Posted: 29 May 2013 08:55 PM PDT Increase retirement age of government employees to 62 On 21st March 2013, there was an unstarred question in Rajya Sabha, about whether there was a proposal to increase the retirement age of Central government employees. The relevant MOS answered there was no such proposal. That’s not quite true, because there is such a proposal floating around and it went to Cabinet sub-committee and an in principle decision to implement was taken by Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT). One should not mix up existence of a proposal with a decision about implementing it. Evidently, a decision has now been taken to increase the age from 60 to 62 years, the last time such an increase took place was in 1998, when there was an increase from 58 to 60 years. Whenever such a decision is taken, debates centre on the big picture. What are arguments for? First, life expectancies are increasing. There is a shortage of good people within government. Let’s tap this expertise. Second, in any case there are extensions in “exceptional circumstances”. But that’s arbitrary and can be shot down by the Appointments Committee of Cabinet (ACC). Why not formalize the system by allowing extensions to everyone? The trouble with this argument is that there will be no finality about 62 either and there will be “exceptional circumstances” beyond 62. Third, there should be parity. Professors now retire at 65. High Court judges retire at 62, Supreme Court judges retire at 65. The counter-arguments of the big picture are also obvious. India is a young country, young need employment opportunities. Promotional avenues of existing civil servants get blocked. Often, in the private sector, people retire at 60 and there are extensions, with the qualification that extensions are at consolidated monthly emoluments, with no perks. An increase in retirement age occurs with all perks. Therefore, there are significant fiscal costs. While these big picture arguments and counter-arguments are important, my problem is that such decisions aren’t taken because of logical coherence. They are ad hoc decisions, driven by myopic motives. First, increase in retirement age postpones the one-time superannuation burden of severance payments by around Rs 5000 crores. For a government that has drawn up red lines on deficit numbers, that’s a desirable objective, even though it is myopic because it increases fiscal costs on future governments. Second, there’s a clear political cum electoral motive. Outright, if we include Defence, we are talking about 1.5 million Central government employees. In a broader sense, we are talking about something like 6 million, excluding State governments and quasi-government, all urban. This is therefore a significant component in that 65 million urban household figure. These two points will also be made when the 62 decision is announced. But the one that bothers me most is a third element, one that is invariably never talked about. Such ad hoc decisions are taken because of specific individuals. There is one particular individual whom government wishes to place in one particular position. Once he is placed there, government wishes him to benefit from increase in retirement age. But to ensure he is placed there, one needs to ensure those who are senior to him get out of the way first. After all, supersession is not desirable. Hence, announce the decision after some people have retired at 60 and exited. This is the way decisions are taken. At one level, there is no point complaining, because we have accepted corruption of institutions and systems as fact of life. But when this 62 decision is announced, as it soon will, let us not pretend there are any big picture considerations involved. this is a test message  |
Posted: 29 May 2013 06:10 AM PDT Union government wants retirement age 62 The Union Government is seriously considering raising the retirement age to 62 for Central Government employees. Obviously, if the Congress announces this before the Lok Sabha polls, it could expect a sizeable vote share. North Block, which houses the Union Ministry of Finance would be more than happy to have 62 years as the retirement age because for next two years the pension funds can accumulate. The UPA2 also wants to put the next government in fiscal tight spot, or what is called the War Room effect of the AICC. Source: www.news.rediff.com |
Increase retirement age of government employees to 62
Fixation of pay of disabled/medically unfit running staff on being appointed against alternative (stationary) posts in revised (6th CPC) pay structure
Fixation of pay of disabled/medically unfit running staff on being appointed against alternative (stationary) posts in revised (6th CPC) pay structure
Posted: 08 May 2013 11:08 PM PDT
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(RAILWAY BOARD)
No. E(NG)I-2008/RE-3/4
New Delhi, dated 30.04.2013
The General Managers (P)
All Indian Railways and
Production Units.
(As per standard list).
Sub:- Fixation of pay of disabled/medically unfit running staff on being appointed against alternative (stationary) posts in revised (6th CPC) pay structure.
Reference Railway Boards letter No.E(NG)I-96/RE-3/9(2) dated 29.04.1999 containing procedure for absorption of disabled / medically unfit Railway servant in alternative employment, framed pursuant to the enactment of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act-1995.
2. Consequent upon Implementation of revised pay structure inter-alia involving merger of various pre-revised scales and comprising running Pay bands and Grade Pay based on recommendations of 6th Central Pay Commission, a question has arisen regarding methodology for fixation of pay of medically unfit running staff on being posted/appointed against stationary posts. The matter has, accordingly, been considered by the Ministry of Railways recommendations of a Committee constituted for the purpose; it has been decided that while determining pay in Pay Band for the purpose of fixation of pay of medically unfit running staff in alternative (stationary) post, an account equal to such percentage of basic pay (pay in Pay Band + Grade Pay) representing pay element of running allowance as may be in force from time to time may be added to the existing pay in Pay Band and the resultant figure (ignoring the fraction of rupee, if any) rounded off to the next multiple of 10, would be the pay in the pay band in the alternative post with no change in the Grade pay of substantive post, in suitable alternative post. An illustration in this regard is enclosed as Annexure-I.
3. For this purpose, Para 1307 and 1308 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual, Volume-I, (Revised Edition-1988) First Re-print Edition-2009 may be amended as per Advance Correction Slip No.224 enclosed as Annexure-II.
4. This issues with the concurrence of Finance Directorate of Ministry of Railways.
Please acknowledge receipt.
Hindi version will follow.
sd/-
(M.K.Meena)
Deputy Director Estt.(N)
Railway Board.
ANNEXURE - I
Annuexure to Board's letter No.E(NG)I-2008/RE-3/4 dated 30.04.2013
Illustration :
(i) Present Pay : Rs.12470 + Rs.4200 = Rs.16,670
Add 30% pay element Rs.5010 i.e. = Rs.5010
Pay fixed in alternative post would be = Rs.17480 + Rs.4200
(ii) Present Pay : Rs.7950 + Rs.1900 = Rs.9850
Add 30% pay element Rs.2955 i.e. = Rs.2960
Pay fixed in alternative post would be = Rs.10,910 + Rs.1900
Note : # At present the rate of pay element of running allowance being 30% of basic pay.
ANNEXURE - II
Indian Railway Establishment Manual, Volume-I (Revised Edition-1989)
First Re-Print Edition-2009
Chapter-XIII : Absorption of disabled/medically unfit staff in alternative employment.
ADVANCE CORRECTION SLIP No.224
1. Substitute the following fo rthe existing paragraph 1307 :
1307 : Reckoning of element of Running Allowance for the purpose of fixation of pay of disabled/medically unfit running staff : While determining pay for the purpose of fixation of pay of medically unfit running staff in an alternative (stationary) post, an amount equal to such percentage of basic pay representing the pay element of running allowance as may be in force from time to time, may be added to the existing pay in Pay Band and the resultant figure (ignoring the fraction of rupee, if any) rounded off to the next multiple of 10 would be the pay in the pay band in the alternative post with no change in the Grade Pay of substantive, post, in suitable alternative post.
2. Substitute the following for the existing paragraph 1308 :
1308 : Fixation of Pay (other than Running Staff) : The pay in Pay band of the disabled/medically unfit Railway servant (other than Running Staff) will be fixed in the alternative post as previously drawn in the post held by them on regular basis before acquiring disability.
(Authority : Railway Board's letter No.F(NG)I-2008/RE-3/4 dated 30.04.2013)
Source: NFIR
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)