7 CPC :RECTIFICATION OF DEFICIENCIES IN PENSION RELATED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 7th CPC

SOURCE :

 CURTSEY
http://sainikdarpan.blogspot.in/

BHARAT PENSIONERS SAMAJ WRITES 

TO EMPOWERED COMMITTEE OF 

SECRETARIES FOR RECTIFICATION OF 

DEFICIENCIES IN PENSIONRELATED 

RECOMMENDATIONS OF 7th CPC

NO SG/BPS/11/2015

Dated 13.12.2015

Dear Shri. Pradeep Kumar Sinha

Cabinet Secretary GOI

Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India

Rashtrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi – 110 004

Reg : Pension related benefits of civilian employees 

Chapter 10.1 of 7th CPC report.

Ref : Bharat Pensioners Samaj (BPS) representation to 

Shri Arun Jaittley Ji, Honourable Minister of Finance 

Government of India vide its No SB/BPS/10/2015 dtd. 

25.11.15 (copy attached)

Sir,

In continuation of BPS representation vide No

 SG/BPS/10/2015 dtd. 25-11.15 (copy attached) to the

 honorable Minister of Finance GOI following few points

 are put forth for the consideration of Empowered

 Committee ofSecretaries under your chairmanship:

1. Fitment benefit (5.1.27) & {10.1.67 (ii) 2.57

Fitment factor has been recommended for uniform

 application to all employees & Pensioners arrived by dividing

 revised minimum pay by existing minimum salary. Minimum

 revised salary has been worked out on the principle of need

 base minimum wage following Dr Aykroyed formula. of 50s

 which is out dated & smells of colonial mindset. The

 “Normative Family” is taken to consist of a spouse and two

 children below the age of 14yrs. (Husband 1 unit, wife 0.8

 unit and children (2) at 0.6 unit each). Considering wife to be

 .80 unit is nothing but gender bias. In the present scenario a

 wife too put in the same amount of physical work rather may

 be more as compared to husband. She needs more

 nutrients to keep herself fit to be mother & needs more

 clothing. A lady whether she is a wife of a labourer or a

 Secretary to Govt. of India has a basic right to keep her

 reasonably presentable for which she needs some minimum

 add-ons as such treating her to be less than a unit is gross 

injustice.

Similarly growing Children of less than 14yrs need more of

 proteins, fats & carbohydrates, with sufficient exercise &

 field activities for healthy growth. Today they need much

 better & more clothing compared to 50s. Today Nation

 needs healthy & stout young citizens. It is against the

 national interest to restrict their need base minimum

 requirement to .6 units.

The basket of items taken does not take care of digital India’s

 minimum requirement i.e.a smart mob. phone & internet

 connection. The quantities of consumption & rates taken for

 the items in the basket are unrealistic compared to actual

 retail market rates.

In the light of above mentioned facts it is felt that minimum

 salary has been intentionally calculated to be lower to keep

 common fitment factor low. BPS, therefore, appeal that

 minimum revised salary be raised upwards to make it

 realistic.

According to 7th CPC recommendations, 2.57 fitment factor

 is for all employees and pensioners. But, in fact, 2.81 fitmen

t has been given at Secy level by raising existing Salary of

 80000/PM to 225000/per month. This is robbing Peter to pay

 Paul, violative of CPC own recommendation and that of

 Article 14 of the constitution of India. BPS, therefore, appeal

 that 2.81 fitment benefit be provided to all employee and

 Pensioners without any discrimination.

2. Minimum Pension/family pension (10.1.24) (10.1.26): As

 per 7th CPC recommendations revised minimum pension

 will be 50% of the minimum revised salary of Rs 18000/&

 Family pension will be 30% of it i.e. Minimum Pension will

 now be = Rs 9000/PM & family Pension =5400/ Sofar

 minimum pension & Family pension have been the same i.e

. Rs 3500/ if existing minimum family Pension of Rs 3500/ is

 multiplied by 2.57 fitment benefit, it comes to Rs 8995/PM

 BPS request that the matter be look ed into to ensure that

 minimum pension & family Pension remains the same.

3. Parity in Pension between pre & post seventh CPC

 retirees (10.1.53):


The pension formulation under para 10.1.67 (i) option 1

 recommended by the Commission is that all past pensioners

 shall first be fixed in the Pay Matrix being recommended by

 it, on the basis of the Pay Band and Grade Pay at which

 they retired, at the minimum of the corresponding level in the

 matrix. This amount shall be raised, to arrive at the notiona

l pay of the retiree, by adding the number of increments he

had earned in the corresponding pay scale from which he

had retired, at the rate of 3 per cent. Fifty per cent. of the

 amount thus obtained would be the revised pension.

It would be seen that the Commission has recommended

 fixation of the revised pension of the past pensioners

 (without rectifying anomalies of 6th CPC), on the basis of the

 pay scale, after 31-12-2005/Pay Band and Grade Pay from

 which they had retired and not on the basis of the revised

 pay of the post from which they had retired. The concept of

 full parity implies that it is the rank or post held by the

 pensioner which determines his pension and not the pay

 scale. In many cases the pay scales have been up-graded

 after the retirement of the pensioners as a result of Pay

 Commission’s recommendations or otherwise without any

 change in the rank or in the nomenclature of the post held

 previously by them. Advantage of these upgraded pay

 scales was denied to those who retired earlier to such up

 gradation creating disparity in Pension.

The formulation proposed by the 7th CPC will not remove the

existing disparity between the pension of the pre 01-01-2006

 pensioners and those retiring after this date. Such a disparity

 will continue even after the implementation of the formulation

 recommended by the 7th CPC for the fixation of the pension

 of the past pensioners since their pension will be fixed on

 the basis of the pay scale from which they had retired and

 the benefit of revised scale upgraded after their retirement

 will not be admissible to them.

The principle of full parity implies that the uniform pension

 should be paid to all pensioners retiring in the same rank

 with the same length of service, irrespective of the date of

 their retirement. Since the formulation recommended by the

 Seventh Pay Commission will not bring about uniformity in

 the pension of the past pensioners retiring in the same rank

 on different dates, 7th CPC recommendation thus will not

 ensure full parity for all civil pensioners.

Another glaring anomaly relating to pensioners in the new

 Pay Matrix which the Commission has proposed after

dispensing with the existing system of Pay Bands and Grade

 Pay introduced on the recommendations of the Sixth Pay

 Commission. In the proposed Pay Matrix, in place of the

 existing Grade Pay, there are 18 distinct Pay Levels which

 would henceforth be status determiner. Each Level lays

 down the minimum pay, the annual pay progression of 3 per

 cent. and the maximum pay. It is seen that the maximum

 pay in each Level exceeds the minimum pay in the next

 higher Level. This is likely to create a situation in which a

 person retiring from a higher Level will receive pension less

 than a person retiring from a lower Level. A situation may

 arise where a junior may draw more pension than a senior in

 the level above him.

BPS appeals for the removal of the anomalies discussed

 above while taking a decision on the Commission’s

recommendation.

4. Ratio between minimum and maximum: Instead of

 reducing it is raised which is against the preamble of the 

Constitution of Indian Republic. Issue may be revisited.

5. Raising Percentage of pension, based on sustenanceL

 (10.1.24 to 27) Analysis given by CPC is silent on 

sustenance-this is unjustified rejection and may be

 reconsidered.

6. Additional pension at 75yrs of age (10.1.28 to 30) is

 denied only because Defence Ministry did not agree, this is

 rather absurd. If Defence Ministry does not want to have it,

let them not have it. Why make others suffer on this account?

7. Medical facilities: (9.5.18 The Commission’s

 recommendations regarding merging of all postal 

dispensaries with CGHS dispensaries and inclusion of non

 CGHS covered postal Pensioners are welcome.

However, its recommendations regarding Health insurance

 for pensioners do not suit existing pensioners on account of

 no coverage of existing disease without lock-in period, no

 provision of OPD facility, payment of premium and less

amount of coverage.

BPS, wish to draw your kind attention to para 9.5.18 (iii) of

the 7th CPC and request you to creat without delay a

 combined entity of CGHS, ECHS-RELHS which in terms of

 7th CPC would result in a very strong network of health

 facilities for the Central Government employees/pensioners

 across the length and breadth of the country.

8. Fixed Medical Allowance (FMA) (8.1.51) It is granted to

 pensioners for meeting expenditure on day to day medical

 expenses that do not require hospitalization. Keeping in view

 the high cost of medicines & ever rising consultation fee of 

Doctors, BPS urge that the issue be revisited to reconsider

 the demand for raising FMA to Rs 2000/ PM.

Thanking you in anticipation.

With warm regards

Yours sincerely,

Er. S.C.Maheshwari

Secy.Genl.Bharat Pensioners Samaj

C/-MS Vandana Sharma Joint Secy.

DOP & PW for n/a at her level pl.

S.C Maheshwari