This reproduction is from a letter written to a friend of mine RO Shah, a veteran trade union letter highlighing the scenario obtaining on pension in State Bank of India. Since the subject matter is of interest to employees in general in banking industructy, this reproduction may be of some importance to them.
_________________
It was heartening talking to you over phone the other day.I quite realize I have not been able to keep in contact with you for a long time –the reason being that I couldn’t spare necessary time for the purpose which ofcourse can’t be a pertinent excuse I know.
You have been fighting virtually a lone battle on an issue like pension which otherwise is a matter connected with thousands and thousands of people all over the country. Your voice clashes the deaf ears in the channels that count for the purupose and only continues to remain sans any response from any quarter. I stopped taking whatever interest I used to take initially for the simple reason that before it could prove to be result oriented it was likely to elicit misunderstandings only which situation I thought of avoiding as all my career I was most often most misunderstood a person on issues crucial and salient. I strongly felt and do feel the same way even on date that pension is an issue worth being pursued as potentially it is strong enough ingredients wise capable of generating necessary merit which the concerned authorities just can’t deny. Why the concerned authorities are themselves not taking necessary initiative is the question. Obviously why they should bother if the beneficiaries themselves are not showing the required interest. You will agree, as you yourself said earlier, that majority of pensioners find themselves well settled otherwise and they have no reason for any worry whether there is some increase in pension or it is not there. Those who are in the saddle are busy elsewhere, even pensioners organisatins in the circles and at the national level are confined to the level of just offering prayers for some thing to be showered on them and are not prepared to act as fighters. Fighting for a right cause is not a fancy, it is a spirit capable of not getting dithered with age or status. This spirit they lack, nay it is a sort of voluntary incapacitation on their part.
If Unions with serving employees holding the reins are unable to deliver the goods, why the Unions with ex employees in the helm of affairs as leaders of the pensioners Association/Federation can’t play a decisively worked out strategy is the question. The serving people holding the reins being indifferent, the pensioners union being incapable of moving the channels involved and the pensioners, the likely beneficiaries of whatever improvement that could be cultivated, being themselves not so keen, what the few like you ofcourse with tremendous amount of spirit and enormous zeal can do is again a question. A few others who can do some thing but can’t do any thing for the risk of getting misunderstood naturally possess no potential for any orientation of some result or the other. Sounds pessimistic but this is the scenario after all is obtaining. I wish I am wrong in my estimation and finally the efforts you are making are capable of bringing the desired results. My circle General Secretary told me just a day before that as per information given to him by the Federation, some thing tangible may emerge within 2/3 weeks time. It is always better to hope for the best and I too would like to fall in line with it for an imaginable satisfaction atleast. I obviously owe you an all out acknowledgement and appreciation for your efforts in the matter. All the best.
Pension in SBI is a matter of serious concern
The issue needs immediate attention
Belonging as I do to SBI circle, to me it is some thing well writte
There are so many ex- union leaders now pensioners.I wonder why they are not taking a lead to fight the injustice done the the pensioners.the the employees retired after the 7th wage revision are still drawing the pension on the salary drawn prior to the 7th revision.The demand for pension at 50 per cent has been pending for a long time and it is time to make all out effort to grt the matter resolved by all possible means including approching the law makers.
There are so many ex- union leaders now pensioners.I wonder why they are not taking a lead to fight the injustice done the the pensioners.the the employees retired after the 7th wage revision are still drawing the pension on the salary drawn prior to the 7th revision.The demand for pension at 50 per cent has been pending for a long time and it is time to make all out effort to get the matter resolved by all possible means including approching the law makers.
You are very correct in your observation that there being a large number of pensioners but still they are unable to throw their weight to secure positive results. In fact the role is so assumed by the serving employees unions that a normal pensioner expects necessary goods to be delivered whereas actually nothing is happening and what is happening is just a matter of retrogate steps.Thank you for your comments.
Neelkanth,I agree that ,there are large number of pensioners but could not throw the required weight for their cause.The reason is that,we are not organised to bring pressure on govt/ bank by agitation like the working employees.In my view, our leaders like Godbole,Umedsingh,R .O.Shah and many others can make a case and present to the Top Management.They can also take help of the local MPs.They may also see whether we have any chance if we challenge to the Gove in the court of Law.(I think Pensioners’ Association had already gone in the court and the matter is being tossed between the high court and supreme court.I am not aware of the present status).
I also understand that a small committee was appointed by the govt to look in to the pending issues including pension and they had already submitted their report to the govt.What happened to that report is unknown.Can you throw some light on that?
IT IS VERY ASTONISHED TO POINT OUT THAT THE PENSIONERS RETAIED BEFORE 1-11-2002 HAD NOT BEEN PAID UNDER REVISED PENSION SCHEME BU THE THE LARGEST BANK IN ASIA – STATE BANK OF INDIA. SOME THE PENSIONERS WENT TO THE COURT ALSO AND WAITING FOR THE RESULTS SINCE THEN. ALL THESE PENSIONERS ARE SENIOR CITIZENS AND CANNOT WALK WITH OUT SOMEBODIES HELP. SOME TIME THEY HAVE TO SPEND LARGE AMOUNT FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES INCLUDING SPOUSE OF THESE POOR FELLOWS. NO SYMPETHETIC ATTITUDES DRIVEN TO THESE PENSIONERS BY THE MANAGEMENTS AND BY THE GOVERNMENT.
PANICKER P.M.G.K
Equality before law a constitutional right does it not apply to the SBI Pensioners ? An employee retired after 31-03-2001 gets more pension than VRS retirees.SBIis ready to wipe off losses resulting to several million crores in the name of OTS to bring down NPAs.But ignores several employees who served SBI several decades.
A step motherly attitude is being shown to VRS employees in respect of Medical benefits,post retirement assignments etc.Why ?Is SBI aginst implementation of its own VRS ?programme ? Let it treat VRS employees and pre VRS on par with others without any discrimination
Your concern on Pension is fully justified and definitely warrants an immediate attention on the part of the powers that be.
I have also retired from SBI and drawing lesser pension based on 6th wage settlement. In the 7 th settlement one more stagnation increment granted but while claculating pension the bank has not taken into account this increment.
They have calculated pension even for Special Assistants an out come of 7 th wage settlement for SBI employees by fixing amount equalent to Spl allowances of the 6 th wage settlement. Why the bank has failed to fix equalent increment of the 6 th wage increment amount to the stagnation amount also. The retirees are waiting for the out come fo the HYDERABAD court case filed by ex NCBE general Secretary Shri.P.Narasiah. Let the Government and particulary the Lawyer cum Hon.Finace minister take an early decision on pension which is a property right of pensioners.
R.SIVAGYANAM, 08th March 2008
13, Bakthavatchalam Street, Phone No: 044- 2479 4044
Koyambedu,
Chennai-600 107.
To,
The Trustees,
IBI/SBI Employees Pension and Guarantee Fund,
State Bank of India,Central Office,
State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Bombay – 400 021.
Dear Sir,
PENSION REVISION
FOR VII TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT
********
I have retired from service under VRS Scheme as per Chennai Local Head Office circular CIR.DO.VRS:4 Dated 11-01-2001.In this connection I have to inform you that as per circular my pension should have been revised based on VII th Bipartite settlement and pending revision my pension is paid on pre-revised pay (VI th Bipartite settlement).
The pension revision for VIII th Bipartite implemented and also family pension for VII th and VIII th Bipartite settlements stands revised. It is unfortunate that my pension based on VII th Bipartite settlement not yet revised even after seven years. I have drawn additional stagnation increment as per VII th Bipartite settlement that has not been taken into account while fixing pension as per pre-revised pay scales The pension cannot be denied to stagnation increment drawn during my service as per VII th Bipartite settlement and it should be paid from the date of my retirement under VRS scheme.
Our Supreme Court has categorically stated in several cases that the pension is neither a bounty, nor a matter of grace depending upon the sweet will of the employer but is a payment for the past service rendered. I am also entitled for revision of pension from the date of my retirement as per your VRS Circular and I request you to take early decision in the matter and effect payment of pension. It is high time the Bank, Both the Federations and Government should stop the round robin play tactics to delay/deny pension to VII th bipartite retirees. I earnestly request you to take positive quick decision on pension.
vrsretiries are deprived of their rights.In fact they have created opportunities for recruitment and promotions.They havf taken vrs as per the scheme directed by the Govt. of India.Keeping prejudice against them for not giving their legitimate right of revised pension and Bank management’s inability to get approval is shameful.Mr. BHATT the Chairman should take this matter.
DEB KUMAR BHATTACHERJEE
3382 MORNING STAR DRIVE,
MISSISSAUGA,ONTARIO.
L4T1X8, CANADA
Telephone# 905 612 8550.
dkb4325@rediffmail.com
DatedJuly27,2008
Dear Sir,
I am writing this letter that might help you some where. I list the claims which I feel is legitimate to me.
1.PENSION WEF 18.08.02 and interest on the pension wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization.
2. Interest paid to me towards PF wef 19.08.02 to 31.03.05 was taken back,(which is evident from the letter of The Assistant General Manager, Kharaghpur Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:42:33 +0500 (IST) enclosed herewith,) while the sum was lying in the Institution. Therefore, interest on the entire sum Rs.7,66,636.00. wef 1.04.05 to 21.09.05 has to be paid. I fail to understand why I am deprived of the interest for the ensuing period wef:31.03.05 to 21.09.05
3.The amount which was taken back has to be paid with interest wef.21.09.05 to date it is paid. The statement sent to me is: Further, I enclose a copy of the letter addressed to AGM, PPG in respect of the statement made by The Branch Manager SBI Khraghpur “Credited LHO, Kolkata with Rs.1,59,122.00 (to the amount of excess interest to the P.F. Account for the period from 20.08.2002 to 31.03.2005.) Since the money was with SBI why shall I not get the interest?
Enclosing the letter from AISBOF:
aisbof
To:
Subject: pf/pension fund
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:44:52 IST
Dear Deb Kumar Bhattacharjee,
This has reference to your written communication dated 21.02.2006 enclosing other related papers. The following are our observations.
a) You have not furnished your date of birth anywhere in the representation. In view of this, we do not know, as on the date of retirement, whether you had completed 50 years of age or not;
b) Secondly, we do not know whether you were dismissed or have left the bank service voluntarily;
c) We assume that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank. We rely, in this connection, on letter no. PPG/3970 dated 7th November, 2005 sent to you by the PPG Department, Kolkata Local Head Office. In this letter, the AGM (PPG) has clearly stated that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank;
d) To become eligible for sanction of pension one should complete 20 years of pensionable service irrespective of the age provided his resignation for voluntarily leaving the services of the bank was accepted and approved by the competent authority. In the instant case, Kolkata LHO letter says that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank. One is eligible for pension only on completion of 20 years of pension able service without taking into account the period on loss of pay;
e) Regarding payment of interest for the delayed period on account of settlement of provident fund, we quote hereunder the relevant instructions contained in codified circular (PPG), current as on 30th June, 2002:
The period of delay will be calculated from the date of application submitted for refund of provident fund or date of retirement whichever is later to the preceding day of actual payment is made. The rate will be the same as applicable to PF balance for respective pension with half yearly rests (vide Corporate Center Circular No. ADM/013596 dated 17th March, 1981). Overdue interest should be paid by debit to branch charges account. Every member is eligible to get interest on the PF contribution from the month following the month of credit to the Trustees Account. That is to say, the fund has to be settled within 30 days from the date of cessation of service.
f) In the instant case, the period of delay is abnormal. Besides, there is a communication from Kolkata LHO that your request for payment of interest for the delayed period would be examined;
g) The General Manager (Net Work-1) of Kolkata LHO is the competent authority to sanction interest for the delayed period. A Note has to be put up by PPG dept, Kolkata LHO, to the General Manager, obtain his sanction and convey the same to the branch which should be pay to you by debit to branch charges account.
We are endorsing a copy of this message to the General Secretary, Bengal Circle together with the papers sent by you. You are requested to provide the required information to him for further needful action.
SECRETARY
AISBOF
4.Payment of Leave encashment with interest wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization.
5.Immidiately hand over the NSC which is liquidated in September2005 and interest on the same for delayed handing over.
6.Interest on Commutation wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization of payment.
With Best wishes.
Yours Truly
Deb kumar Bhattacherjee
Shri Deb Kumar Bhattacharyya,
3425, Morning Star Drive, APH #406, PPG/3970 7TH Nov. 05.
MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO,
L4TIYI
CANADA.
Dear Sir,
SBI Employees Provident Fund
P.F. Index No 1684604, Date of Retirement: 19.08.2002
Claim for overdue interest on delayed payment
Kharagpur Branch
We acknowledge receipt of your e-mail dated 20.10.2005 addressed to our Chief General Manager, Bengal Circle and telephonic discussions our AGM (PPG) had with you in the above matter. In this context, we have to advise that your application claiming overdue interest is being examined by us in the light of the extant rules of the SBI Employees’ Provident Fund and we shall advise you in the matter shortly.
Further, as per our records, when you voluntarily vacated the Bank’s service w.e.f. 19.08.2002 you neither completed 25 years’ pensionable service nor attained the age of 50 years, and as such you are not eligible for pension in terms of SBI Employees’ Pension Fund Rules.
Yours faithfully,
For Chief General Manager
WHEN I QUOTED THAT AFTER 20 YEARS OF SERVICE ONE IS ELLIGIBLE FOR PENSION THEN THEY WROTE:
AGM(PPG)LHO Kolkata” | Add to Address Book | This is spam
To: dkb4325@rediffmail.com
Subject: Settlement of Terminal benefits
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:13:09 IST
Note: To help protect your privacy, images from this message have been blocked.View images | What is this?
Dear Shri Bhattacharjee,
Please refer to your e-mail of 01.03.2007 in response to our letter dated 28.02.2007. We reiterate that your exit from the Bank, was not an usual retirement, but a voluntary vacation of service, with effect from 19.08.2002. You had been served with a notice dated 16.04.2004 in this regard which you duly accepted on 17.05.2004, after you had failed to resume duties despite repeated reminders. Had you retired from the Bank in the usual manner, and had your retirement been accepted and approved by the competent authority, the question of pension would have arisen upon completion of 20 years’ pensionable service.We hope that the matter has been suitably clarified.
AGM PPG, Kol LHO
17.03.2007
NOW IF MY CASE WAS NOT ACCEPTED THEN HOW / WHY THEY PAID MY PF AND GRATUITY.
THEY HAVE NEVER STATED THAT IF I LEAVE THE BANK’S SERVICE THEN I WILL NOT GET MY PENSION.
THEY SHOULD HAVE MADE ME AWARE OF ALL THE SITUATION BEFORE .
IT WAS BANK WHO STATED SINCE I AM UNABLE TO JOIN THEY PRESUME THAT I HAVE VACCATED MY SERVICE.
AS PER RULE THEN THEY SHOULD HAVE APRISED ME OF THE FACT THAT I WILL NOT GET MY PENSION..
FURTHER, I CAN’T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY SENT MY PENSION PAPERS TO FILL UP AND SEND IT TO THEM FOR ONWARD ACTION..LATTER THEY CAME WITH THIS DECISION.
I WILL SEND OTHER PAPERS VERY SOON. PLEASE DO NOT FEEL OTHERWISE TO STATE THAT IF YOU THINK THAT THE CASE HAS NO MERIT.
PLEASE SEND ME YOUR ADDRESS SO THAT YOU GET THE PAPERS.
DEB KUMAR BHATTACHERJEE
I am a VRS retiree and one who strongly feel about the injustice meted out to the pensioners who were covered by the VIIth bipartite agreement. The matter has become so fluid that we are unable to guage where the mischief lies when the issue is so simple and equitable. Bank management’s indifference cannot be understood. Added to the insult, the Management feels that the VRS retirees had committed a gross misconduct as its subsequent attitude towards them indicate. VRS retirees despite their long association with the Bank were treated very badly at the time of their retirement. To quote my own displeasure, I took advantage of the VRS only because I had just two years’ of service left and there was nothing that I could look upon in the Bank even if I continued. And it was the Bank that formulated the Scheme. Only people like me opted for it for various reasons. But what was most condemnable on the part of the Bank was its total nonconcern to the retiring employees. A decent farewel to those who sweted for the Bank was not even organised. I feel totally betrayed by an Organisation which I so sincerely and faithfully served for nearly 4 decades.
Wish Mr. Bhatt will do something positively in this respect.
One aspect which has missed the serious introspection and fight by the Unions as well as Pensioners’ Association of State Bank of India is the plight of retired employees who retired with service of not less than 10 years and even more than 20 years for the simple reason that they entered service after 38 years. In the recent amendment of 5/4/2007 of the Pension Fund rules, the minimum service for eligibility of pension was reduced to 10 years and by the Bank taking a strange attitude confined it to only those who retired on or after 1/11/1993. Further the Retired Employees medical Benefit scheme was confined to only pensioners by an executive order and not extended to those who were denied Pension. Two retired employees by name N.Easwaran and N.Natarajan filed Writ Petitions before the Madras High Court in 1996 and 2000. The single judge without detailed analysis of the contentions dismissed the writ Petitions. But the Division Bench by its order dated 25/7/2007 struck down the cut off date of 1/11/1993 and directed that all retired employees irrespective of the dates of retirement are eligible for pension and thereby extended the much needed succour to those few employees who have been by sheer indifference left out the pension net. Those petitioners are now aged 85 and 76. Unfortunately, the Bank ignoring the golden opportunity to remedy the wrong has went in appeal to the supreme court and obtained interim stay. The Petitioners with no resources but fortunately assisted by Chennai Pensioners’ Association is fighting the case. It is to be observed that in the case of nationalized Banks and Associate Bank) the Government of India itself permitted payment of ex gratia pension to all those who retired before 1/1/1986 (the date from which pension was introduced in those banks as well as family pension to spouses of deceased retirees. The said directive stated that it did not extend to SBI as it has all along a pension scheme. The inference is that SBI would amend its scheme to extend similar benefits to all those who have no fault of their own denied pension. Unfortunately, SBI by putting a restrictive rule extending the benefits to employees who retired on or after 1/11/1993 left those who retired earlier high and dry. In nationalized banks, medical benefit by way of bearing hospitalization expenses was extended to all retired employees whether or not they were eligible for pension by providing that in the case of non pensioners, by one time payment of the last drawn one month’s pay they would be eligible for medical benefit. Even this salutary rule has not been followed. There is also Gen.Regulation 55(2)(e)of SBI General Regulations which provided the power in the Central Board of the Bank to grant pensions even in the case of those not covered by the extant schemes of the Bank. Even though the petitioners in those cases pointed out this in their writ petitions, there was no answer from Bank as to why the injustice wrought to them could not be undone by the exercise of that power. A representation from Sri.Easwaran has also been submitted to the D.M.D. as follows:-
From
Sri.N.Easwaran,
Retired Record Keeper, SBI,
4, State Bank Colony,
Pammal,
Chennai-600075
19/4/2008
To
Smt. Bharati Rao
Deputy Managing Director & CDO
Corporate Centre,
State Bank Bhawan,
Madame Cama Road,
Mumbai-400 021.
Madam,
I request you spare a few minutes of your valuable time to kindly go through this representation. I consider you as the personification of a mother to take care of her helpless children.
I give below my personal particulars
1. I was born on 25/1/24 and presently aged 84 years.
2. I was appointed on 1/10/1962 as ‘Mattey” sort of a server in Class IV in the Pantry of the Bank for senior executives of the Bank
3. I was confirmed in service on 1/10/1963
4. I drew salary and other allowances as applicable to any other workman category in the Bank as per the Sastri, Desai Awards and subsequent bi-partite settlements between the SBI Staff Federation.
5. I was promoted as “Record Keeper” a sort of clerical cadre in 1980
6. I retired from Service on 31/1/1984 on completion of 60 years of age.
7. My total period of service in the Bank is 21 years and 4 months.
8. I was governed like any other employee of the Bank in respect of gratuity as per the Payment of Gratuity Act.
9. Due to the rule then in vogue I having entered service after 38 years, I have been denied pension.
10. It is matter of record that when the pension fund rules were amended on 26/3/1987 raising the age of eligibility for pension for entry into service from 35 years to 38 years, all persons irrespective of the date of their retirement, if they had entered service on or before 38 years were extended the pensionary benefits. I could not benefit out of the same as I was above 38 years when I entered service.
11. After making lot of representations to the Bank and Government of India, I filed a writ Petition in W.P.No. 6691/1996 in the Madras High Court for a writ or suitable direction to extend to me the pension benefits as I had served more than 20 years in the Bank. In the said writ petition I also challenged the amendment dated 5/4/1997 in the pension fund rules which raised the upper age limit to 48 years and minimum service of 10 years for eligibility for pension and discriminating among the ex employees of the Bank by confining the said benefit to only those who retired on or after 1/11/1993. Further I contended that the Bank has enormous powers to remedy aberrations in the matter of grant of pension by invoking the Central Board’s powers under General Regulation 55(2) (e) of the SBI general regulations.
12. I also challenged the 1996 Scheme introduced by the Bank for Retired Employees Medical Benefit where under only those who were in receipt of pension on payment of one month’s pension were made eligible for hospitalization expenses. My contention was that since it is a non-statutory scheme, the Bank cannot make discrimination amongst its retired employees by confining the scheme only to pensioners and denying the benefit to unfortunate few like me who have been by then pension fund rules were denied the benefit of pension.
13. It is a matter of record that when nationalized Banks and Associate Banks introduced for the first time pension with effect from 1/1/1986, the said Banks were making ex-gratia pension with dearness relief to all those who retired prior to1/1/1986. This kind of taking care of those who have been left out of the benefit of pension has not been extended to persons like me on a crude logic that SBI has always a pension Scheme. The implication is that SBI can make necessary provision in their pension Scheme to take care of those who have been left out of pension benefit. In this connection I enclose the circular dated 16/5/2007 issued by State Bank of Travancore whereby the pension benefits were extended even to the spouses of employees who retired before 1/1/1986 irrespective of the period of service.
14. It is also a matter of record that nationalized banks have extended the benefit of hospitalization expenses to pre 1/1/1986 retirees by requiring them to pay one month’s last drawn salary. You may please refer to Bank of Baroda in this connection. Unfortunately, our Bank which is the largest bank with huge resources has not thought fit to extend the scheme to an unfortunate few like me who due to the cold print left out of the pension net. It is also an irony that when en employee dies even after one year’s service, his spouse was extended the family pension, whereas due to the quirk of fate, people like me having put more than 10 years of service before normal retirement have been denied pension as well as medical benefit.
15. Fortunately for me, the Madras High Court by its judgment dated 25/7/2007 in my Writ Appeal W.A.No.2822/2004 and another W.A.3939/2004 preferred by my colleague similarly situate found that the cut off date of 1/11/1993 for extension of pension benefit to all retirees has no rationale and ordered pension benefits to me and the other and all those similarly situate like me.
16. I understand that the personnel department far from snatching the golden opportunity to remedy the historical and unintended wrong to a very few like me is attempting to prolong the agony by preferring appeal to the Supreme Court.
17. I request you to kindly look into the injustice wrought to us in the matter of denial of pension as well as medical benefits and deter those in the Bank who unmindful of the human angle involved in the matter are bent upon spending resources of the Bank in engaging us in an unequal fight. The implementation of the Madras High Court judgment is a flea bite for the Bank.
18. I don’t have the age, stamina or resources to defend the onslaughts of those in the Bank who unmindful of the human angle believe in engaging us in a wasteful and costly litigation. People like us who would benefit out of the judgment of the Madras High Court who fortunately survive are very few and may not even cross 100 or even 1000. By accepting with good grace the Madras High Court’s judgment and implementing the same will be bringing cheer to people like us who are in their 70s or 80s and not much time left to reap the full benefits.
19. It is highly anachronic when the Government of India itself realizing the plight of senior citizens above the age of 60 has extended the benefit of pension irrespective of their employment, the Bank is considering in engaging in wasteful and debilitating litigation just to leave a few like us in the lurch and cold.
I request you to immediately call for the papers from the concerned department and put a halt to the litigation happy of a few in the Bank, and bring cheer and succour to the unfortunate few like me who had given the best to the Bank while in service and have been left out uncared for, for no fault of us.
I hope to have a soothing and life saving reply from you.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(N.Easwaran)
Encl. A/a.
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE
(Associate of the State Bank of India)
HEAD OFFICE :: THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT
PROVIDENT FUND, PENSION AND GRATUITY SECTION
DGM AGM CM/BM Mgr./DM/AM Other Staff
CIRCULAR LETTER TO ALL BRANCHES/REGIONAL OFFICES/ZONAL OFFICES/HEAD OFFICE
ACCTS/PPG/01/07 16.05.2007
GRANT OF EX-GRATIA TO SURVIVING SPOUSES OF PRE-1986 RETIREES: MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING SCHEME
Your attention is invited to circular letter No.ACCTS/PPG/02/2006 dated 6.10.2006. Accordingly, we have been paying an amount of Rs.1,000/- each as ex-gratia every month in respect of the spouses of the pre-1986 retirees ( ie., those who retired on or before 31.12.1985).
We have now been advised by the Indian Banks’ Association that the Banking Division, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, have clarified that ex-gratia relief may be granted to the surviving spouses of the employees who died in service prior to 01.01.1986 irrespective of the period of service rendered by the employee before his/her death.The other eligibility criteria given in the circular letter mentioned in paragraph 1 above remain the same. The PPG Section at Head Office will arrange to effect the payment of the ex-gratia amount through the account opened for the purpose. The amount of ex-gratia payable is Rs.1,000/- per month. A format of the application form is enclosed (Annexure A).
-2-
The spouse should produce life certificate in the month of November every year. This certificate should be kept on branch record in the format enclosed (Annexure B). In case of death of the spouse, the same should be advised to PPG Section, F&A Department at Head Office immediately.
Representations have been received from several beneficiaries for making the scheme effective from 13.09.2006, the date of notification by the Government of India instead of 20.10.2006, the date of approval of the scheme by the Bank. This has been favourably considered and the scheme has been made effective from 13.09.2006. The arrears in eligible cases are being remitted to beneficiaries’ accounts separately.
Wide publicity may be given to the new dispensation. Please bring the contents of this circular letter to the attention of all the staff members. A copy of this circular letter may be placed on the notice board for information.
GENERAL MANAGER (TREASURY)
_______________________________________________________
There is no reply to this letter till now.
May I request all the serviving employees/officers’ Unions and pensioners take it up with the top management seriously the plight of the unfortunate few and get the historical wrong committed by the Bank remedied.
J.Radhakrishnan, Advocate ( G.M.(Law) and Legal counsel(Retd.) of SBI, C.O.
State Bank Officers’ Federation is going an indefinite strike from 20th October 2008. You may find details in their circular no.139 dated 8.9.08
Even when the revised pension was announced along with pay revision in 2005 shri kakodkar raised moot points on the tv and other media with no avail. how long should it take to just implement what is legitimate for the officers/employees who worked for the bank and took vrs only formulated by the bank itself..it is highly embarrassing and disturbing to frequesntly raise this issue…trust sri o p bhatt who is a very nice person and efficient officer attends to this satisfactorily….
Dear Sir, The organistion office bearers now are happy as they got the benefit. The Pensioners Fedaration & circle Units are shpowing lip sympathy only. Only few pensioners collectively fight for the justice in the court & get the benefit for the 7th Bipatite settlement pensioners also as now enjoyed by the 6th & 8th.Common fund can also moblised for this cause.
All retired employees, though aggrieved, cannot be expected to agitate for revised pension, as even when in service, they only supported the association/union leaders,during agittions for various benefits. Pensioners Association should take up the matter strongly with Management/ Govt.
I SUGGEST THAT ON ADD AS SUGGESTED BELOW CAN BE INSERTED IN
LEADING ENGLISH DAILEES
DO YOU KNOW?
IN SBI PENSIONERS RETIRED BEFORE 1997 DRAW 50% OF THEIR
LAST DRAWN PAY:&
PENSIONERS RETIRED IN 2002 AND LATTER ALSO DRAW 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY
HOW ABOUT PENSIONERS RETIRED BETWEEN 1997 & 2002.
THEY ARE DENIED 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY.
WHY?
WE DONOT KNOW
PERHAPS OUR FINANCE MINISTER KNOWS
I SUGGEST THAT ON ADD AS SUGGESTED BELOW CAN BE INSERTED IN
LEADING ENGLISH DAILEES
DO YOU KNOW?
IN SBI PENSIONERS RETIRED BEFORE 1997 DRAW 50% OF THEIR
LAST DRAWN PAY:&
PENSIONERS RETIRED IN 2002 AND LATTER ALSO DRAW 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY
HOW ABOUT PENSIONERS RETIRED BETWEEN 1997 & 2002.
THEY ARE DENIED 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY.
WHY?
WE DONOT KNOW
PERHAPS OUR FINANCE MINISTER KNOWS
Cogradulations Mr.Seshadri for winning a case for sbi pensioners. The Judgement delivered today (16/10/2008) by the honourable Chennai high court directing the bank to consider payment of pension within 3 months for VII Bipartiate retirees as per 50% of last drawn pay (1684 points)and also pay the arrears from the date of retirement.I once again congrdulate you sir.
R.Sivagyanam (Former office bearer NCBE and Negotiating committee member III Bipartiate talks)
Phone No: 044 2474044
I ALSO JOIN IN CONGRATULATING MR.SESHADRI IN WINNING THE CASE
FOR 7TH BIPARTITE PENSIONERS. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE FULL
DETAILS OF THE JUDGMENT
T.R.VENKATESAN
I also join the many VRS retiress in congratulating Mr.Seshadri for his earnest effects.
I will be obliged if you can kindly send me the details of the judgement and also let me know as to when the new pension will be effected
thanks
manju rajagopalan
The biggest news before Diwali is the winning of the court case by Mr.Seshadri.Unfortunately,none of the circle level association have given this news to their members.We all wanted to know more about the court order and its likely implications.
Congratulations to all the pensioners who were fighting court cases all over India and special thanks to mr Seshadri
The Madras High Court in its Judgement dated 16-10-2008 has passed orders directing the Central Government to consider and approve the proposal dated 19-04-2006, submitted by the Bank to the Govt., immediately after the conclusions of the indefinite strike in April 2006 by the employees of the State Bank of India, for ammendmends to SBI Pension Fund Rules revising pension to the VII th. bipartite retirees.In this proposal the SBI has recommended to the Govt seeking approval for the revision of pension at 50% of Pay up to Rs.14,240/- + PQP and above this Pay at 40% subject to a minimum of Rs.7,120/- +1/2 of PQP and D.R over 1684 points with effect from 1-05-2005.Mr Seshdri and others filed four writ petitions praying for pension to all at 50% of pre-revised pay with a merger of 1616 points and D/R and commutation as per the VII th. bipertite Industry level settlement. All the four writ petitions were disposed by this common order. The Counsel of the SBI ,submitting to the Court a copy of its proposal dated 19-04-2006 pleaded that the SBI is not able to implement this proposal which is pending with the Government.Based on this proposal, the Madras High Court has passed the above order.
The Government should honour this verdict and implement this order with out any delay.
The implementation of this judgement will remove the anamoly caused to the VII th bipartite retirees and will make them on par with the VI and the VIII th bipartite retirees. It will not how ever help the retirees of the V th. Bipartite retirees, some of whom receive pension at 31.7 % of their last drawn pay only.It will not also ensure the revision of pension on actual salary revised from the date of reitement. It will continue the discrimination of payment of pension at 50% of Pay to some and at 40% of pay to the rest. Payment of pension at 50% of Pay to all the past pensioners would involve an additional amount of about Rs 100 crores only. Even then the Govt would not remove this discrimination.
While the above anomalies would continue, the implementation of the Madras High Court’ Judgement would remove the discrimination caused to the VII th. bipartite retirees.
Comment by P.P.S.Murthy
I STAND CORRECTED IN THE LIGHT OF COMPREHENSIVE REPLY GIVEN BY
SHRI.P.P.S.MURTHY AS RAGARDS THE RATE OF PENSION BEING PAID TO 6TH & 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. NONE THE LESS THE FACT REMAINS THE WORST AFFECTED PENSIONERS BELONG TO 7TH BIPARTITE: THAT TOO REGULAR PENSIONERS WHO RETIRED AT THE AGE OF 60. LET US HOPE THE GOVERNMENT MAY NOT DIRECT THE BANK TO FILE A REVIEW PETITION IN THE COURT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT.
LET US ALL WISH THE NEW YEAR 2009 SHALL BRING HAPPINESS PROSPERITY & PEACE TO ALL PENSIONERS.
T.R.VENKATESAN. (TRV)
Congrats Mr.sheshadri. Sir you have done what the Pensioners’ association is not able to do.They simply talk and agitate and move around on Pensioners’ subscription. Pl help the poor pensioners of SBI.
sbi top MANAGEMENT INCLUDING CHAIRMAN HAS NO COURTESY TO RESPOND TO THE LETTERS ADDRESSED BY ANY PENSIONER.
IN MY CASE I AM FIGHTING FOR FAMILY PENSION TO THE DISABLED CHILD(AFTER DEATH OF BOTH PARENTS)UNDER THE BANKS SCHEME,since LAST 2 YEARS. SENT REPRESENTATIONS TO THE CHAIRMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.OP BHATT, IN PERSONAL NAME, ALSO TO MR.DESHPANDE, SPL. OFFICER AT C.O. FOR RETIREES, BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. NO BODY IS RESPONDING.
WHAT SHOULD I DO NOW. I APPROACHED ALL THE CONCERNED DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, VISITED PERSONALLY, PHONED, E MAILED , SENT COURIERS AND SO ON. BUT EVERYBODY KEEPS SILENCE.
PL. ADVISE
Congratualtions Sehadri…..What the associations are not doing you have done.But one PPS Murthy has commented agaist it.Is he an SBI officer privy to all decisions by Govt?
Please forward this to at least links to Pensioners association in Bomabay …..or VD Deshpande retd officer in Indore or Shrikant Desai President of the Pensioner’s association at mumbai
Request to Mr.A.Kumar,
Regarding the sanction of family pension to the disabled children of the deceased parents, can you furnish the details in this regard by e-mail to murthypps65@yaho.co.in for taking up the matter with SBI.
Regarding the observations of Mr.Rao dated 18-01-09, no comments were made by me in my observations placed in this site on 28-10-08. Only the facts of the judgement delivered by the Madras High Court have been placed for the benefit of the visitors to the site.An appeal has been made to the Government to honour this verdict. If the judgement is acted upon by the Government, it would place the Seventh Bipartite retirees of State Bank of India on par with the Sixth and Eight Bipartite Retirees of State Bank of India by enabling them to get pension at 50/40% of their actual salary.This appeal made to the Govt does only support the efforts of Mr.Seshadri.
P.P.S.Murthy
Congratulation to all pensioners and Mr.seshadri for winning the case on seventh bipartiate pensioners. Please let me know when the judgement will be effected from as three months from the date of judgement has already passed.
Why is government delaying the implementation.
B.D.Giri/Darjeeling/02-02-2009
I consider that Asociation should take up pensioners’ issues.At the time of retirement they have taken a lump sum to send brochures and also communications tot he pensioners irrespective of affiliations.but this has been thrown to the winds.
Medical benefits are not enough.Banks’ diapensary doctors behave like vested interests.They compalin against the management and paucity of funds.they don’t do any medical work of a doctor.they demand prescription from outside doctors.They treat the pensioners shabily telling that it is Central office or DGM’s instructions.they should provide all resonable medicines required in old age.
SBI boasts about with magazines like “Second innings” But real help is little.
Pl go thru the judgment.there is no condition like that.they have directed SBI to consider only.SBI has planned to appeal further.
The ills are creation of the greedy association bearers who neglected all other categories while accepting the increase in pension.
If at all pension is increased it should be applicable to all surviving pensioners and family pensioners.Here association is going by bipartite to safe guard the time frame of officers benefit.Since they are greedy to get some benefits fir the retirees of the later bipartite they neglect the earlier ones.Reason is fund allocation.
At least from now on the negotiations should be done by calculations for all pensioners totally.Then every increase will help the old pensioners as well.If the new pensioners are prepared to lose some benefits for the sake of old ones that is welcome and correct.After all the corpus is built by the old and not the new.Even the Bank should think in such terms.Old pensioners are getting reduced day by day by deaths.Let there be some respect for the seniors and also benefits.
y earlier one was reply to thisM
“It is learnt that the high court of Madras has directed to the sbi and the government to pay the pension @ 50% of the basic paylast drawn salary of the pensioners who retaired in VII the barppatite agreement with in 3 months of the date of the order. it seems that 3 months is already over but the payment has not been made so far. it is a voilation of the court order and a string action to be taken by the court agaisnt the sbi officials and government
Comment by P.M.GOPALA KRISHNA PANIKER | February 6, 2009 “
IT IS TIME FOR MR SESHDRI TO COME ON THIS BLOG AND EXPLAIN THE PRESENT STATUS. MAY I REQUEST SOMEONE CLOSE TO HIM TO CONTACT HIM AND MAKE HIM TO COME ON THIS BLOG TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS IN STORE FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.
IT IS TIME THAT MR SESHADRI COMES ON THIS BLOG AND EXPLAINS
THE PRESENT POSITION SO THAT 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES CAN KNOW
WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THEM & HOW LONG THEY HAVE TO WAIT. I SUGGEST THAT SOME ONE CLOSE TO HIM CAN TALK TO HIM IN THIS REGARD.
T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV)
when every pensioners/family pensioners and working federations and bank management and hon’ble courts give verdict for payment of pension/family pension as per the pension rules why the govt has reservation in this area and the functionaries sitting there have developed personal animosity towards bank staff in general and pensioners in particular is not under stood by anybody and by any logic. most of the pensioners involved from 1997 to 2002 have reached the heavenly abode during the period of 10 years. sentimentally those left may feel happy from there is this issue is settled at least now.
SO MANY PEOPLE SAY SO MANY THINGS. BUT WHAT IS THE REALITY NOBODY KNOWS. WHILE MANY PEOPLE CONGRATULATE MR.SESHADRI FOR HAVING WON THE CASE, NO ONE HAS BROUGHT HIM TO THIS LOG TO
EXPRESS HIS VIEWS. I REITERATE MY REQUEST TO HIS CLOSE FRIENDS
TO BRING HIM TO THIS LOG
T.R.VENKATESAN (TRV)
I see no reason in these comments.The Govt is not willing to consider even the court directions.Can anyone publish the court directions to SBI and Govt if any? I presume that this is not going to materialise…very soon.Association is struggling to bring in the new bipartite talks with so many conditions.The chacter of the work force of officers has changed in the sense they are now young and more task oriented.the recent IT boom and such people are now fully in the grip of the matter.Pensioners (old lot)have been forgotten.In olden days when award staff was twisting their muscles with more overtime earnings,officers suffered a lot stayin in the branches and offices working hard to balance the books.they tioled and moiled burning the midnight oil.Such pensioners are now in earlier bipartites without proper medical facilities and more expenses to fend for themselves.The wealth created by such hard work is standing SBI in good stead today with more efficient networks and customer base.Even SBI was the field of experimentation and stipulation of financial values for RBI.RBI learnt everything from the field of banking known as SBI.
After all these The SBI dispensaries are not providing proper medicines and vested interest are operationg quoting rules and blaming the management.As a family of SBI veterans I am part of the old generation who worked for 18 hrs a day in the branches to keep the flag of SBI up.But now I feel all that was in vain…The Govt interference and non-chalance and stoogy behaviour of the management to Govt bosses for promotions etc have grown too much.
I pity all the SBI pensioners who were pillars in the branches before computerisation.they were sandwitched between management and Award staff who got overtime without even working on a contract basis in some branches.
The SBI management should be proper if not liberal to understand the old retired emplyees’ contribution and help them with honour dignity and facilities.The present day branch managers and staff don’t even recognise them despite circulars and behave and tret them as unwanted visitors while somebody has given a routine after retirement “visit The nearby SBI branch” as if it will regale the pensioner.
This forum can take up such issues as medical facilities and dignified treatment of oldies who have done enough for the present lot to earn their salary by continuing a strong system whose foundation was laid by the pensioners.The chairman should lead the policy towards pensioners by example.
I know Seshadri is not in pensioners Association ruled by PPS Murthi and he fought on his own.whether he has won the issue or not…the SBI Pensioner’s association has started claiming credit for it.this is nufair and the all India
SBI pesioners should know the full story……….Let us rally behind Seshadri instead of this association
by reading this blog and replies i am educated on issues in the right perspective.I heard from one retd.technical officer of the bank ie SBI who was also a classmate of Arun Ramanathan,finance secretary,that Mr. Chidambaram who is no more the Finance minister is in the way despite his not having any standing in finance ministry.It seems he still hold a consultative and pseduo-control on these issues and is opposed to the extension of 50% pension to 7th bipartite officers.
Chidamabram is not aware that these officers and ealier ones were those who have brought the standing of SBI’worth in good stead even if he was not in Govt or not in any decision making capacity in earlier Govts.
His policies would got skewed but for the communists and the earlier SBI associations who were really powerful to have influence on the policies of the bank.Somebody should make his political and legal brain to understand the need for dignity for pensioners who have raised the flag of SBI collectively.These old pensioners accepted computerization and even passed thru the phase of changeover without much increase in wages. Let him understand that he did not manage profitability of SBI and only these poor oldies.Instead of paying lip service let him extend a liberal attitude to the senior citizens and care for more medical facilities and arrange health camps for them.they have definitely worked more than the IAS officers and Govt officials silently under political pressure.Pl remind him of Poojari and even Sanjay Gandhi days.
More than the present working officers the old pensioners have contributed more for the present day IIR of the banks particularly SBI.
I see that many discriminations exist in treatment of pensioners by SBI.Further the medicines distributed from the dispensaries of SBI are said to be for common ailments for staff and family including pensioners.The stocks and categories stored are left to the discretion ofthe medical officer and the local HRD dept who are not aware of the needs of the old people.they stroe some eye drops which are not required at all.Further the they don’t find the generic names of the medicines and supply equivalent medicines.At least they should supply a list of medicines available at the dispensary and even stock position can be revealed by a chart to the staff and pensioners so that they can claim the equivalent.
Once an officer gets ol retires what is the difference? some are treated as if they are in service and even rare medicines are purchased from outside and supplied.
Common cataract medicines or drops are not stored. Doctors don’t see patients. insist on outside prescriptions for medicines.
All these old dicta should be revised.All pensioners deserve equal treatment irrespective of their cadre of retirement.
I agree with Ramadorai and Kumar.i think they write the facts and the nonchalance of officialdom has crept into the treatment of oldies.Once or ord officer.you are old why there should be discrimination as MD or Dymd or CGM o GM or Ord. officer.All live with one foot in the grave.Why denial of equality at that stage.This is a clear case of arrogance of the officers on top in the bank like SBI.
I find the comments very relevant and thought provoking.Real current underneath is different and the top management of SBI is insensitive to the needs of the pensioners.In an organised way many associations in the name of puttin forward the needs of the pensioners are not doing so correctly.As a retd. senior officer I find that the pensioners who are the workers of yesteryears should be rewarded better as the banks’ present top brass cannot pretend the toil and moil of these pensioners in the “overtime” days when the lower order held the management to ransom and these poor officers who are decrepit and old shouldered the responsibilities even burning the mid-night oil by compulsion without compensation.It is unfair and atrocicious that outcries of somany pensioners remain unanswered by the benumbed officialdom which cares for its existence on a day to day basis.
The Pensioners association is taking up the issues of oficer pesioners particularly senior officers’The Award staff retiree issues and the junior officer issues are left in the lurch.there is imbalance in the negotiations and management should be vary of this.
I draw the attention of all concern the latest Circular No.53 dated 06.04.09 issued by AISBOF signed by Com.G.D.Nadaf regarding the discussion held with SBI Management on 4th and 5th April 2009. Regarding improvements in superannuation benefits and review of medical benefit scheme for retired employees the circular states:
The matter of improvements in SBI Superannuation benefits will be followed-up with the Government at the highest level to resolve the issue as early as possible.
Review of medical Benefit Scheme for retired Employees from JMGS-1 to V will be finalised shortly.
Will the Bank review the medical Benefit Scheme for the retired Awar staff also. Are they think that the award staff pain and suffrings on account of illness is diffrent than officers. The so called improvements in superannuation benefits will be extended to 7 th Bipartiate retirees also. Both the live Organizations and Pensioners Federation should take up the matter effectively and donot fall a fray to Managements divide and rule policy among the retirees of officers and award staff.
RSivagyanam. Phone No:044-24794044 Cell No 9789859810
Yes, the issue really needs immediate attention. At the same time we are also supposed to get the revised structure in the Payment of Gratuity in comparison to the Govt. employees as per the recent amendment of the Pay Commission. I am also opted VRS from the Patna Circle in Jan.2007 and presently shifted to Hyderabad. Should anybody is able to advise if any favour is going to be in near future?
It is unfortunate that despite clearcut directions to Govt. of India by Hon’ble High Court of Madras to consider the proposal of the Bank and approve the amendments to SBI Pension Rules as regards the payment of pension to 7th Bipartite retirees from 1-5-2005, the Government instead of compying with the order sleeps over the burning issue perhaps contemplating to file an appeal agaist the order belatedly after a lapse of about 10 months. On the side of the petitioners’ counsel Shri. Seshadri also, it seems no action by filing a contempt petition is thought of to set the ball in motion to see its logical end. If no contempt petition is filed at the earlist, the interests of the 7th Bipartite retirees are going to suffer. Since the High Court Judgement has come in handy and it is a silver lining in the dark clouds, it is the responsibility of the petitioners to take advantage of the situation and grab the golden opportunity. And time is running out for a contempt petition. As the claim of the 7th Bipartite retirees is justifiable and rightful, let there not be any fear of filing a contempt petition. If they fail to advise their counsel properly they will be commiting a great injustice not only to themselves but also to the other struggling lot. Justice delayed is Justice denied and they will be missing the bus for ever. Therefore it is my earnest request to all the petitioners to impress upon their counsel Shri. Seshadri to file the contempt petition withot losing time. This action only will sustain the appreciation earned by the counsel for the Petitioners,Shri. Seshadri.
Seshadri should not follow the pensioner,s association advices.They play scond fiddle to the association and aother comercial schemes like running school and arranging tours etc.Even in earlier bipartites the present office bearers of the pensioners association were involved and worked to the detriment of the common cause.Everything is in the hands of O.P.Bhat and the ministry who are not favourably disposed.The higher officials try to increase their pension benefits and health schemes.We want a separate independent pensioners association with people like seshadri and very many others who are neutral and are not influenced by commercial motives but influenced by common good with a consensual approach to benefit all.the senior offfiers who are trying to corner all benefits must understand that even a dunnderhead would have worked in the position and passed on to superannuation.The results are due to all the hard work of the undemanding neutral staff without vested interests in their career.
It is unfortunate that despite clearcut directions to Govt. of India by Hon’ble High Court of Madras to consider the proposal of the Bank and approve the amendments to SBI Pension Rules as regards the payment of pension to 7th Bipartite retirees from 1-5-2005, the Government instead of compying with the order sleeps over the burning issue perhaps contemplating to file an appeal agaist the order belatedly after a lapse of about 10 months. On the side of the petitioners’ counsel Shri. Seshadri also, it seems no action by filing a contempt petition is thought of to set the ball in motion to see its logical end. If no contempt petition is filed at the earlist, the interests of the 7th Bipartite retirees are going to suffer. Since the High Court Judgement has come in handy and it is a silver lining in the dark clouds, it is the responsibility of the petitioners to take advantage of the situation and grab the golden opportunity. And time is running out for a contempt petition. As the claim of the 7th Bipartite retirees is justifiable and rightful, let there not be any fear of filing a contempt petition. If they fail to advise their counsel properly they will be commiting a great injustice not only to themselves but also to the other struggling lot. Justice delayed is Justice denied and they will be missing the bus for ever. Therefore it is my earnest request to all the petitioners to impress upon their counsel Shri. Seshadri to file the contempt petition withot losing time. This action only will sustain the appreciation earned by the counsel for the Petitioners,Shri. Seshadri.- H. GANAPATHY
Shri.Seshadri is contemplating to file a contempt petition at appropriate time and he will fullfill the aspirations of the 7th Bipartiate retirees. He is following the case on daytoday basis and also the move by the Govt. to file an apple against the order.He will also get the cooperation of all the people interested in implementation of the favorable order issued by The Hon.High Court Madras.I earnestly hope that everyone will work together in getting the pension for the 7th Bipartiate retirees.
SIVAGYANAM.R
THE JUDGEMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IS SLEEPING
IN THE HANDS OF ALL CONCERNED & MANY ELIGIBLE
RETIREES IN THE MEANTIME LEFT THIS EARTH FOR THEIR
ETERNAL SLEEP. GOD SAVE SBI & PENSIONERS
T.R.VENKATESAN(TRV)
DO NOT UNDER WHY THE FEDERATION AND THE MADRAS PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION ARE NOT TAKING FURTHER STEPS FOR THE RETIERESS UNDER 7TH AGREMENT. IT IS EAGER TO KNOW THE ACTUALS POSITION OF THE CASE. IF THE GOVERNEMENT HAS NOT GONE FRO APPEAL , WHY NOT FILE A CONDOMNED OF COURT WAITING FOR REPLY
MANAA KI HARAA DIYA KISMAT NE PRITHVIRAJ CHAUHAN KO
LARAA DESH KI KHATIR DIYA APNA BALIDAAN JO
PAR ETNE BHI GUNEHGAAR NHI
TO KYA NASIB NA HO APNE HI DESH KI MITTI PRITHVIRAJ KO
PRITHVIRAJ CHAUHAN KYA ISKA BHI HAQDAAR NHI
It is heartening to note that Mr. Seshadri is contemplating to file Contempt Petition against Government’s inaction over the directions of Hon’ble High Court of Madras to Government of India as regards the proposals of the Bank in the matter of pension for 7th Bipartite retirees. I wish him all the best in his endeavours to get the order of Single Judge is implemented at the earlist. This action of Mr. Seshadri will also pave way for the Government to settle the issue pertaining to 7th Bibartite retirees and set right things at least in the ensuing wage settlement of 9th Bipartite, if not in the court proceedings. I thank Mr. Seshadri for his earnest efforts towards this end. – H.GANAPATHY
why union is not pressurise management and government to implement high court order otherwise union member should wear bangle and keep himself inside the door ?
Earlier the association has agreed to this exclusion of the 7th bipartite retirees.How can they now pressurise.Further the persons in charge of pensioners’ associations are happy sitting pretty with more privileges with the subscription money.Wrong persons and old ideas and moribund thinking is on the fore
I fail to understand that the M.P., M.L.A;s get their pension revised as per their will/wish and donot give a single notice on the rightful dermand of pensioners .it is a matter of disgrace on the part of sbi chairman sh O.P.Bhat not giving positive look on the demand of the pentioners even he himself will be retired from the bank within a short period. I once again request the government to enhance the pension of sbi pensioners upto 50% of the last drawn salary to all the pensioners including VRS retirees.
Sir, With regards I wish to submit my say if the matter is not obsolete now. I retired at a basic of 15380 on 31-3-2002 after putting in 34 years of service. Basic pension 4250 only is paid.
The points to ponder are:
1. betrayal of the policy of making 50% of basic as pension
2. the concept of maximum pension 4250 is bank’s own policy which is contrary to the ‘law of the land’.
3. govt. employees get 50% without any discrimination,
4. govt. has more pressure of managing funds for pensioner than sbi.
5. the decision to make payment at 50% to those retired after nov.02 is not applicable to those retired before the date. Rules should be UNIVERSAL and not discriminatory.
6. The serving employees in top positions are not doomed to face the situation because the rules have been framed favourably before their retirement. What, if they too would have faced the same conditions.
7. The CONCEPT OF MAXIMUM PENSION needs to be reviewed in view of the justice to all on equal terms & conditions;
8. government employees seldom face anomalies of such nature.
9. Cann’t the bank synchronise with the policies of equality like the one prevalent in govt. has left the bank pensioner in a state that requires 150 to 175% of what is paid. A deplorable state of affairs in respect of the pensioners of the largest income generating company of India.
SBI Pension Scheme did see some improvements through amendments to SBI Pension Rules gezetted in the year 1997, but the ceiling was increased only upto a certain level i.e. Rs. 4250 by modifying sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23 and inserting for the first time the Dearness Relief payable for various categories of retirees under sub rule ( 6 ) of Rule 23.
However, during the year 2000, the Government Of India unilaterally brought amendments again by substituting sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23, thus introducing the formula of 5o% of Basic Pension for those who draw upto Rs. 8500 & 40% for those who draw above Rs. 8500 with a minimum of Rs. 4250 by means of a proviso specifying that w.e.f. 01/ 03 / 1999, the maximum amount of Pension for the members who retired / retire drawing subtantive salary in the Pay Scales effective from 01 / 11 / 1992 ( Award Staff } / 01 / 07 / 1993 ( Supervising Staff ) AND THEREAFTER shall be computed TILL AMENDMENTS in this regard. The Gazettee Notification of the year 2000 does not envisage any modification in the sub rule 6 ( iii ) of Rule 23 as regards Dearness Relief payable for those who retire on or after 01 / 11 / 1993.
I am of the cosidered veiw that the amendment brought in the year 2000 has AN IN-BUILT STOP- GAP ARRANGEMENT in the matter of Adhoc Pension calculation based on the last drawn salary for those who draw the salary in the Pay Scales effective from 01 / 11 / 1997 ( Award Staff ) / 01 / 04 / 1998 ( Supervising Staff ) and so on until further amendments are made in veiw of the subsequent Wage Revisions. I feel that any short fall in the case of Award Staff on account of reduced percentage of Basic Pension ( Adhoc ) from 50% to 40% in the said stop-gap arrangement as regards payment on such calculations will be compensated to some extent by the Dearness Relief payable in terms of sub rule (6 ) (iii ) of Rule 23 and later on can be adjusted when the amendments are made subsequent to the relative Wage Revisions. It is pertinent to note that the words “THEREAFTER ” is omitted in the proposal of the Bank submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras for further amendment as regards Maximum Pension for the 7th & 8th Bipartite Retirees. It is to be nored that the Dearness Relief payable are modified in said proposal for them..
It is unfortunate that the Bank for reasons best known to them giving a go-bye to the spirit of the above amendment in question made in the year 2000, decided to pay pension calculated on the basis of the Pre- revised Scales of Pay against the laid down principles in this regard and Bank’s such wrong decision has caused huge loss not only in the Basic Pension but also in the Commutation ifor 7th Bipartite retirees till this moment and also 8th BP retirees until 01/ 05 / 2005.
The 7th & 8th BP retirees are entitled to get Pension calculated on the basis of Last Drawn Pay from the date of their retirement even as per the existing provisions of sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23 read with sub rule ( 6 ) ( iii ). Therfore such of those retirees can take up the matter with the Bank to calculate their Basic Pension ( Adhoc ) on their last drawn salary quoting the existing provisions of sub rules ( 2 ) & ( 6 ) ( iii ) of Rule 23.and force the Bank to make legitimate payments until amendments are made in this regard. If the Bank fails, they can prefer individual claims with proper worksheet on arrears of such Adhoc Pension and also commutation, before the Labour Court under ID Act.
I AGREE WITH THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY MR.GANAPATHY. BUT THEN WHO IS TO BELL THE CAT. WE CAN NOT EXPECT
THE PENSIONERS’ ASSCN TO TAKE UP THE ISSUE AS THEY WOULD RATHER ALLOW DECADES TO PASS BY THAN ACCEPT THE 40% -50% DIFFERENTIALS. MANY PENSIONERS MAY FIND IT DIFFICULT TO CALCULATE THE ARREARS PAYABLE. I ALSO UNDERSTAND A FEW PENSIONERS HAVE ALREADY GONE TO THE COURTS ON THIS ISSUE.
THERE MAY SOME VOLUNTEERS TO WORK OUT THE ARREARS PAYABLE TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. A GROUP OF PENSIONERS CAN JOIN TOGETHER AND PURSUE THE MATTER.
IF WE WIN THE BENEFIT SHALL GO TO OTHER ELIGIBLE PENSIONERS. NOTHING IS GOING TO BE LOST IF WE LOOSE THE CASE AS WE ARE BY NOW MATURED TO ACCEPT ANY
VERDICT
SBI RETIRED EMPLOYEES MEDICAL SCHEME
The latest amendment to the scheme also not covers the retirees under VRS & EXIT policy. The scheme provides Rs.7 lacks medical benefit for those who contribute Rs.62000 or pay the difference amount for those already members of any other scheme.
The VRS retirees are eligible for medical benefits at that time if they have completed 30 years of service and become members of the scheme by remitting one month pension. This scheme provided equal benefit of 2 lacs even if they have remitted one month pension according to their eligible pension (lesser pension for sub-ordinate staff and higher pension for officers). Now in the amended scheme uniform amount of Rs.62000 is fixed after studying the viability and the scheme extended to all regular retirees.
The question of excluding VRS retirees who are otherwise eligible as per VRS circular i.e. after completion of 30 years of service when uniform amount is fixed for joining the medical scheme. The Bank gives lame excuse that under VRS Scheme large number of members retired and hence the scheme nonviable. The scheme already excluded the VRS retirees below 30 years of service. The question of viability does not exist now after fixing a fixed amount of Rs.62000 for joining scheme irrespective of the cadre. The Bank can make the scheme more viable by allowing the VRS retirees to pay the difference amount who have opted for the scheme of 2 lacks after putting in 30 years of service by paying variable amount according to the cadre they belong. In the year April 2001 the amount of pension for JMG is around 8000 and they paid the amount and become members of the scheme and eligible for 2 lacs. Now to get the benefit of Rs.7 lacs they have to remit Rs.54000 extra and the Bank can permit them to get the benefit of the scheme. In the original scheme a JMG retiree paid Rs.4000 per lac and now he has to pay Rs.8850 per lack to get the benefit of Rs.7 lacs.
The Bank should reconsider their decision and both the Award staff federation and Officers federation should impress upon the management to extend the benefit to all retirees. Being a welfare scheme the Bank should not shut the doors for the retired employees and what is the use in projecting itself to serve the society through community banking. The Bank should also realize that VRS retirees helped the Bank to rearrange the staff strength and the bank also gained by way of Medical bills, LFC bills ect. The Pensioners Associations also should take up the matter. The VRS retirees can also explore the possibility to proceed legally in the matter.
I had taken up with the Trustees by email etc.on the VRS retirees inclusion in medical schemes.The scheme itself was was for shedding flab from manpower resource as Sivangyanam correctly says. Chennai personnel dept took up the matter to get a negative reply only.
SBI considers all VRS retirees as taboo.They have forgotten the contribution.they honour officers and staff who plough the field without sowing the seed for results.
Many VRS officers left the bank for personal reasons and mainly for the fact that he personnel policy of the Bank was defective and prejudiced and even lacked objectivity.Some left on health grounds.
The present day bank is in such a state because of the doers from the VRS group.the present lot of higher ups are reaping the benefits.
When an officer at GM’s level retires he is considered to be in service for medical benefits, while the working lot are left in the lurch.
Let not the Chairman forget that the bank is in shape because of the doers from the VRS gang of officers.
Let him be not discriminatory.