THEN THINK OF LEGAL ACTION. AFTER ALL IT IS A MATTER OF ONE MONTH.

ajitnaik said...

Hi Friends,
Sharing cost of pension is a difficult task. As the pension is given/demanded from April 08 or later date and not from the date of retirement i.e from 1995/96, many retirees lost huge sum of pension,commutation amount as of that date since then. Can anybody come forward with a scientific formula of cost sharing considering all such losses. So some compromise is a must or continue with the present status witout excercising for new option which is not compulsory.We may give hundreds of arguments pro or against the agreement favorable/unfavorable to old/recently retired employees,existing pf/pension option staff etc. Let individuals decide on the issue or Intellingent people in the group give scientific formula of cost sharing. Only criticising is not at all good in the larger interst without suggesting solution in the right time.

BALAN said...

ANALYSIS OF PENSION RELATED CIRCULAR OF VARIOUS UNIONS DT 13.04.2010

RETIRED PF OPTEES They have to pay 56% of additional amount that they have received for getting pension. .The figure 56 is nothing but interest for 7 years at the simple rate of 8% aiming the bulk VRS pf optees of 2001 and assume that the pension pay out date may oscillate between 01.04.20008 and 01.04.2010 depending on who is going to convince whom ie UFBU AND IBA .The draft has cleverly avoided the WORD INTEREST because the moment you say that they have to pay interest on their accumulation they may be notionally entitled for pension from the date of their retirement at least for argument sake which nobody is interested.to give. Since the vrs 2001 scheme was a golden handshake scheme which union opposed at that time and because of the pressure only they have taken the pension cause now, no better package can be expected. They can keep this 56 % figure only for those retired under vrs 2001 scheme with pf option with exgratia amount.because at that time amount of pf received also was less


MODIFICATION TO BE DONE
The figure should be reduced proportionately for the normal retired pf optees after 2001 vrs scheme OR they can arrive the figure with the base date of effect of pension settlement and the date of retirement @ 8% p.a by going on the reverse direction subject to a maximum of seven years without calling it as interest and calling it as a lump sum amount for filling the gap in pension fund. No justification for a retired normal pf optee of say 2005 paying a much higher amount with increased accumulations than a person of 2001 retiree .
For a pf optee retired on or after 01.11.2007 recovery of 56% is highly inhuman and totally un accepatable .They should be asked to return the PF received with simple interest of 8% p.a from the date of retitrement in the same method suggested above.

EXISTING PF OPTEES AND PENSION OPTEES: Since mou itself says that one more pension option to be given to those who has not opted earlier , legally the pf optees are getting that chance to become member of the pension fund. EXCEPT THAT THEY HAVE NOT OPTED PENSION EARLIER, NO LINE CAN BE DRAWN BETWEEN TWO SERVING EMPLOYEES SAY A AND B OPTED FOR PENSION EARLIER AND THE OTHER PERSON WANTS TO OPT NOW. THE OUTFLOW OF FUNDS FROM BOTH CASES TO THE BANK BY WAY OF PF SUBSCRIPTION IS IDENTICAL.
IN RBI WHERE ONE MORE OPTION WAS GIVEN EVERYBODY WAS TREATED IDENTICAL ONLY.
So to avoid legal complications the UFBU/IBA combine has adopted the easy method of recovering money from the existing serving employees whether pf or pension opted to contribute equally to the GAP IN PENSION FUND. Since our pension regulations provide for arriving the deficit and to be provided they are adopting it now as per the MOU. Whether such sharing is correct or not is a different issue. Having agreed for 1800 crores that has to be done in a less combursome way by taking into account legal angle also.

SUGGESTUION TO UFBU

The recovery clause should be modified as follows

The amount repayable is to be arrived as the number of completed years that the PF bank portion is in the hands of the retirees and the factor is simple rate of 8% p.a. THEY NEED NOT CALL AS INTEREST IF THEY FEAR LEGAL COMPLICATION . LET THEM CALL IT AS A FACTOR FOR ARRIVING TO FILL THE GAP IN PENSION FUND.
THIS ONLY WILL GIVE JUSTIFICATION.
LET THEM IMPLEMENT THE PENSION AGREEMENT WEF THE RESPECTIVE RETIREMENT DATE WITH MONETARY BENEFIT FROM 01.04.2008 OR 01.04.2009 ETC. THIS WILL MAKE THE PF OPTEES TO GET IN TO THE PENSION FOLD FROM THEIR RETIREMENT DATE. SINCE THEY ARE CHARGING EXORBITANT AMOUNT LIKE CAPITATION FEE FOR GIVING PENSION, THE COMMUTATION CAN BE FROM THE NOTIONAL DATE OF RETIREMENT WITH 15 YEARS PERIOD ALSO DETERMINED FROM THAT DATE AND THE RECOVERIES FROM THE DATE OF RETIREMENT TO THE DATE OF EFEFCT CAN ALSO WE WAIVED. THIS PACKAGE ONLY WILL HAVE SOME MEANING FOR THE RETIRED PF OPTEES.
TO BE CONTINUED

BALAN said...

FUTURE PENSION DETERMINATION. : ANY OTHER PENSION IMPROVEMENT OTHER THAN 100% DA NEUTRASLISATION TO PRE 01.11.2002 RETIREES AND ROUTINE DA INCREASE ,SHOULD IN FUTURE COVER THESE RETIRED PENSION OPTEES ALSO FOR THE PURPOSE OF EQUITABLE RECOVERY AS THEIR NUMBER BECOME SLOWLY MOVING UP IN THE YEARS TO COME.BECAUSE OUR FUNDS ARE COMING FROM BANK PROFITABILITY AND NOT CONSOLIDATED FUND OF INDIA. HENCE IT IS BETTER TO REQUEST IBA TO RELEASE 100% DA TO PRE 01.11.2002 RETIREES. NOW ITSELF.
NOW THAT ALL EMPLOYEES BEARING A FEW HUNDREDS WHO MAY CONTINUE WITH PF OPTION IF AT ALL,MAY BECOME MEMBER OF THE PENSION FUND, THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE RETIREES ASSOCIATION SHOULD ALSO BE CALLED FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION AND SERVING EMPLOYEES ALONE CAN NOT BE ASKED TOBEAR THE LOAD OF FUTURE ACTUARY AMOUNT ARRIVED.IF UPDATION OR INDEXATION TOOK PLACE.

EFFORTS SHOLD BE MADE TO IMPROVE HRA TO 30% / INTRODUCTION OF GRADE PAY AND OTHE R ALLOWANCES TO THE EXISTING SERVING STAFF AT LEAST FROM 01.11.2012 WITHOUT GOING FOR MERGER OF BASIC EXCEPT RECTIFYING THE ANOMALIES ARISING NOW BY RESTRUCTURING THE PAY SCALES AT THE \SAME INDEX LEVEL. LET THE SERVING EMPLOYEES DRAW INCREASED WAGES TO THE TUNE OF 30 TO 40% IN NON PENSIONABLE AREAS LIKE HRA, EDUCATION ALLOWANCE. TRANSPORT ALLOWANCE ETC. WHICH WILL ACT AS A DISINCENTIVE TO TAKE VRS UNLESS AND OTHERWISE THEY ARE IN APOSITION TO MANAGE FAMILY ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT MUCH SALARY.

ACCEPT NOW IBA S TERMS AND SIGN THE SETTLEMENT AS THIS NINETH BIPARTITE THE MAIN FOCUS IS SECOND PENSION OPTION SAVING 2.6 LAHS EMPLOYEES.
.VIGOROUSLY FIGHT FOR RESIDUAL PENSION ISSUES AFTER IMPLEMENTING THE 9 TH BIPARTITE. STUDY TH E IMPACT OF THE LOAD. THE MOMENET THE BALANCE SHEET OF 31.03.2011 WAS FINALISED PREPARE A VERY GOOD CHARTER OF DEMANDS AND FIGHT AND IMPLEMENT WEF 01.11.2012. DON’T BRING MUCH COMPONENT WHICH WILL HAVE PENSION BEARING EFFECT . LET IT BE TAKEN CARE OF AFTER 01.11.2017 BY TAKING CLUE FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND THE FUTURE SCENARIO OF BANKING GROWTH IN THE YEARS TO COME.

K BALASUBRAMANIAN RETIRED SENIOR MANAGER VRS 2001 PENSION OPTEE

SHANKAR said...

Referring ajithnaik-April 15, 2010 10:19 AM
The point is clear.Who are retirees? Since the burden on retired and existing PF optees is arrived as on 31.03.2008, all employees who were in the muster roll of his/her bank as on 01.11.2007 and retired subsequently till the date of signing the pension settlement should be treated as existing employees and the amount to be collected from them should be at par with those of existing employees.
Then the sharing of burden can be considered as scientific. Commutation amount has no relevance since the same will be collected back from the pension to be paid in future and hence it can not be treated as a deduction from the burden to be shared by employees. 56 % of the amount of PF contribution to be paid by employees is arrived as under:-
01. Accumulated PF of retirees-
Rs 1,658 crores
02. Shortfall identified as on
31.03.2008-Rs 935 crores
Percentage = 934.95 X 100
------------
1657.79
= 56.39 percent.
This is relevant to retirees prior to 31.03.2008 but not for subsequent retirees.

RAJIV said...

please let me know whether we can move to the court against union/association leaders and IBA on the pension issues.

Jay Vijay said...

Why members who were in pension and now who dont want to go in pension and still remain in pf should bear the pension gap.

Is there no pension Gap with Central Govt employees?

Do GOI also take back arrears from central Govt staff to fill the Pension Gap.

Why this discrimation only with Bank Staff who have been depreived of true Da by using old index,who have been deprived of proper wage settlement vis vis to Central Govt employees.
Our Mr Nadaf gives strike calls for his political parties but has never fought for this discrimination for us.

Do Banks have 5 days week
Do Banks give 40% commutations.
Do Banks dont earn profit every year

or Is that Govt with Iba and ufbu is trying to fill the pension gap of central govt from these utmost tolerable bank employees as banks being the cash cows.

Looks like something is fishy with the motive of our Govt. towards us.

And now with The new Direct Tax Code
Govt is also planning to Tax our little retirement kitty at the time of withdrawal

What is going on.
Do we elect Govts for this purpose ?

Comrades Unite & fight for your right otherwise nothing is possible thereafter.
COMRADES
DONT PAY LEVY INSTEAD OF PAYING LEVY GIVE AN OPT OUT LETTER TO UNIOUN LEADERS.
DO OR DIE IS THE TIME.
FORGET THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEEN PENSION & PF OPTEE UNITE AND FIGHT OUT.
iT IS TIME TO UNITE AND FIGHT FOR OUR FUNDAMENTEL RIGHT.

Jay Vijay said...

An Open Letter to Mr Nadaf
Dear Mr Nadaf,

You have given us what you wanted to give.

But Now it our time to reciprocate you with a gift which you gave us.

Be prepared for All India Mass Resignation of 6 lacs Bank Employees from This Bank Unionism.

The End is near

My Challange to you Save what you can otherwise people will not ever remind you for your good deeds.

I dont understand how we literate bankers have tolerated you for so many years.

Ramachandran said...

I would like to draw attention to Mr.Shanker's posting of 15th April 2010 where he has explained how this 56% is arrived at.

I feel the formula is not correct.When they have already arrived at the pension fund gap of Rs3140 crores for retirees as on 31.03.2008 and only 30# of this amount i.e Rs.934 crores is to be shared by the retired 65000 employees how is that you are arriving at a figure of 56% by just taking into account only the PF accumulation of the retirees only.Why the bank's contribution of 70% is not added to this amount and then calculate the % to be refunded in case you treat all the retirees alike . As you have stated accumulation of PF of retirees Rs.1658 crores added to bank's contribution towards pension fund gap 70% i.e Rs2802 crores the formula will look like as follows:

Rs934 crores divided by Rs.1659+2802 ie 4460 multiplied by 100.This will give a % of 21 approx.

I am afraid whether I am right or wrong in my assumption. I would request the blog members to please clarify particularly by Mr.Shankar.

Shridhar said...

Mr.Shankar April 15 comment I was under confusion that I retired on 30-04-2009 and thought that I have to refund Banks PF Rs.8,92,000/- plus 56% of that means appro Rs.5,00,000/-so total Rs.13,92,000/-and opt for pension of Rs.15000/-or so.Now some what cleared that those who are on the banks establishment as on 31-03-2008 and retired thereafter will be treated at par with existing emp and have to refund Banks PF and 1.6%of PAY as on Nov 07.if this is correct then ok.Pl clarify and give me some relief.Thanks

Ramachandran said...

There is a slight correction for my writing on 4.23 pm today in arriving at the formula.The % should be arrived as follows:

Balance available in
PF of retired employees Rs.1658
total pension fund gap
for retirees Rs.3140
----------
Total PF needed Rs.4798
----------
PF available plus 70% gap
to be contributed by Bank
RS.1658+2206(70% of 3140) Rs.3864

30% gap to be contributed
by retirees Rs. 934
--------=
Total source of fund Rs.4798
---------

Now the required % to be calculated as follows:

934 divided by 4798 multiplied by 100 will give 19%.

My earlier calculation may please be ignored and let me know whether I am correct in my above calculation of % to be recovered from retired employees if all the retired employees are treated alike which I feel is also not justified.

Master said...

This BPS is the worst ever in the history.
Both for working & retired or PF & pension choosers.

When retired employees calculate the amount to be return to bank. They will also be realize that this is they ditched by Union leaders in this BPS.

Even new employees who joined the bank after 01.11.2007 have to pay money for pension fund. (What the shit is this)

C N Venugopalan said...

Mr. Shridhar has apprehension that he may have to refund Rs.8.92 lakhs plus Rs.5.00 lakhs to get Pension option and Pension. Since the element of Commutation will be about Rs.8.50 lakhs, the amount to be refunded can be in the range of Rs.5.00 to Rs.5.75 lakhs only. If he invests this much in banks, he will get some Rs.4,500/- by way of interest whereas he will get Pension of Rs.18,000/- to Rs.20,000/-. Is it not a wise choice to pay back the money and take Pension? If Pension has retrospective effect from 01 04 2008, the amount to be paid back will almost be nil. Do not get panicky. Things , if any to be reset, can be done later scientifically. Arithmetic of the authorities have proved to be wrong always. Bankers in PF now should not be misled so as to stay in CPF. Those who want to discuss can contact 09447747994 C N Venugopalan, EX-Manager, Union Bank of India, Nandanam, Kesari Junction, N Paravoor, Kochi

Sanjay Bhatt said...

There have been wide spread reports regarding the dissatsifaction among various sections of the officers on account of the poor increase in this wage settlement. Officers have been fuming as association instead of increasing the pay scales as offered by IBA actually forced IBA to start the pay of Scale I officers at a lower level then what was offered by IBA. Similarly, the last stage of Scale VII offered by IBA was also pruned under the pressure of Union leaders. They did all this in the name of benefiting the Scale I, II and III officers by introducing stagnation increments. The final outcome which has come out has been far from satisfactory even for Scale I, II and III officers. Moreover, the payment for 2nd option for pension has also brought heart burnings as even pension optees have to contribute towards this.

Now we have received certain reports that due to above resentment with the wage settlement, 80 per cent of State Bank of India (SBI) officers in the senior management grade have resigned from the membership of the officers’ association.

The finer details of the industry wide wage revision for bank employees have already been worked out and the agreement will be made official next week.

“There has been an exodus from the officers’ association from the Mumbai Corporate centre alone”, said an employee involved in the issue.

Referring to the dissatisfaction among officers, TN Goel, president of the All-India State Bank of India Officers’ Federation, said the basic issue with the decision for just a 17.5 per cent hike, which was making it difficult to structure the pay scales. Hence, various groups feel they are getting a raw deal. Specific issues regarding SBI staff and officers will be taken up after the industry-level pact is signed.

However, SBI officials who have resigned from the association are of the view that the wage negotiations are more focused on issues other than a decent wage package. Officers allege that the first priority of the present settlement is giving a second pension option to those who did not opt for the scheme in 1993.

The second priority of the settlement had been providing “stagnation increments” to officers in scale I to III, they said. The position in the SBI cadre increases in an ascending order from scale I to scale V. Scale IV and V comprise senior management.

“The stagnation benefit creates an anomalous situation whereby a person in a lower scale, who was either not found fit for promotion or did not opt for promotion, draws the same basic salary as a person who is shouldering higher responsibilities after being promoted to a higher scale. Moreover, the wage settlement does not extend the same benefit to scale IV or V officers, where stagnation is more than 12 years and is followed by frequent transfers”, they said.

“The most objectionable part of the settlement is that the representatives of the SBI officers’ association, rather than struggling for higher wages for members, have settled for less. This is because IBA had proposed pay scales of Rs 15,000-54000 as increase in basic salary across the board whereas the association settled for Rs 14,500-52,000”, said the officers.

GD Nadaf, general secretary, All India Bank Officers’ Association, said that from around two-and-a-half years of arrears, employees opting for the second pension scheme might have to forgo seven to eight months of arrears as contribution to the pension fund in lieu of the provident fund.
Source-Allbankingsolutions.com

akhilesh said...

As I have earlier requested please let me know my position clear. I with
folded hand request you all of to guide me . My detail is as under

I retired from Allahabad Bank as an officer in scale two as CPF op tee with basic pay of Rs.22900plus620as FPA on Jan. 2010. Please let me know I may be treated as exiting employee or
retired employee.Thanks.

workplace bullying said...

Settlement is effective from 1.11.2007. All of us have to contribute 1.6 months salary as of 1.11.2007 to pension fund. This works out to Rs.60,000/- for a scale III officer drawing a basic pay of Rs.22900 now and will be drawing Rs.32400/- revised. In which case we are opting for pension as from 1.11.2007. As soon a the pension option letter is signed by an officer employee he becomes a pension optee and his balance in PF account will be transferred to pension fund. What is the necessity for us officers to contribute the PF difference @ Rs.950/- per month from 1.11.2007, since we are already contributing 1.6 months gross salary to pension fund. Can any body clarify on this point?

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Sri Ramachandran-April 15, 2010 4:23 PM
Figures can not tell lie. 934.95/1657.79X100=56.39 % rounded off to 56 % is correct.See below:-
01.As per MOU dated 27/11/2009,
total gap for retirees
is(Rupees in crores) Rs 4774
02.Less-PF by employees Rs 1678
03.Balamce Rs 3116
04.70 % of 3116(By bank) Rs 2182.
05.30 % of 3116(By staff)Rs 934

But this should not be applicable to employees exixting as on 01.11.2007 since the number of existing staff as on 01.11.2007 is inclusive of employees retired subsequent to 01.11.2007.As everybody is aware IBA is not for giving and taking.It is for sucking blood to the maximum extent from every staff even by showing blatant disregard towards labour laws, Service regulations etc.

open govind.jana@gamil.com said...

From past 30months this issue is being delayed and why should we be the responsible to pay 56% for pension gap. And these settlement issues not been discussed with the actual employees who are covered under in this Pension scheme. Wat about the interest on the arrears of 9th BPS? Why we should be responsible to pay pension gap from the date you have signed the settlement? If this decision has been taken before then there would be no gap of Rs. 1800 crore which you are recovering from employees. So what is the meaning of recovering the gap amount from employees & bank contribution. IF MP's & MLA's are been in post for continuous 3years then they are paid life long pension without any difficulties then why the common man who have serviced their life for about 40yrs for the bank are been treated in this way?

Parameswaran said...

UFBU/IBA combine will be inviting lot of troubles if they fail to pension agreement with the following
1. All employees who were on rolls as on 31-03-2008 should be treated as existing employees
2. Date of effect of pension should be from 01-04-2008

since all calculations are based on 31-03-2008.

Nidhi said...

It has proved once again how greedy our leaders are upto. Contributing 1.6 times of pay of Nov 2007 (revised) is highly objectionable act on the part of unions and IBA. Every body should come forword and reject it straight away. Time has come to show them (unions/IBA) their right place. Every body should raise there voice now or there voice will be shut for ever.
Please let us come together and bring court stay to this fraudlent pension issue which will not totally forced upon existing employee/pension optee.

chandan said...

Referring MADAPPA 15, 2010 6:42 AM:

Dear Sir,

Please find my step reply.

MADAPPA:- MEMBERS SHOULD EXERCISE PATIENCE AND FIRST OPT FOR PENSION.

Chandan:- I already opted in 1993/94. So 'FIRST OPT FOR PENSION' is not applicable to me.


MADAPPA:- IF WE HAVE TO SACRIFICE FOR THE TIME BEING WE SHOLUD NOT HESITATE. IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO GOOD TO YOUR COMMUNITY PLEASE KEEP QUITE BUT DONOT HARM THEM BY FILING WRIT AT THIS TIME.

Chandan:-For existing pension optees wage revision is important and not pension as because they have already opted the same long back.


MADAPPA:- WE KNOW WHAT THE IBA/UFBU ARE DOING IS ILLEGAL. IF THE MATTER IS PLACED BEFORE HC/SC THERE IS FAIR CHANCE OF WINNING THE CASE.

Chandan:- Thanks for the encouragement.


MADAPPA:- ARE AWARE THAT WHEN THE ISSUE OF SECOND OPTION WAS RAISED BEFORE SC AFTER THE STRIKE CLAUSE WAS REMOVED, THE PLEA WAS NOT ALLOWED. WE CANNOT ANTICIPATE FAVOURABLE COURT JUDGEMENTS WHEN THE MATTER IS OF FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS.

Chandan:-The merit of this case is quite different than that one.


Thanks.

ajitnaik said...

Hi Mr.Chandan,
Your following comment is most important.
MADAPPA:- ARE AWARE THAT WHEN THE ISSUE OF SECOND OPTION WAS RAISED BEFORE SC AFTER THE STRIKE CLAUSE WAS REMOVED, THE PLEA WAS NOT ALLOWED. WE CANNOT ANTICIPATE FAVOURABLE COURT JUDGEMENTS WHEN THE MATTER IS OF FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS.

Chandan:-The merit of this case is quite different than that one.

We had fought a case in the Highcourt for pension after VRS 2000 which was not successful. Only a direction to finance ministry was given to find out some ways for the benefit of persons who had filed the case. It was only a direction which was not binding to finance ministry. The direction was neglected. Our case was then moved to Supreme Court wher it is pending for more than 4 years. All these involve heavy finacial burden on retirees without guaranteed favourable judgement. The younger generations and the blog writers should know it. Anyhow GOI /IBA have agreed to give second pension option for retirees and existing staff. Decision should be left to individuals for considering this option.


Read more: http://paycommissionupdate.blogspot.com/2010/04/details-of-talks-with-iba-on-13th-april.html?showComment=1271348623251#comment-c208767901650719363#ixzz0lE4zGDak
hould know.

Nidhi said...

If IBA donot have sufficeint fund to pay pension from back date, why they have restore to act like recovering from existing staff ( Per staff have to give on avarage 50000 for this pension fund gap). Why IBA is not thinking of giving pension from a latter date say 2011 or 2012 from the existing fund it already have for this purpose without putting burden on existing staff.
But still IBA is insisting to go ahead with ill concept methods of unions, we will take it to the law of land. Bullshit Unions/IBA.

Shridhar said...

After reading the formula agreed for retirees to contribute Banks PF and 56% plus.For those who retired after 30-03-2008 whether they will be treated as existing emp or retired because a person retired on 30-03-2010 has to refund nearly Rs.1700000/-to 1800000/-banks pf and 56%.As the total cost of pension fund was arrived as on 30-03-2008 and the emp who were on the establishment on that day was known as existing emp so as per formula they have to refund bank pf and 1.6% of pay as on Nov 07 is it correct or anything else.For getting pension one has to shell out 17,00,000/-then what is use of opting the pension he will get int on that amt and plus his money is with him.One person retired on 30-04-2009 pl let me know whether he will be treated as retirees or existing emp for refund of contribution.

Sanjay Bhatt said...

BSNL employees plan indefinite strike from April 20
Press Trust of India / New Delhi April 15, 2010, 19:14 IST

Calls to and from BSNL network will be disrupted from April 20 with nearly 3 lakh BSNL employees planning to go on an indefinite strike against the management's decision to divest 30 per cent stake.

"We have not heard as yet from the management. We are planning to go on an indefinite strike from April 20," Joint Forum of Executives and Non-Executives' Unions and Associations convener VAN Namboodiri said.

"About three lakh employees will be participating in the strike. Services of BSNL will be severely affected due to the strike," he added.

BSNL, which has over three lakh employees, saw profits plummet to Rs 178 crore in 2009-2010 (up to December 2009) from over Rs 575 crore in 2008-09 as the PSU is rapidly losing market share to new entrants. The PSU has 91 million users.

The strike call has been given by a joint forum of unions that has both executives and non-executives as members.

The employees unions are protesting against the recommendations of the Pitroda Committee report that favoured 30 per cent divestment in the PSU and voluntary retirement to nearly 1 lakh staff.

The Sam Pitroda panel was set up by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to suggest ways to improve BSNL's financial health. The panel had banker Deepak Parekh and Telecom Secretary P J Thomas as members.

Besides a scrapping of the divestment plan, the unions are also demanding absorption of the 1,500 Indian Telecom Services (ITS) officers in the company who have been continuing on deputation for the last 10 years.

Sanjay Bhatt said...

What need of BSNL News here?

Please Read,think and see What will be happen on or before 20th April.

Please don't forget to compare ourselves and others,because 20th is common date for both.(On 20/4/2010 evening)

Yet so many hidden magics rest in MAGIC BOX of UFBU/IBA.

Best of Luck.

seetha said...

let us be united and dont accept this wage revision agreement, resign from the union, dont pay levy act intelligently in the coming election, express ur grieviences think about the solution just discussing about the problem never solves it let us start to think about the solutions sincerely

seetha said...

ha ha

learn from BSNL connecting India

sundaram said...

Dear Sirs,

Gap on pensiion fund for retirees estimated at Rs. 934 Cr. by IBA. It is supposed to be shared by 65000 already retired PF optees.

Per optee's contribution to fill the gap is 934 Cr./65000 = Rs. 1.44 Cr.

As per the understanding between IBA/UFBU, 56% 0f CPF should be surrendered in addition to CPF already received by the retirees,.

Retirees are spread over a oeriod of 9 years from 2001- 02 to 2009-10 and estimated at 65000.

Claculations:

I In 2001, the average BPF contribution received by the majortiy of retirees is assumed as around Rs. 3,00,000 (Conservative estimate)

II In 2010, the average BPF contribution received by the majortiy of retirees is assumed as around Rs. 8,00,000 (Conservative estimate)

(I wish to point out that very few opted for VRS in 2001 by PF optees as they were not eligible for pension benefits. )

III 65% of I = Rs. 1,95,000

IV 65% of II =Rs. 5,20,000

Average of III & IV = 3,57,500 (Average is taken as the retirements took place gradually over a period of 9 years)

This is assumed as the average inflow to the pension fund for filling the shortfall gap per retiree.

It is further assumed that at least 15% will perefer to continue as PF optees reducing the number of retired PF optees to 51000.

If they opt for pension now, the collection for short fall in the pension fund gap works out to 59000x Rs.3,57,500=Rs. 2109.25 Cr

as against the gap of Rs. 934 Cr. being the share of retired PF optees. which is 2.25 times the gap envisgaed.

Therefore, the basis of arriving at 56% of PF contribution to be surrendered by retired PF optees appears to be incorrect even on

conservative basis.

Please go through the above working and please offer your comments. The cotribution by retired PF optees should be max. around

Rs.1.59 Cr. (Rs. 934Cr/ 59000 ) that too without commutation adjustment.


Regards,
R.Sundaram

Vasu said...

I hope the leaders are reading various comments/calculations on sharing of burden by retired employees,appearing herein. In the over all interest it is incumbent upon them to explain the logic in arriving at the quantum of burden .
Besides already 3 days are over from the date of last meeting, when it was decided to refer the matter to Govt to decide upon the date of effect of pension and there is deafening silence on the part of the leaders. Will they please let all know what steps have been taken so far to seek an appointment with Govt. officials and the results thereof ? As the final settlement is yet to be signed there is enough time to take into consideration various opinion expressed by members and act upon its merits. Vasudevan

Advait said...

Dear leaders,

Would u please tell me that why the share of existing Pension opty will go to pension fund. Is it natural justice. Pension fund amount should be recovered from new opty not from existing pension chooser. When option came in 1993 it was open to all. that time these people only refuses pension. hence Those who are going to opt pension amount they should bear.
kindly see

Nidhi said...

There is urgent need to delink the pension issue with wage settlement. If it is not agreeable to UFBA, IBA and GOI should consider scrapping this 9th B.P.S all together and constitute a pay commission to look into wage revision.
At no cost existing pension optee will pay pension fund gap for these interest greedy PF optee retired people.
They have already lived the a decent life and made good fortune for there old age, because of better salary in past. There salary were in comparision with central Govt. during 80's and they can afford good house, education for their children.
But now with such low salary current serving employee are finding it difficuilt make a simple living and cannot afford to have simple education for their wards. Owning an house will remain a distant dream.
SO IN BREIF PENTION OPTEE SHOULD NOT GIVE A PENNY TO THESE PF OPTEE FOR PENSION FUND GAP. IF INSISTED BY UNIONS, BRING MOBILIZE ALL PENSION OPTEE AND BRING A STAY TO THIS FROM COURT.

M.Lokanadha Rao said...

Referring to Mr. Parameswharan's comments dt. April 15, 2010 9:53 PM
I fully understand his reaction . Those who are retired after 01.04.2008 have got every reason and justifiable ground to demand claiming the status of existing employees and consequent beneficial/reduced load factor to share the 30 % pension fund gap- as the whole exercise is based on the statistics as on 31.03.2008.
Coming to the other retirees also,
the Actuaries must have made the assumption for payment of pension with retrospective effect from the date of retirement of the respective employee which will offset the burden of 56 % of the extra load refund.
We should demand first to make the assumptions open to assess the correct position and then decide the recourse.
UFBU has taken care to make the share of 30 % lighter of the existing employees by clubbing even the existing pension optees- after all they want to serve the serving employees alone-
no doubt they have ensured the option to the retirees and arrived at the extra load of 56% with a grudge against the VRS category who were paid the lumpsum exgratia-
but in the process regular retirees too have to bear the brunt-
So by treating the retirees after 01.04.2008 as existing employees and effecting payment of pension to the other retirees from the respective date of retirement to a significant extent the burden can be relieved to a majority of the officers-
I would like to have wide exchange of views amongst all the retirees to redress the injustice meted out by IBA / UFBU combine through suitable legal remedies immediately after the settlement and after enlisting themselves into the pension scheme without fail well with in the
Time schedule as per the scheme guidelines.
M.Lokanadha Rao

SNEHA said...

SD OUR LEADERS ARE ADAMENT TO RESIGN FROM LEADERSHIP, IT IS BETTER FOR US TO HIRE PROFESSIONAL KILLERS TO KILL OUR LEADERS IN ENSUING SILVER JUBILEE CELEBRATIONS

chandan said...

Referring ajitnaik 16, 2010 8:10 AM:


Different judgements of apex court on different matters are different to one another according to the space of time. You can't grab the money from pension optee forcefully. For deducting this 1.6 factor you have to first extend another reoption to existing pension optees to return back to their erstwhile PF as happened in 1995 after 1993/94 option.It is legal.

PF Optees should not ask the pension optees to exhibit the solidarity for their cause by paying from arrears. Why should pension optees in service will bear the cost? What's about the pensioners retired before Nov-2007 ? Do they contribute to pension fund? If not then why? If at all there was any gap in last BPS, then they must contribute like existing pension optees as because they were the parties in previous BPS. What's your answer ?

Thanks.

james & friends said...

all bank management should be bear to gap 30% with 70%.

1800 Crs is not big amount for banks.

ufbu leaders have little talent than convince to iba and banks.

C N Venugopalan said...

In settlements that took place after commissioning the Pension Scheme, a load factor was considered and taken to Pension Fund. The amount was raised from the entire class including the then PF optees for which there was no resentment from any quarter. While the existing Pension Optees raise protests against the sharing by them too, it becomes ironical. Pension Opteees are also putting in the same work as their CPF conterpart and a broad minded thinking as a class for the banking fraternity will bring consolation to all. The present turmoil is a temporary one which no one need worry about as things can be settled later through court intervention. What IBA/UFBU do can not be treated as final.

C N Venugopalan said...

Sneha may change her Maoist outlook and show that she is "Sneha" herself. There are so many necessary evils in the world and attempt should be made to convert them into good. Unless there are people to work for every cause, nothing can be accomplished in the world. Donot underestimate their roles and try to convert them into useful elements

seetha said...

U {can always be} Fooled By Us

the same thing happens in each settlement we {bankers} are the most optimistic creatures in this universe expecting better settlement in 10th if not in 9th, the same optimism was there when 8th bps was signed but still we are optimistic great leaders and great followers better not to be so much optimistic

shilpi said...

financial crisis

shilpi said...

comrade ???

shilpi said...

gaddar

shilpi said...

pillai BABA jinda hai ki mar gaye

shilpi said...

mera ba. Chor hai

AajTak said...

Tera Khandan hi pura Chor hai.

Jay Vijay said...

The question of sharing burden by pf optees is our understanding.
The real picture is because of increase in pension & da etc there is already a gap which iba & govts want to fill in

And the wage settlement is a good oppurtunity to fill in this gap from the arrears This is the real motive of Iba and which Ufbu is helping out

Now we are taking of why wage load is to shared by pf optees
Ok what about those pf optees who still dont want to join pension scheme
Why they should share the pension gap

So this misunderstanding has been created among us by Iba & Ufbu that the pension gap is due to new pension option.
How many of the retired pf optees is going to refund +56% .Who has that in hand and who has doubled it so as they can retrun 56% and those who have retired within the last 2 years how he will return 56% so all this is illusion and looking into this type of attitude it is heard that there are some more conditions likely to come for pf optees switching to pension optees how many will switch to pension?
Already the family pesion is like getting alms neither there is 100% da
and the members who are retiring after good amount slogging even if you want to resign if you are a pension optee will it be that easy ?.
There are pension regulations which very few know or must have read in our respective banks pension regulatory book
One must first study & find out what are the conditions if we want to volantarily retire after opting pension.
If you are a pension optee and you want to retire on health grounds then it is not easy because your banks medical Doctor will check you and if fit then you may not be allowed the propertionate pension .
WHereas for pf optee there is no such restriction.
Now the Govt & Iba is to recover 1.6 times of Nov 2007 pay from all members whether they are pension optee whether they are switching to pension or whether they are still going to remain as pf optee.
We scream about the why we have to bear the load of new pension optee Think about them who still want to remain as pf optee . The real big screaming should done by them who still want to be in pf. why they have to share the pension gap They are least concerned.
So the real picture is Iba wants to fill the gap and create an illusion that it is because of new pension optees.
And all this UFBu is knowing but they are hand in glove with Iba for a cut.
Iba's Game plan:
Iba's calculation is from the reitred 65000 pf optees very few will have the original banks contribution in hand plus the 56% to get pension and from the existing pf optee employees of some 277000 15% would still not opt pension
But 1.6% would be recoverd from all members even if they are still not opting pension.
Intelligent planning helped to reach by Ufbu.
Slogans for Bankers.
Nadaf murdabad Nadaf murdabad
Bank Union chod do apni takdeer khud likho

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Ajithnaik-April 15, 2010 5:42 PM
True that arriving at scientific calculation is difficult.This is not because of UFBU,but because of IBA.
Correct method is as under:-
01.Identify the number of all
retirees as on 31.03.2008.
02.Collect PF+Interest @ 6 % p.a.
from each retiree till March
2008.
03.Pay pension from April 2008
or from date of retirement.
But IBA is not ready to do this. When that is the case, scientific calculation becomes irrevelant and hence the gap should be collected so as to ensure that no employee is over burdened. But How?
01)
Devide Rs 935 croes by 65000 retirees which works out to Rs 1.44lakhs. Collect as above and pay pension from 01.04.2008

02.Existing employees

Devide Rs 1800 crores by 266000 PF optees which works out to Rs 68,000per head. If he is interested he will pay or he will not opt for pension if he is not interested.
This is since IBA is not ready for scientific calculation.
Also this ensures that pension optees will get their full arrears.The pension burden gets reduced to the extent of number of employees remain in PF.
But who is bothered ?

DKSachdeva said...

Mr. Jay Vijay & other friends on the Blog

A small correction with regard to contribution of 1.6 times of pay by 'PF optees continuing with PF only'. BEFI circular no. 13/2010 dated 14th April on the subject of pension option settlement states "Serving employees, who are presently covered under
CPF and would not like to switch over to Pension, would not be required to contribute on this account"

For information of all

Sachdeva

Parameswaran said...

All the calculations were done by actuarians based on the date 31-03-2008. There is no need for any suggestion to IBA and UFBU in this matter. IBA also should not be adamant in giving pension from 1-4-2008.

ashwani said...

Lot of pension optees are writting that why gap in pension fund is being recovered from existing pension optees. This is because of their ignorance of the following fact

In last three settlement i.e. 1992, 1997 & 2002 the existing CPF optees has been bearing 3 to 4% of wage load for pension optees. had not been this case then the salary of PF optees should have been revised more that the pension optees in last 3 settlement.
If Pension optees are not ready to bear the cost then in last 3 settlement 3-4% be recovered from pension optees and given to Pf optees as arrear. The PF optees will then bear all cost out of arrear

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Ashwani-April 18, 2010.11:15 AM
You are right. But pretending ignorance is the best reason to shout at others.

SHANKAR said...

I read various views and opinions by some of the readers/visitors of this site regarding pension contribution. All of them are unanimously opposing the contribution by the Officers who are alredy in the pension scheme earlier.

The lot of Officers who are already in the pension scheme be it by exercise of option or by default, they should bear it in mind that a great amount of sacrifice was made by those who are now getting another option. During the earlier wage settlements a major portion of the amount was earmarked for the benefit of those officers who are now crying and threatening legal action.

It is to remind those who are showing displeasure and attempting to misguide the innocents that any misguidance on their part may endanger their interest also. The wage settlement is on mutual benefit of all concerned. No one was forced to sacrifice any thing. IBA is representing Management and also answarable to the Govt. of India. Any discriminatory settlement as alleged from some corner is baseless and an futile attempt to derail the long negotiated and awaited settlement.
SKPatnaik-Allbankingsolutions.com

Parameswaran said...

Shankar's point has been repeated many times in this blog but still the pension optees are crying. They will be forced to pay more if they do like this. PF optees were silently sacrificing all these days inspite of the fact that they have lost a golden chance to opt for pension. In addition to that they were forced to forgo for their pension brethren. They are getting one more option because they were keeping silent and of the sacrifices made.

SHAILESH said...

shilpi,
excellent.

chandan said...

IF WAGE SETTLEMENT SETTLED SOON AND THIS PENSION RE -OPTION TAKES A TURN TO THE CORRIDOR OF COURT, THEN WHO WILL BE IN TENSE ? DEFINITELY NOT EXISTING PENSION OPTEES.WHO ARE IN HURRY FOR THIS ISSUE ? DEFINITELY ONLY PF OPTEES AND NOT PENSION OPTEES.IT IS ONLY FOR HUMANITY PENSION OPTEES SHOW SOME SOLIDARITY FOR PF OPTEES. OTHERWISE PENSION OPTEES DON'T HAVE ANY INTEREST WHETHER THE ISSUE SETTLED OR NOT.UNIONS NO WHERE TELL THAT WAGE WITHOUT PENSION ISSUE CAN'T BE SIGNED. BUT THE WAY PRUDENT UNIONS MOVE THE PENSION ISSUE ONE AFTER ANOTHER, I AM NOT MUCH HOPEFUL TO SEE ITS FINAL SETTLEMENT BEFORE ONE YEAR. WAGE SETTLEMENT MUST BE WITHIN A MONTH. COURT CASES ON STAY ETC WILL COME ONLY AFTER SIGNING OF PENSION SETTLEMENT ON 1.6 TIMES FROM PENSION OPTEES AND NON-UNIFORMED 156% BETWEEN IBA AND UFBU OFFICIALLY. BASING ON UNION WEBSITE LEGAL SUBJECTS CAN'T STAND IN COURT OF LAW FOR A LONG PERIOD.

THANKS.

Nidhi said...

Agents of UFBA/IBA have become active on this blog. They donot have any logical explaination to give for this failed 9 th BPS. People like Shankar and parameshwer are retire people and UFBA agents trying to misguide current serving employees.
We will take this matter to court, donot worry.

Sanjay Bhatt said...

Please Reade First below mentiond:

> Lot of pension optees are writting that why gap in pension fund is being recovered from existing pension optees. This is because of their ignorance of the following fact

In last three settlement i.e. 1992, 1997 & 2002 the existing CPF optees has been bearing 3 to 4% of wage load for pension optees. had not been this case then the salary of PF optees should have been revised more that the pension optees in last 3 settlement.
If Pension optees are not ready to bear the cost then in last 3 settlement 3-4% be recovered from pension optees and given to Pf optees as arrear. The PF optees will then bear all cost out of arrear
ashwani said... April 18, 2010 11:15 AM


Than also any Pension Optees feel injustice than court gate is open for all.
Actually We are all victim of UFBU agents they spreads wrong matters here and want to hide leaders failures to get good wage settlement.
If PF optees bare load for Pension optees in last 3 settlement then now turn of pension optees to bear load.Why crying?Nothing can change even after court case,Try it.Only waste of time and money.If any unwanted situation will stand than also nothing will changed What is today,It will come after some months nothing else.

As per my view Pension optees should be stop crying and should be knock at court doors.Nothing wrong to try.
If court verdict will come like recent than Who will lost their time and money ????

"ONE COIN'S TWO SIDES"

We all doing What We have not to do and What We have to do that We are not doing?

We all should be ask to our leaders for all these injustice in pension and wage revision.

It is only Divide and Rule pattern only.

If We continue like this time than its confirmed We will all finished like YADAVS in Shri Krishna time.

Regards

SHANKAR said...

chshingiReferring to Nidhi-April 18,2010 10:24 PM
I have already confirmed that I am not a member of any union and my payslips confirm the same. Nobody can prevent anybody from moving to courts. Go ahead.

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Chandan-April 16, 2010 10:31 PM
Your queries are answered in allbankingsolutions.com recently

SHANKAR said...

It is learnt that another option to switchover from pension to PF and PF to pension will be given this time also, as was done in the past so as to enable both groups decide whether to contribute their share to pension fund or not. Those who remain in PF or switching over from pension to PF need not pay any contribution to pension fund. If the above is correct kindly confirm who are in touch with unions.

Shridhar said...

Regarding sharing of pension gap it was understood and worked out the actuaries cost of pension to be contributed in March 2008 and was done on the basis of existing staff as on 01-11-2007 and retirees and the same was agreed be the IBA and UFBU and demand for pension from 01-04-2008.Then why this question arises date of effect of pension.IBA was also aware of this they only asked the actuaries to give report for increase in wage and accordingly cost of pension then only theu came for discussions.So now they must agree for this that those whom were on the bank establishment as on 01-11-2007 should to treated as existing emp and others are retirees and give pension w.e.f.01-04-2008.Ufbu leaders dont bend now if they dont agree immediately give action call for indefinite strike from to-morrow only otherwise they will not listen to you and simply force you to accept.In any condition dont accept people are with you dont bother all will follow your calls though they wrote anything in the website but still they are with you.Regarding pension op tees to contribute should not forget in all the previous settlement some percentage of rise was earmarked to pension fund otherwise they would have not got the pension.Pl act accordingly people are waiting.

Jay Vijay said...

It is Ridiculous that pension optees want higher pension & da but are not ready to share the cost and making a hue & cry
from 2770000 some pf optees there are many who still dont want to switch to pension and in last three settlement i.e. 1992, 1997 & 2002 the existing CPF optees has been bearing 3 to 4% of wage load for pension optees. had not been this case then the salary of PF optees should have been revised more that the pension optees in last 3 settlement.
Lot of pension optees are writing that why gap in pension fund is being recovered from existing pension optees. This is because of their ignorance
There is already a gap in pension fund due to disbursements of higher pension and higher Da.
How banks can recover it.
Banks go kya lottery lagti hai ?
to give revised pension & da.
This Iba & Ufbu is knowing but they are hiding the fact from us and creating an illusion that there would be pension gap if they give another pension option
We all have equally contributed to our pf and our respective banks have deployed the pf optees funds in investments as required by the law. But due to past wage revsion & increase in da their pansion is facing crisis of short fund based on actuarial assesment.
So all this exercise is to fill this gap from arrears. which Ufbu is helping Iba and cheating.
It seems we all just carried away by our Unions and dont use brains.
funds.
Ufbu & Iba is hiding the fact that the already pension gap is being filled with 1.6 of Nov 2007.
Is this a wage settlement which our Unions are fighting for us or helping fill the pension gap for banks.

sudhakar said...

No point in fighting among PF and pension optees. The main culprit in the entire episode is associations and unions. Let us not fight among ourselves. All should get pension in a decent manner. Let us work out for better solution which will result for better pension and pension updation in the coming years. Let us look for completing the entire 9BPS at an early date by solving the residual issues if any. In any given settlement somebody has to loose and some body to gain. Pray for putting an end to this unending drama of 9th BPS.

gopal said...

It seems members have mistaken the effective date of payment of pension for new pension optees.When it is said from the date of settlement...settlement date is 01/11/2007 due. Date of signing the the settlement and date of settlement are two different things.When IBA accepted the effective date as the date of settlement means it is from 01/11/2007 not fro date of signing , I hope and it should be .

PM said...

Ref:Mr.Gopal 19th April.

Why this confusion on effective date of Pension payment? It is yet to be decided.Any way
with regards to date of effect of pension option IBA's stand is clear that pension option would be effective from the date of the Settlement.That will not be w.e.f.1.11.2007 as you have mentioned. In that case Union would not have demanded for payment of Pension w.e.f. 1-4-2008 Difference on this issue persists and as per UFBU,they are trying to find a solution to this issue.
We can hope but reality is something else.

D K said...

I FFEL COMPELLED TO POST MY COMMENTS AFTER READING COMMENTS OF MS NIDHI.MY OFFICE IS QUITE NEAR TO IBA OFFICE I HV FRIENDS THERE AND ALSO HV SOME FRIENDS IN UNION
I AM IN REGULAR TOUCH WITH BOTH OF THEM.ALSO WITH FINMIN.THIS EXERCISE IS A HERCULEAN TASK,PEOPLE
TAKING SO MUCH OF PAIN TO HAMMER OUT A DIFFICULT SETTLEMENT I HV SEEN FROM VERY NEAR.PL DO NOT BELITTLE THEM.HALF KNOWLEDGE IS ALWAYS DANGEROUS.PL TRY TO GET ACQUAINTED WITH FULL FACTS.I AM NOT A MEMBER OF ANY UNION. PL WAIT FOR SOME TIME, ALL FACTS WILL BE LAID-OUT IN JOINT NOTE/SETTLEMENT.
EVENTHOUGH WE MAY BE YOUNG OUR COMMENTS SHOULD BE MATURE.I PRAISE MR PARMESHWARAN FOR HIS MATURE COMMENTS.
DK

ajitnaik said...

Let us put an on the dispute between pf optees, pension optees, retired staff without pension etc.All the retired staff without pension have enjoyed their Bank's PF contribution since retirement in some cases from 1993. But they are loosing considerable amount of commutation amount on account of calculating the same from the would be effective date of pension in addition to loosing huge pension for so many months. They have to repay 56% additional with bank's contribution of Pf amount received.This burden of 156% repayment of Pf amount is high on recently retired persons considering the old retirees. IBA/UFBU should have done some justice based on the retirement year and adjusted the contribution of fund from around 65000 retirees.
The existing staff.i.e. Pf optees as on 1st November, 2007 should have contributed based on the short fall of pension fund for their opting to pension. IBA/UFBU should have clearly convinced the existing staff i.e. pension optees the burden borne by Pf optees, the sacrifice made by PF optees in order to create adequate pension fund for pension optees during 1992,1997 and 2002 BPS. Even the details of Acturial Calculations for pension fund with details are not known to general members. IBA/UFBU never gave any clues of earlier sacrifice by PF optees since 1992 BPS. UFBU is duty bound to inform proper details in these regards to its existing members so that they do not fight as PF and Pension optees because lack of proper informations. The UFBU/IBA should come open why pension is not being paid from the date of retirement. Was it decided to pay pension from any predetermined date when it was referred to actuaries. What is that date? General staff members (existing or retired staff) are not aware of these details. Mr. Shankar wrote in the blog that IBA is not interested in scientific or near scientific solution/calculations in the matter. Is UFBU so weak to impress upon IBA the correct stand/approach? UFBU/ IBA shold clarify these facts to all.

A request to all.Dragging to court is not a right step as it takes minimum 10 years.

ajitnaik said...

In my last blog please read the first sentence- Let us put an END on the dispute.

End is missing

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

Banks and the Government could shell out Rs.70000 Crores for write off splendidly for building up vote bank for the Congress immediately prior to election. Normal write off in three years was to the tune of Rs.25,000 Crores in the recent past. The amount that banks wasted through take over mania during 2002 to 2006 ran in lakhs of Crores by pulling the legs of one another in the most unethical way by offering interest concessions to big borrowers was not gauged at all by RBI or Government. Bank Unions also did not raise any protest against the interest rate war that debilitated the banking system. All are not in a position to find out funds to meet the small gap for Pension Payment only and try to pass on the burden to the already retired alone by bringing out another class of sufferers. New dimensions of "Honesty and sacrifice and right solution"

M.Lokanadha Rao said...

I fully agree with the views of Mr. Ajitnail published on April 19 2010 11:04 PM .
UFBU should come out transparent with the logic on which the sharing formulae of 30 % load factor is based for both serving employees and retirees.
When Actuaries have worked out the pension fund gap , what is the effective date of payment for pension they have taken into consideration !
Why Actuaries were not involved even for suggesting a fair and equitable sharing formulae since that definitely involves actuarial principles such as age factor of the employees and retirees etc.?
Actuaries have surely considered
all the employees as on 31-03-2008 as existing employees and they must have arrived at the pension fund gap to enable payment of pension right from the date of retirement of respective employee, of course by collecting a reasonable interest on the PF balances to be refunded by the retirees.Why IBA is denying the pension payment till the date of settlement ? Why IBA is denying the status of the Existing Employee for those serving as on 31.03.2008 but retired before the date of settlement as per the basis of Actuaries Estimates ?
Even for arriving at the load sharing formulae between the employees, Atuaries should have been entrusted to come out with a fair & equitable basis on actuarial principles to avoid any litigations later from the aggreived members.
M.Lokanadha Rao

ashwani said...

I am very much suprised with the way litterate bankers are fighting and using abusive langauge against each other in the name of PF & pension optees which has made the real issue of poor revised wage structure is the backdoor.

In fact it the bankers who are themselves responsible for their current plight. The bank's wage revision is very meagre in comparision to govt. 6 pay commission because we have choosen idiots as our UFBU leaders. They are unaware of the following facts;
1.THe HRA in case of Govt. Employees is not linked to cost and it is neutralised with upward revision 30% in last 5th Pay Commission.
2.The Govt.Employees works for 5 days week hence bankers deserves 52 days bonus in lieu of
3.There settlement is not for 10 years as UFBU/IBA/Finance Minstry is saying. When the DA increases above 50% it is merged with BP. The DA is likely to be more than 50% in Jan.2011 for Govt. Employees. 50% mearger with BP means immidiately 15% increase in HRA.
4.In 6 PC scale if 9300 to 39000 plus GP 6000 which means no stagnation till retirement.
5.Increament is 3% of BP with compounding effect.
5.Home Travel every year.

akhilesh said...

is bank men agreement is going to be signed today i.e. on 20th April 2010?.

malathi said...

sir, why delay in finalising the wage revision. when compare to central govt. employees and state govt. employees now after getting revised salaries, our bank employees salaries are very low. even HRA is also very less. when the govt write off the agricultural loans upt to 30000 crores recently, can't govt bare the entire cost without getting from employees who are mercyless.

ashwani said...

If any of UFBU leaders are following this blog he should jump into river after reading the abuse bankers are using against them.

I appeal all the youth of the country not to join banking industries because of following reasons

1. In banks there is no recognition for talent. Here only yes man and sycophant gets promotions.

2.The job is highly risky. There is risk of paying wrong cheque under work pressure e.g passing 2000 cheques without viewing signature, Disbursing loan under pressure from higher authorities and under polical and local goons pressure. If account goes bad the junior/ middle management will be made scapegoat. Opening accounts of fradusters/ polititians/ corrupt buerocrats under pressure and when fraud in inquired by CBI bank founds scapegoat in its staff .see what happened in Madhu Koda case.

3.The pay scale of bank officer is at par with primary school teacher/ govt. deptt. babu

4.There is no consideration for long duration working hours affecting your personal health and social life.

Parameswaran said...

It is not correct to advise the youngsters not to join in banks. They have to join and fight all the evils that is prevailing in the system. If every body does like this then who will take care of the banking system. Banking system is not managed efficiently then there will be no economic growth. Do you want our country to go to hell.

ashwani said...

We should also not keep the youngsters in dark. When they have option to choose better carrier then why make his personal life hell. If we have to think of country then not to go for job but do some social service or become polititian.

Vasu said...

If there is any substance in what Shilpi says, that some one has moved the court against the present settlement, then probably bankers can forget about the present settlement. This could be the ploy of vested interests to delay and deny the Bank employees of their legitimate dues and derail the whole process. It is rightly said that any thing that is delayed inordinately would become counter productive.
The thundering silence on the part of all the leaders is really beyond anybody's comprehension. Vasudevan

Jay Vijay said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
SHANKAR said...

Referring to gopal-April 19, 2010 6:45 PM
If you go through the MOU dated 27/11/2009, it is very clear that the date of effect for pension is from the date of settlement TO BE SIGNED and not from 01.11.2007.(As per IBA)

Shridhar said...

Rely very shameful on the part of the great foolish ufbu leaders that they were knowing that iba is very adamant since inception of the 9th bp and now what happened on 13th they are not agree for pension payment w.e.f.01-04-2008 why?The actuaries were appointed by them only to calculate cost of pension on increased wage for existing staff who are on the muster as on 01-11-2007 and retirees and that gap has to be shared 70% and 30% and iba is playing the game not to give pension from 01--4-2008 as per our demand.Why our leaders kept quiet on that day if they are not agree they should have given strike call on that day only.AIBEA is busy for their foundation day AIBOC is busy for silverjubilee function on 24th so no body is interested in signing the settlement.Now attend only one meeting if IBA accepts our demand for pension date and should treat the retirees who have retired after 01-11-2007 as existing staff otherwise give strike call immediately.Now see yesterday came to know that some people from Bihar gone to court to bring stay on the settlement when there is no final settlement signed.Present pension optee should know that in last 3 settlement some portion was earmarked for pension fund otherwise they would have not got the pension.

Nidhi said...

Dear Friends,

All this problem of 2nd pension option, sharing of cost for pension, etc. etc. is because of one and only one thing.
"RATE OF INTEREST HAS COME DOWN FROM 14 TO 15% IN 1996-97 TO 8% NOW."
Suppose you had inveted Rs. 1 Lakh in share market in 2007 and now its current value is only Rs. 10000.My question is whether you can ask SEBI to give a second option to get back your original Rs. 1 lakh.

Indira Gandhi has done a great thing in Nationalization of Banks. But now I am afraid these narrow minded Unions/IBA will make PSU bank to a cooperative bank or community based bank.

Satish said...

K.A: Mr. or Mrs. Nidhi

I am writing here Ist Time. All the Employees, Who are dead against the another option for Pension will see their face after 15 - 20 years when the than New Generation (NPS Optees) would be in majority.
ANAND

Nidhi said...

Dear Satish,

I have just put up a logical question. You should have tried to reply it logically if you had any answer.

Running behinds useless bank union leader will not help. If you are really interested in pension knock the the right door.

SHANKAR said...

News just received-
IBA meeting with UFBU on 27/04/2010 to finalize settlement

akhilesh said...

can any body tell about next meeting of I B A with UFBU for final signature of wage settlement?.

akhilesh said...

Thank you Mr. Shankar. Will on 27th April settlement will be signed?.

chandan said...

Referring akhilesh 21, 2010 10:12 PM:

Yes, I think it will be as because from Dt:01/05/2010 clerical employees without special allowance is to get Rs 1000/- and others to function as Single Window Operator-B with 1500/-(1000/- +500/-) revised allowance with higher responsibility as per drafting.So it must be before Dt:01/05/2010.

Thanks.

Swami said...

DEAR COMRADES,
LATEST & CONFIRMED NEWS. UFBU TO MEET AT BOMBAY ON 26-4-2010 AT 11 AM TO TAKE FINAL VIEW ON PENDING ISSUES. UFBU TO MEET IBA ON 27-4-2010 TO FINALISE & SIGN THE SETTLEMENT.
TODAY, ALL GENL SECRETARIES OF THE UFBU HAVE MET THE FINANCE MINISTER AND THE FM CONTRIBUTED HIS MITE TO AGREE FOR PENSION EFFECTIVE 6 MONTHS EARLIER IE., WEF 11/2009.
BEFORE THIS THE WORST HAS HAPPENED IN BANKING INDUSTRY'S UNITY.
ONE OF THE CONSITITUENT OF UFBU ISSUED A LEGAL NOTICE TO IBA THAT EXISTING PENSIONERS WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TOWARDS 30% OF PENSION CORPUS FUND. ONLY PF OPTEES TO PAY THE BURDEN. ALL WERE SHOCKED. THE CULPRIT'S WEBSITE IS NOT VIEWABLE IN THE EVENING DUE TO "BANDWITH" PROBLEM. ALSO THEY HAVE REMOVED EARLIER WAGE REVISION DETAILS FROM AIOBOA.ORG WEBSITE. IT SHOWS PAGE NOT FOUND. ALL OUR RIGHTS WILL BE SURRENDERED - TOTAL OUTSOURCING - IN THE NAME OF URGENT PENSION SETTLEMENT. IF PENSION OPTEES LEGALLY PROTEST, WE PF OPTEES SHALL GO TO COURT TO RECOVER ADDL COST OF PENSION FOREGONE BY EXISTING PF OPTEES FROM WAGE REVISION - BUT THE BATTLE AFTER ALLOWING TO SIGN THE SETTLEMENT BY OUR LEADERS. IT IS THEY WHO HAVE STOLEN ALL OUR MONEY AND ENJOYING PENSION FOR THE PAST 10/15 YRS - BY OURSELVES ACCEPTING POOR SALARY - BY % OF ADDL COST OF PENSION. DEAR PF OPTEES WHO ARE GOING TO OPT PENSION (INCLUDING ME) - ARISE, AWAKE & STOP NOT TILL WE RECOVER OUR PORTION OF ADDL COST OF PENSION FORGONE WITH INTEREST @ RETURN EARNED BY PENSION FUND AS PER INVESTMENT REGULATION & THEIR B/SHEET.

Swami said...

DEAR LEADERS:
A HUMBLE SUGGESTION AT THE LAST MOMENT. NOW U HAVE SEEN ONE CULPRIT - BLACKSHEEP AMONG U. WHATEVER POOR SHAMEFUL SALARY U ALL HAVE AGREED UPON ON OUR BEHALF, WITH NEGOTIATIONS OVER 2 1/2 YEARS, SIGN THE SETTLEMENT FOR WAGE REVISION ON 27TH WITH IBA - PENDING "outsourcing" and 2nd Option for Pension. LET US ALL START RECEIVING OUR REVISED SALARY FROM MAY, 2010 - PENDING FINALISATION OF RECOVERY FOR PENSION CORPUS. LET US FORGO ARREARS FOR SOMEMORE TIME TILL AN AMICABLE, JUSTIFIABLE SOLUTION IS REACHED. - THINK 2 WAGE REVISION BEFORE - WHEN ENTIRE INDIA RECEIVED THEIR WAGE REVISION / ARREARS - 3 BANKS - INDIAN BANK and 2 OTHER BANKS DID NOT RECEIVE THEIR NEW SALARY / ARREARS FOR FEW YEARS. ONLY WHEN THEIR BANK POSITION BECAME ALRIGHT, THEY RECEIVED IT. " ARE THEY NOT BANK EMPLOYEES " ? LIKE, THIS, WE ALL WILL WAIT. NOTHING WRONG. IF U SEE THE REAL CALCULATION OF ARREARS - THIS TIME (ARREARS - PF - PENSION CORPUS - ACTUAL TAX LIABILITY and not TDS at lesser % - Levy by Union / Assn = the NET ARREARS ON HAND WILL BE 1/3RD FOR SUBSTAFF (DUE TO NO INCOME-TAX) 25% FOR CLERICAL & OFFICERS DRAWING 150% HRA, 20% FOR OFFICERS AVAILING QUARTERS. FOR THIS PITTEN, SHOULD WE ALL HURRY & SURRENDER OUR HARD EARNED RIGHTS OVER 30 YEARS THROUGH STRUGGLE, SRIKES, COURT / AWARDS ? THINK MANY TIMES.
TOWARDS PENSION CORPUS: EXISTING PENSIONERS FROM 1995 TO 2010 SHOULD RETURN SOME AMT FROM THEIR MONTHLY PENSION - FOR THE ADDL COST FOREGONE BY PF OPTEES. PENSION OPTEES WHO ARE TO RETIRE IN THE OFFING AND LATER SHOULD ALSO RETURN SOME SHARE ON THE ABOVE. "PF OPTEES" who may opt PENSION NOW - BUT TO RETIRE FROM NOW ON TO ANOTHER 15 YEARS SHOULD SHARE PROPORTIONATELY WITH REFERENCE TO REMAINING SERVICE.
FROM NOV 2009: 2.0 TIMES
NOV 2011: 1.9 TIMES
NOV 2012: 1.8 TIMES
NOV 2013: 1.7 TIMES
NOV 2014: 1.6 TIMES
& SO ON LIKE THIS.
DON'T PUT ALL THE BURDEN ON THE REMAINING EMPLOYEES. WE HAVE FOOLED OURSELVES IN THE NAME OF TRUST & UNITY WE ALL HAD WITH U ALL. STILL WE TRUST. WE KNOW YOUR SACRIFICES FOR THE SOCIAL CAUSE IN BANKING SECTOR. PLEASE THINK B4 INK.
IN ALL TRUST WITH U LEADERS
POOR (BY RIGHTS) BANK EMPLOYEE.

Swami said...

DEAR COMRADES, CAN ANYONE POST THIS FULL MSG IN "ALL BANKING SOLUTION ". IT DID NOT WORKOUT TO ME. PLEASE DO OBLIGE. TK U.

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Akhilesh-April 21, 2010 10:12 PM
Yes,as per message received by me purported to have been emanated from CHV
Probably strictly as per MOU dated 27/11/2009 with no additional benefits to any section of employees.

SHANKAR said...

Referring to Nidhi-April 21, 2010 8:09 PM
Share business is gambling and public are cautioned before investing about the risks.Those who are not ready to take risks need not invest.But ours is blood sucking business by managements. Unless you enter the business you will not be knowing the risks involved in it.

jayaram said...

SWAMI;APRIL 22 12.22;

PLEASE LOG ON WWW.ALLBANKINGSOLUTIONS.COM-CLICK WAGE REVISION FOR BANKS LATEST-CLICK ITEM NO 2 -LETTERS TO NEWS CHANNEL-R JAYARAM

santhosh said...

who gave the mandate to unions/assn to finalise/sign settlement on behalf of bank employees whether it can be challenged in a court pls clarify.

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

For several decades, Unions settled the wage pacts and by custom, they can not be treated as unauthorised to do the exercise. The only recourse to handle the situation is to accept the things for the time being and get the anomalies rectified later. To prevent the thing from being given effect to is considered as utter foolishness. The world is not going to end with the signing of the 9th BPS. Those who consider it not worthy or expensive to join the Pension Scheme by paying 1.6 percent of pay or 156 percent of CPF taken are not compelled to join now. The recovery envisaged for granting fresh option is illegal and can be challenged in due course and not now. Any suit fabricated improperly may have adverse result and can hamper things taking good shape.- C N Venugopalan , ceeyenvee gmail.com

April 22, 2010 8:57 PM

ajitnaik said...

Whether the following is the agreed understanding between IBA and UFBU? Whether it will be a part of the final agreement to be signed on 27th April, 2010? Those who are close to UFBU leaders should insist them to have a time bound solution on the issues as it is affecting thousands of only pre 2002 retirees.
"Improvements in pension scheme: UFBU has also decided to take up various issues relating to improvements in the Pension Scheme like periodical updation of pension along with wage revision for serving employees, 100 % DA to be paid to all pensioners, common indexation of pension, increase in commutable portion of pension, increase in Ex Gratia for Pre-1986 retirees/widows, higher pension for pensioners above the age of 80, etc."

C N Venugopalan said...

CPF OPTEES APPEAR TO BE WORRIED ABOUT SURRENDERING THEIR CPF BALANCE AND TAKING OPTION. THEY MAY TAKE COGNISANCE OF THE FACT THAT PENSION OPTEES ALSO WOULD HAVE EARNED THE SAME AMOUNT OF CPF AND THEY HAVE MADE THIS MUCH CONTRIBUTION EARLIER. WHILE SHARING THE BURDEN, PENSION OPTEES SHOULD CONSIDER THAT IN ALL EARLIER SETTLEMENTS, CPF OPTEES WERE CONTRIBUTING TO THE PENSION FUND BY FORGOING A PORTION OF THE INCREASED PAY LOAD. BOTH SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT EITHER OF THEM DO/HAVE DONE THE SAME WORK AND PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY CALLS FOR EQUAL CONTRIBUTION FROM THEM. IBA SHOULD REALISE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT ASK EMPLOYEES TO SHARE PENSION BURDEN SINCE PENSION LIABILITY IS TO BE BORNE BY EMPLOYER AND NOT BY EMPLOYEES. RIGHT SOLUTION IS TO GIVE PENSION FROM THE ENSUING MONTH OF RETIREMENT TO ALL INCLUDING THE RESIGNED EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE QUALIFYING SERVICE. IF IBA AND BANKS FEEL THAT THEY ARE NOT HAVING MONEY (which is far from truth as disclosed by working results)LET THE KEY MEN GO AND SIT WITH A PIECE OF CLOTH NEAR CHURCH GATE AND CST AND RAISE ALMS AND OPEN CHARITY BOXES AT ALL IMPORTANT PLACES

Raghavan said...

Associations and Unions should have taken proper view of the various monetary implications and arrive at or request for required wage rise as well as formula for return of funds by pf optees who opt for pension etc...
As Government is bearing cost of pension in other organisation it could well be argued that there was no need for any contributions from pension/pf optees towards pension as it is to be treated as a Social Security Measure of the Government.

malathi said...

Atlast, 9th BP signed yester day. the unions have cheated the employees as earlier agreed terms. earlier, the pension optees have to pay 1.6 times of pay of nov, 2007 is to the contributed from their arrears.now surprise to note that the same has been enhanced to 2.8 times of pay of nov, 2007.

already a lot of injustice has been made to bank employees. Now, once again a great injustice is made by the union people by thier brutal acts.

raamraam said...

hello friends,what happened to our finance minister move reg effective date ie nov2009.Is there any mention in this regard????????????

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.