Injustice to bank retirees

[Raghunath Sharma]

 Dear All,

The recent supreme court judgement has clarified and settled some of the very important points in removing and 

redressing the injustice done to retired bank staff.  It has clarified in no uncertain terms that :

1)       Pension is not a bounty or charity or gratuitous payable on the sweet will and pleasure of the Government.

 2.)     Right to Pension is a valuable right vested in a Government Employee and cannot be dealt with arbitrarily. 

3.)      Right to receive Pension is property under the Act and Article 19 of the Constitution. 

 4 )      Pension is a deferred portion of compensation for the past service and is in the nature of social security to provide for the December (Evening) of life of a Retired Employee.

            Gross injustice has been inflicted to the  post November 2012 Bank retirees who were deprived of the normal increase in pension which was reduced due is carving out a portion of the normal increase in basic pay to create a new allowance which attracted DA for calculation of Salary but omitted for calculation of Pension.  Let us see the effect of latest supreme court  judgement in Canara Bank v/s Savitri etc.,  on this injustice meted out to pensioners.

            Please analyse now the 10th bipartite settlement which caused great injustice to the retirees by IBA in collusion with UFBA , sacrificed the interests of the pensioners to provide more to the salaried class.  Normally during the revision of the pay scales,  Dearness allowance was merged with Basic pay at a specified level, and then increased with a specific percentage and benefits like DA, HRA, CCA contribution to PF etc depended.  New allowances were created depending on the demands made  by the unions in their charter of demands  and proper justification ,   Contrary to this system the IBA and unions created a new allowance called " Special Allowance" carved out of the revised Basic pay  which provided a restricted benefit of "Dearness allowance" for purposes of calculation of salary and was excluded for the purposes of calculation of pension.   Most importantly this was never a demand made by the unions in their charter of Demands not was a condition from IBA.  This was done in the last minute to adjust the " Cost/Burden" limit settled between IBA and UFBU which  adopted the Principle of " Rob Robert to pay Paul".

           Supreme court has very categorically confirmed that  " Pension is not a bounty or charity or gratuitous payable on the sweet will and pleasure of the Government" ( read as IBA/FM). and the creation of new allowance to curtain the pension portion (which was available till the 9th B P settlement) to pay for salaried employees.  Therefore the creation of New " Special allowance"   is illegal as it is the result of reducing the pension  with view to increasing  the salary of existing staff.  The very act of creating  such an allowance ( which was never a demand of UFBA nor a condition by IBA for the settlement) with a clear intention of reducing the pension.  This clearly  is "an act of the Government( IBA) treating pension as a bounty or charity or gratuitous payable on the sweet will and pleasure of the Government /IBA  to reduce the pension.

           The supreme court has also very clearly stated that There can not be two scales used  One for calculation of Salary and the other for calculation of pension.  Further it has clearly stated that there cannot be a reduction in pension due to revision in salary.  There was reduction in net pension to all employees who retired after November 2012.

May I now request the Unions of Pensioners and retirees of Bank to take up the issue at the appropriate forum and provide justice to the post November 2012 retirees. 

[Satyanarayana Rao]

This type of injustice is perpetually inflicted on retirees by UFBU and IBA since 2 decades . The retirees organisation's  are continuously Fighting to solve the injustice done by vested interest.The latest SC judgement in favor of retirees is a big slap on all those who signed the illigal joint note to deny the legal rights of retirees.This fight to bring justice to all suffering retirees is feather in the cap retirees commune of  e SBM headed by Shri C.N. Prasad the G.S.Hats off to his Fighting spirit and never dieing spirit and zeal.Let us support.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

--
Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[L S RAMAN]

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Unions will never come to your rescue. During past two decades these issues were pending in courts. Gratuity to 6th BPS retirees, 5 Year benefit, 50% Basic Pension arrears, 100% DA, Second Pension option. These cases were filed between 2001-2010. In some  cases HC had passed decided verdict and in some SC had already passed final verdict. But still IBA illegally denied benefits to retirees. No Union strongly took up the case with IBA for implementing Court verdicts. They spend time blaming others. No body expects that agreements should be 100% perfect. There will be short comings. But all retirees have contributed to their unions for 30-40 years. It is moral responsibility of Unions to safeguard interests of aged pensioners. But all these issues had to be resolved by courts only.  IBA is still acting as if their Managing Committee and their lawyers opinion is superior than SC. However at least in the year 2018 good court decisions are coming and IBA realized that it can no longer dodge issues. Though Unions are acting as if these developments are not concerned to them, we are happy that they have not taken credit for success achieved by retirees through courts.

--

[sekhar G.]

Mr. Somasekhar you are correct. Though the members contributed to these unions for the past 30 to 40 years, the unions are not concerned about the retirees because there is no revenue from them for the survival of the leaders.   The same attitude is continued in the retiree associations  also.  To augment their revenue, they knowingly encourage dual or triple membership and each union claim that they hold the maximum membership, without deducting the deceased retirees memberdhip from the list. They cleverly declare the present serial number as total membrrship. The whole thing is a violation. But they are not concerned about the retirees as listed by you.
They are our staunch leaders and we are their foolish foollowers.

Regards,
G. Sekhar