Thursday, September 17, 2015

OROP : GENERAL WITH TWO TONGUES & OTHER STORIES ON "OROP"


SOURCE :
http://www.ndtv.com/topic/one-rank-one-pension


 GENERAL KNOWS VERY WELL THAT IN HIS CASE THOUGH  HE WAS CORRECT HE ALSO  FAILED TO GET JUSTICE FROM  "HON SUPREME COURT". AS A MATTER OF FACT SUPREME COURT EVEN FAILED TO DELIVER THE "JUDGEMENT" & THE GENERAL WAS BROWBEATEN BY THE SHEER BRUTE STRENGTH OF THE INSTITUTION TO WITHDRAW BACK

 GENERAL I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND SINCE WHEN THE

 " GANDHINIAN METHOD" OF SATYAGRAH HAS BECOME  an UNHOLY AGITATION - Vasundhra


Please talk with the soldiers as 'one soldier will talk to another soldier.' 

               NO POLITICS PLEASE


Other Methods Than Agitation To Get One Rank One Pension: VK Singh


Other Methods Than Agitation To Get One Rank One Pension: VK Singh
File Photo: Union Minister and former army chief VK Singh
Guwahati:  Union Minister and former Army chief General Vijay Kumar Singh (retired) today said there were other methods than agitation by retired servicemen to get 'One Rank One Pension' (OROP) fulfilled.

"I feel that there could have been other methodologies than agitation to get OROP... I would have preferred agitation at the last and less intense," said Singh, who is also currently the Minister of State for External Affairs.

Addressing a press conference in Guwahati, he said agitation for implementation of OROP has been going on for the last 43 years and only the NDA government resolved the issue.

"Only some minor perceptional issues have remained. These can be resolved by talking to each other. The Defence Ministry will solve these," Mr Singh said, adding that the doubt over VRS for soldiers has been cleared.....................................................



.........................................................................................................


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

'One Rank One Pension' - 104 Video Result(s)

More Videos on One Rank One Pension»

'One Rank One Pension' - 134 News Result(s)

More News on One Rank One Pension»
Posted by at No comments:

ADM & MORAL : RAPE OF INDIAN YOUTH IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM

SOURCE:http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/not-just-orop-another-grave-injustice-for-army-1217269



 ADM & MORAL :  RAPE  OF  INDIAN YOUTH IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM


                         Not Just OROP.

            Another Grave Injustice For Army.

                          Dr Shashi Tharoor

September 14, 2015

82 COMMENTS



With all the understandable (and justified) focus on OROP, the media appears to have missed another major development in the Ministry of Defence - a decision to extend Short Service Commissions for 14 years. This is a gross injustice, and it is all the more difficult to understand in light of the Defence Minister's response to a question I raised in the Lok Sabha on December 12, 2014 (verbatim exchange follows):

"Madam Speaker, the issue of recruitment and the shortage of officers in our country is now widely known. But the Army appears to be addressing this by extending the duration of Short Service Commissions in a way that is doing an injustice to the officers concerned. In the old days, you would have a five-year commission. You would then leave and you would still be in the prime of your life; you would be able to find a job and move on. Today, they are making these officers stay for 10 years, 11 years, even 14 years. These are people who have no pension; they have no benefits. They leave the Army late and, as a result, they are not in a position thereafter to actually resume life in the civilian sector. I would like the Defence Minister to explain what the policy is now on Short Service Commissions. I would like to know whether the Government has begun extending these unobtrusively at the expense of the civil rights of the officers concerned. If they are going to do so, whether it would not be fairer to give them all the benefits that a normal officer would be entitled to, pensions included? Thank you, Madam, Speaker."

The Minister for Defence, Manohar Parrikar, replied as follows (again verbatim transcript from the parliamentary proceedings):

"Madam, I entirely agree with the hon. Member. Whatever was the original concept of the Short Service Commission is being totally put upside down by extending it to 14 years. In fact, I had a discussion on this issue. We are trying to address this issue very shortly. We will definitely take care of this concept. There was 17 per cent shortage of officers by the year 2012. As of now, we are recruiting more officers. Every year, we are addressing one per cent. So, we are coming down by one per cent every year. I expect that by another ten years, we should be able to ultimately fill up the vacant posts. As far as the Short Service Commission is concerned, I will definitely address this issue because I am also concerned with the same issue. I have asked for more details. There is some reasoning given by them. Give me some time. I think, in a couple of months, I should be able to address this issue. I understand your concern. The same concern was expressed by me. You are virtually suggesting to convert them into a regular Commission by taking it to 14 years. The original idea was different."

That's the point. The original idea behind the Short Service Commission was a good one: it kept the armed forces young, gave men and women in their 20s an opportunity to experience military life, while allowing them to have the satisfaction of serving our motherland in their youth and going on to pursue other careers thereafter. Those Short Service Commission officers who sought it could seek a Permanent Commission, but few got one and the vast majority were supposed to move on to other careers outside the Forces.

This is why the Short Service Commission was genuinely short - five years in your 20s added to your experience without making a major dent in your life or career plans. But there has been a gradual extension of the five year period to seven, ten, and now fourteen. As a former officer who brought the problem to my attention observed to me, "The SSC ceased to be short when it was made minimum 7 years. It became exploitative when made minimum 10 years. Now that the minimum service is 14 years, it is just abuse of the youth." As this former officer, Mr Balakrishna, argues, "Anything more than 7 years should be treated as a career option. And a career cannot end abruptly after 10 or 14 years."

The charge of exploitation or even abuse is not exaggerated. I recently received a heart-rending email from a Navy Lieutenant on a Short Service Commission, who shall remain nameless since he is still in service and I do not want him to be open to reprisals. I am quoting from it in his own language (without editing the English) to convey his genuine anguish: "The charter of duties are same [sic] for SSC officers as of PC officers. If duties are same then why there is a huge difference in benefits. We SSC officers will be out from the service at 10 or 14 yrs. At that stage we will be at critical stage we don't have any further exposure of outside world. We SSC are neither entitled for pension, ECHS and membership of any club. ...All benefits is [sic] only for permanent commission officer and the other ranks who does minimum 15 yrs of service and gets all facilities. If we are also relieved at the same age bracket then why this discrimination. Dear sir it is a sad state of affairs, all veterans are busy in asking OROP, but they left their brothers behind who had also spent their prime young time with them. ... Most of us has [sic] just started our families. Few are about to become fathers. Sir we are also human being and did nothing wrong while joining service enthusiastically but some where it is getting diminished...Our future is at stake."

It is time that, as a nation, we thought about the human beings who don uniforms to keep us safe. After 14 years of service, SSCOs would retire at the age of around 36-40 years, the time when job/financial security matters the most. By this age, most would have married and have school-going children; this is likely to be the case also for those released after 10 years. The chances of a Permanent Commission are minimal for most of the SSCOs; indeed the policy on granting Permanent Commission is very vague and decisions are left to the discretion - sometimes the whim - of the senior Officers concerned. Those in the executive branches of the navy and air force are not granted Permanent Commissions even if their performance has been better than their fellow officers who are permanently commissioned. It is a criminal waste of India's human resources that young officers, well-trained, qualified, medically fit, and willing to serve, are simply let go because they were hired under one category rather than another.

In fact many choose to extend their service to 14 years because of the uncertainty of a second career. And where can they go? There are no special provisions for them, and the existing rules don't help. Former SSCOs who are 36-40 years old will not be eligible to most of the Group A equivalent positions in the civil services or in public sector undertakings, as the age limit at entry is 30 years (a relaxation of five years is sometimes granted for Ex-Service personnel, but at 35 that prospect also disappears).

As young officers who joined the services in the first flush of idealistic enthusiasm wake up to these realities, disenchantment sets in. Our country cannot afford demoralization among SSCOs after a few years of service. Worse, the Government is beset with a large number of ongoing legal cases and representations against the evident discrimination in terms of grant of financial and other benefits on release.
          
The solution is simple. Keep Short Service Commissions short: in and out in five years, no further obligations on either side. But for those who wish to continue further in service - and whom the armed forces consider good enough to keep - they should be converted to a status that gives them the same benefits and entitlements as permanent commissioned officers of equivalent experience. This would make the SSCO both a platform to give motivated young people an opportunity to experience military life, and an alternative route to filling the ranks of military officers and curing the chronic shortages our armed forces are suffering from.

Those who quit after five years (typically in the age group of 27-30 years when the pressures of family are much lower and the appetite for risk is higher) will not find it difficult to embark on a second career; indeed the experience will stand them in good stead in landing a job. And these Officers can be ambassadors of Armed Forces in their second career and attract more youth to join the services.
          
As for those who stay on for 10 and even 14 years, the government should pay a pro-rata pension and related benefits, based on the length of service. The government should also consider making arrangements for lateral entry into the Civil Services, the Central Armed Police Forces, or public sector undertakings, relaxing the rules that prevent this from being an option.

If the Defence Minister really meant what he said in his impromptu answer to me in Parliament, he should review the decision of his bureaucrats to perpetrate an injustice upon the brave young women and men who protect our nation with their lives.
(Dr Shashi Tharoor is a two-time MP from Thiruvananthapuram, the Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, the former Union Minister of State for External Affairs and Human Resource Development and the former UN Under-Secretary-General. He has written 15 books, including, most recently, India Shastra: Reflections On the Nation in Our Time.)
Posted by at No comments:

OROP :SERIOUS SHORTCOMINGS IN THE IMPLEMENT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) AS READ OUT BY RAKSHA MANTRI





Satbir satbirsm@gmail.com via googlegroups.com 

Attachments11:48 AM (2 hours ago)
to iesm_group


17 Sep 2015
 
SERIOUS SHORTCOMINGS IN THE IMPLEMENT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) AS READ OUT BY RAKSHA MANTRI      
       
Dear Veterans
 
     Letter to Hon’ble Raksha Mantri  dt 17 Sep 2015 and three Chiefs  regarding “Serious shortcomings in the implement of one rank one pension (orop) as read out by Raksha Mantri  is enclosed herewith for information and widest circulation please.    
 
       
            With regards,
 
Yours Sincerely,
 
Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)                                                         
Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen & Chairman IESM                   
Mobile: 9312404269014110570                                         
Email:satbirsm@gmail.com       

...................................................................

17 Sep 2015
 
Shri Manohar Parrikar                                                                                                       
Hon’ble Raksha Mantri                                                                                                                 
104, South Block, New Delhi
 
SERIOUS SHORTCOMINGS IN THE IMPLEMENT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) AS READ OUT BY RAKSHA MANTRI      
       
Hon’ble Raksha Mantri
 
1.         Much awaited announcement on the Implementation of One Rank One Pension (OROP) as read out by you on 05th Sep 2015 has some serious shortcomings.  If not corrected, will not only dilute the OROP but will destroy its approved definition.  The assurances given to the Defence Fraternity will remain unfulfilled.  OROP had been denied to us for the past 42 years when OROP in the form Military Pension was withdrawn. Pensions for Military Personnel were reduced from 70% to 50% while that the civilian employees were increased from 33% to 50%.  The ends of justice would have been met, had the Military Pensions were also proportionality increased or age of retirement brought on parity with civil.
2.         The seven serious shortcomings in the implementation of OROP as announced by you on 05 Sep 2015 are as under:-
  • Instead of equalizing the pensions every year as required as per the approved definition, the Govt has announced equalization after 5 years.  This would totally defeat the definition of OROP.  Large number of senior defence personnel will start drawing less pension than juniors.  This would result in One Rank Five Pensions and not One Rank One Pension. This is not acceptable. Veterans have software to overcome the administrative problems being quoted for the government.
  • The Govt plans to order one man commission to decide on the periodicity of the equalization of pension and other anomalies and has given six months time to the commission.  The purpose of such a committee is not understood particularly since all issues have been resolved as stated by you after the last time the file was sent to finance ministry. This is grossly unfair and not acceptable.  If committee is to be ordered, it must consist of five members: - three from ex-servicemen, one serving defence personnel and one from MoD.  Such committee should be given only one month period to submit its report and within 15 days thereafter it must be processed and final decision implemented.
  • During our discussions with the Personal Secretary to the Hon’ble Prime Minister, base year 2013 – 2014 was accepted, that means as on 31 Mar 2014.  However, in the Note issued by the Defence Minister, calendar year 2013 has been mentioned, that too the average of the calendar year.  This is not acceptable. 
  • The Govt plans to give arrears wef 01 Jul 2014 instead of 01 Apr 2014 The Govt has deprived the veterans three months of arrears. Once a Welfare Scheme has been sanctioned by the Govt, why is it being diluted to the disadvantage of defence veterans? Further if the date is changed to 01 Jul 2014 then the financial year must also change to 2014-2015.
  • It was agreed by you to grant highest of scale of rank and years the service.  The Govt intention to grant average of the pay scale will greatly reduce the pensions.  JCOs, ORs and widows will get hardly any increase in pension. 
  • This is a concept which is to be executed in perpetuity. This was also agreed that the implementation of OROP is independent of Central Pay Commission (CPC).  It is pertinent to mention that Pay Commission award must integrate the OROP and should not adjudicate on it.
 
3.         The above may please to corrected before the issue of Govt Notification on OROP.  You are also requested to incorporate reps of ESM for the preparations of Draft Govt Letter.   May we request you to kindly grant meeting at the earliest to discuss all the above issues please.
            With regards,
Yours Sincerely,
 
Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)                                                         
Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen & Chairman IESM                   
Mobile: 9312404269014110570                                        
Email:satbirsm@gmail.com       
Copy to :-   
 
 
General Dalbir Singh                                    
PVSM, UYSM, AVSM, VSM, ADC    Chief of the Army Staff
Integrated HQs of Ministry of Defence (Army)South Block, New Delhi-110011
 
 
You are requested to jointly and strongly take up the issue with the Govt. 
Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha           
PVSM, AVSM, VM, ADC           Chief of the Air Staff & Chairman,                    
Chiefs of Staffs Committee (CoSC),                  
Integrated HQs of Ministry of Defence,(Air Force) Vayu Bhawan, New Delhi 110011
 
 
Our request as above.
Admiral R K Dhowan, PVSM, AVSM, YSM, ADC ,
Chief of the Naval  Staff                      Integrated HQs of Ministry of Defence (Navy)  South Block, New Delhi -110011
 
Posted by at No comments:

OROP : PRESS CONFERENCE AT "JANTAR MANTAR " BY UFESM ON 18 Sep 2015 at 1200h.






   Facebook
 
   
   
 
Anil Kaul posted in Indian Ex Servicemen Movement.
 
   
Anil Kaul
September 17 at 12:17pm
 


A press conference will be held at JM by

UFESM ON 18 Sep 2015 at 1200h. 



This is to make public the regret letter to
the Honourable Rashtrapati by veterans
who fought in the '65 War and who were
invited by him for the ongoing
celebrations of the Golden Jubilee of the
'65 Indo-Pak War. 




The ;letter expresses our inability to
attend any such functions due to the
continuing instrangience of his
Government on the issue of OROP. 
It also emphasises on the alleged attempt being made by certain sections of his council of ministers and their subordinates to shortchange the very same veterans in the evening of their lives by bringing in issues that are inimical to the definition as accepted by the Parliament twice over and on which stictures have been passed by the Honourable Supreme Court.






The regret also show cases our concern for the current serving community as certain issues being unfairly introduced would adversely affect the structure of the Armed Forces as also work against all future would be veterans who opt out due to injury, disability or even supercession.


The regert assures you of our concern towards the National Security paradigm that we have guarded over the last 70 years with our lives and limbs. The same National Security that is under threat by certain vested interests.


The Presser will also specify the future turn of the agitation at JM will take hereafter.


You are requested to make it convenient to attend


Col Anil Kaul, VrC
Media Advisor
UFESM
Posted by at No comments:

O R O P : Civil-Military Divide: Mind the Gap

SOURCE :http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/civil-military-divide-mind-the-gap/134014.html





            Civil-Military Divide: Mind the Gap
                                     By   

                          Hugh & Colleen Gantzer



Sep 17 2015

Civil-military divide: Mind the gap

Ex-servicemen protesting at Janpath. The OROP imbroglio is due to conflict of perceptions. PTI

THE Pakistan Army originated in the Indian Army, their bureaucrats and politicians were once ours. And yet, a breakdown of relations between them has led to terrible consequences. Virtually the same thing happened in Myanmar. Servicemen, of all nationalities,   believe that politicians are driven by a hunger for power; bureaucrats by a thirst for the privileges of tenure in office. Similarly, netas and babus, worldwide, are convinced that Servicemen are uniformed dolts, fit only to carry out orders and become cannon fodder.

 The OROP imbroglio is the result of these skewed perceptions.



This is not a new problem. Warriors of many societies, throughout history, tended to associate with other like-minded people. They were the artisans of war as others were specialists in construction, copper crafting, medicine or worship. Professionals tended to cluster together, share technical secrets, intermarry and form themselves into guilds. In the late Vedic period in our land, these professional guilds coalesced into exclusive castes.

 This proud exclusivity is the source of the problem.


Defence personnel have evolved into an exclusive guild, a jati. Their cohesion is insured by self-contained, sequestered, environments, adherence to revered customs and traditions, and unquestioning loyalty to their comrades. When your life depends on others, trust is obligatory. It cannot be bought because no one will put a price on his or her life. This was brought into sharp focus during one of the annual cruises organised for Members of Parliament by the Indian Navy.



An MP asked one of our officers, “For a poor country like ours, don't you think you are being paid too much?”

The Lieutenant smiled at the politician “What price do you put on your life, sir?”  

The neta was taken aback. “How can I put a price on my life? How can anyone?”

The young officer nodded, “Exactly. When your life is threatened by an enemy, we put our lives on the line to protect you. My salary is your life insurance, sir”.


The MP smiled wanly and waddled away.

[ MR MODI ASK THE SAME ""Q""TO YOUR 'CABINET SECRETARY' I DO KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER WILL BE  BUT I WILL NOT TELL YOU. NOW ASK HIM & GET 'JOLTED' - Vasundhra]


Service personnel face frequent transfers, retire young and are unable to put down their roots long enough to acquire the wealth of their peers in other professions. They have had to find another ballast to give purpose to their lives: honour.

They are sustained by the driving power of honour. The Japanese samurai had their bushido code, “the way of the warrior”, valuing honour more than life. Rajputs had a similar code.
 When Rajput warriors faced certain defeat, their women and children immolated themselves, while the men rushed out armed and naked welcoming the glory of death on the battlefield as a matter of martial honour. They were not paid to die: they were inspired to die. Such traditions gave rise to guilds of professional fighters, eventually forming the Kshatriya caste of hereditary warriors.  

 The OROP imbroglio is an auto-immune affliction born out of the guild-caste stratification of our society. The British structured their Indian Army on such variations. The mores of our Armed Forces glorify these distinctions, while widening the gap between servicemen and civilians. This has also given rise to a conflict of perceptions.


The Defence Services tend to see the world in terms of black and white, right and wrong.
 There is no time for doubts on the battlefield.

Their civilian counterparts, however, spend their lives adjusting and compromising.

It is difficult for one to understand the other, or not to have a mutual contempt for each other. Nevertheless, this dichotomy is hazardous and must not be allowed to grow.  Seemingly little things can trigger disaffection. The British officers of the East India Company's Army thought that the grease used on their bullets was an insignificant thing.  

This “misunderstanding” festered and led to the trauma of 1857 and the eventual crash of the British Empire.


As a couple that has experienced life on both sides of the gap, we don't believe that things have reached that impasse. But we do see disturbing signs of disaffection. When service personnel put up a complaint to their seniors, they never use the word “we”. We implies collective action and, unlike in civilian organisations, collective action is anathema in the Defence Services. Clearly, ex-servicemen, brought up in this tradition, must have been hard pressed to stage a public protest.
Their conduct is being watched with anguish by their sons and daughters who are serving personnel. In particular, the decision to pit one uniformed service against another, to use young policemen to manhandle grey-haired, retired soldiers engaged in a peaceful, permitted protest was one of the most ill-advised actions taken by any state.

It was our 'TIANANMEN' Moment.

It was the reprehensible act of a cowardly state masquerading in a masculine image. Its subsequent silence on this shameful event has not been interpreted as toughness but as the shame of a guilty mind. This disgraceful incident has been discussed and dissected wherever servicemen and their families meet and, naturally, in the absence of a sincere apology or explanation, it is growing in size and gravity.

 When this burgeoning chimera eventually emerges to confront its presumed tormentors, the consequences could be very ugly.
Any attempt at appeasement by offering incentives to one section of ex-servicemen and not the other, jawans vs officers for instance, will be seen as the divisive tactic of netas and babus who feather their own nests at every opportunity but throw crumbs to the Services.

The offer may be accepted by some, but the tactic will be viewed with contempt.

The only way to douse this smouldering discontent is to meet the veterans head-on, discuss things with them, arrive at unequivocal terms, and stick to those conditions. Don't depend on smarmy doublespeak and prevarications, or diktat and fiat to ride roughshod over their objections. Other governments have tried such ill-advised tactics and failed.


And if these lessons are forgotten, look across our western border.








The writers are Mussoorie-based  freelance writers. Hugh was the first Judge Advocate of the Southern Naval Command.


COMMENTS:


I thank you for this wonderful article. I do not think the Neta and Babus will bother to understand the points put up with such a clarity. They are not accustomed to peaceful agitations. They will wake up when things get out of control. Look at the PM how silent he is?
B S BRAR
Lt Col Retd



As a civilian I would venture to say that the trust is already gone. At least covertly. Look how the Govt. has tried to delete the retirees from OROP. The defense Minister read what was given to him by the PMO which says early retirees are not eligible. Next day Modi says they are eligible. But the total amount quoted by both of them remains the same. Whom to believe? Veterans have no trust even in the PM's statement. That is why veterans want it in writing. 20 days are over and no written clarification from the govt.



Good article. I would add that in the services ones word is a commitment, a bond. When a junior says he will do something, the senior knows that this will be done, come what may. So, the service person is even more disillusioned when successive governments have made commitments to announce OROP - what did they get instead? A changed definition, changed implementation dates, attempts to sow discord, a news blackout, attempts to stop people for coming for the 'solidarity rally'
I am afraid that the cost will be high and the whole country will suffer because of this.


Nayan ksmat 4 hours ago
If I may add the damage will be unquantifiable. The day a soldier starts talking in a language a "TOPIWALLAH" understands that day will be a very sad day for the nation.


































  
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)