AIBPARC TALK TO MEDIA AT DELHI.

[mohan p]

AIBPARC.

Watch ;

https://youtu.be/aOcLWkyKUxY 

[mohan p]

When will these retirees leaders stop talking on 'surplus theory' in pension fund,to meet Updation cost?

On Tue, 27 Sep, 2022, 7:15 pm mohan p, <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:

AIBPARC.

Watch ;

https://youtu.be/aOcLWkyKUxY 

--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDTPL%3D7tCHadm-0wf_3cAu%3DOwkUhtxkRmNMb87SSfBR04Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mani B]

Whether there is surplus in pension fund or not it is the botheration of the banks and they are supposed to provide adequate funds to the pension fund whenever needed, as per EPR 1995 regulations, which they have not said to be provided then and there all along.

Why the so called warriors of bankmen is saying the same rhetoric every time whenever the issue is tabled.

Utter shame on the retired union leaders, who are good for nothing relating to retirees issues. They have become part and parcel of the IBA, a cover up organisation of bankers.

Bala

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDQ4_P1Ghkexvnt6tAW_UwS_NmLUJCRDs8r-CLU0TwgLLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Niranjan Cn]

Sirs,

Your comments/views on what is said in the video regarding

a) Availability surplus in Pension Fund

b) Mis-utilisation of Pension Funds by Banks

c) Write off

Sir your views please

Niranjan

[Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam]

It is complete nonsense to say that pension fund is having surplus. Time and again it has been explained that the balance in the pension fund is maintained as estimated by actuary to meet the present and future pensioners as per  existing pension regulation. By chance if the pension fund is depleted, can the bank say that they will not pay pension? If the pension fund is having surplus  why additional fund has been credited while enhancing family pension?

It is equally irresponsible to make a claim that we have contributed for the pension fund as we have surrendered PF balance. We have surrendered our PF to the bank as we are not eligible for PF while opting for pension.  It is a different matter that the bank has used that fund also to build pension fund. 

In the same way, how these fellows claim that pension fund has been used for adjustment of NPA? Where is the proof for this? 

It is distressing to see that the prominent leaders of the retirees' association are making irresponsible statements. IBA and Government officials will simply laugh at our ignorance. 

S Kalyanasundaram 

[Prasad C N]

Dear friends,

Really shocked to listen some of the senior leaders speaking something which is far from truth.  Those who listen to this kind of sermons, even those who want to revise our pension, many not revise.  Are we helping pensioners or harming their interest ?

Four Officers organisations, including AIBOC, which has sponsored AIBPARC, have stated that ‘Simultaneously, we demanded that all banks should have the health of the pension funds examined and make provisions, wherever necessary to ensure that the funds were sustainable in the long run’.   On the contrary,  AIBPARC leaders say it is our money, surrendered our PF and there is Rs.3.00 lakh Crores.  Who is correct ?  Whether AIBOC or AIBPARC ?

Some of us want the IBA to negotiate with Bank Retirees' Organisations.  In case, these leaders negotiate on behalf us,  IBA is only required to prove that there is no surplus and they offer pension revision by allowing provision for Rs.3,000 Crores.  Then, what would happen ?

We will leave it to learned members. 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDQ4_P1Ghkexvnt6tAW_UwS_NmLUJCRDs8r-CLU0TwgLLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[mohan p]

Sir,

Whatever said to Media by leaders in general is not factual.

Balance of three lakh crore in Pension Fund is not the anwer for pension updation.Rs3000 crore said to be the cost for revision including SBI pensioners, is not based on any actuarial variation,and there fore not factual.

(This is the Apex Organisation of retirees, who wrote to UFBU recently, on surplus in fund even after meeting Rs.3288.cr.towards revision!)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWE8xmTqz-kpkV%2B5h%2BsQnOO4V4bKE3xajQmpnBbHaaRiDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

For implementation of updation what is required is willingness on the part of IBA and UFBU and if they are positive all things will fall in place.

1. Pension fund absolutely has no relation to Updation. Pension fund was created only after unions and IBA agreed on a pension scheme.  Family pension did not happen because there were excess funds in the pension fund. Family pension improvement was agreed first and then funds provided in pension funds. IBA is misleading SC by bringing Pension funds in affidavit.

2. IBA generally cannot claim Updation cannot be affordable before arriving at actual cost. IBA says it acts only according to the specific mandate of  the Banks and will not take any decision on its own. So what is the mandate of Banks for updation? Is it blank mandate giving powers to iBA to decide or is it for full updation or only merger of DA or only updation to section of pensioners? Cost factor depends upon the specific mandate of Banks and type of updation or improvement of pension. Without arriving at cost details filing an affidavit in court without submitting cost analysis is illegal.

IBA has to come out with cost details of various options first  and discuss the same with UFBU to have meaningful discussions on Updation.

3. There is no meaning in claiming pension regulations have no provision for updation. Pension Regulations since 1995 have been amended more than 6 times.  Recently an amendment was made consequent to approval of improvement in family pension. Even RBI pension rules had no provision for updation.

4. We will not talk about the committee. Because after it got dissolved there is no proof that it was reconstituted and no report that the reconstituted committee had discussions with Unions. IBA hesitation to submit a copy of the report in SC and Unions not demanding a copy of the report from IBA gave suspicion that  there was no such reconstituted committee.

5.These excuses are false, misleading and mischievous. What is required  is both IBA and UFBU should discuss the updation issue with open mind, get cost details of various options and then decide the best option considering that pre 2002 retirees are aged above 70 and they are not getting 100 % DA.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1c38fc8e-1c16-41a7-ac2a-3198087afce7n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ramakrishnan S]

A common man,s calculation of pension updation is as follows. There retirees will be a mixture of 60% award staff and 40 % officers. Let us assume so .Total for 3 lakhs retirees let us calculate. Even if they give average increase of 15000 per pensioner, the working will be as below per year.  15000×300000×12=5400 crores.  The increase for 8th, 9th and 10th bps retirees will be less than pre 2002 retirees, who are small in number, and the average increase worked out is higher, definitely  the fund requirement will be less than this. Still there will be surplus in the pension fund. Iba and unions are playing a drama and it seems they want to delay updation , so that the last retiree also leave this world. Justice  delayed is Justice denied. This undue delay snatches the life of many retirees.  Good and sincere trade union leaders will be happy to deliver benefits to all members, irrespective of their retirement date. But unfortunately the leaders like chv a trogen horse as communists are referred like that,  go for negotiation  the chances of a negotiated pension updation is bleak . Retirees only hope is now through court decision. Court too delay the process unduly.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDRG-AFAyxZavXx5TXdw9Qk9CCdAFqn%3D50BB7J3u29L0Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

[PM]

Dear Friend,

Few of our retirees as well as one apex retiree organisation has already made great harm to retirees community by providing absolutely wrong information on status of bank pension fund and thereby misleading bank retirees.

The calculation provided by you is an example for that.It is not so simple to arrive on cost of pension updation,as done now.

Why cost of improvement of family pension touched around Rs.21300 crores.?Why a statutory obligation is provided in bank employees pension regulations,1995 to conduct actuarial valuation each year on fund position and to provide for if there is shortfall.?

More over the money kept under pension fund is not only for already retired employees but for those who are working in banks,now who are opted for pension.

Pension fund and building up of pension fund is the concern of banks.

[NSS]

Sir

Rs.5400 crs is the annual expenditure on account of Pension updation. Cost of updation according to IBA is the amount of provision to be made.to meet all the future payments.For improvement in family pension about Rs.20000 crs was provided for while the annual expenditure may be Rs.2000 crs only. IBA claiming the total provision amount as cost is logical because Accounting Standards mandates banks to provide for all the future payments. Regarding Pension funds, there cannot be any surplus. Why should banks keep surplus pension fund and show reduced profits?

Regards

N.Sankara Subramanian

On Wednesday, 28 September 2022 at 15:45:55 UTC+5:30 ramakri...@gmail.com wrote:

[Narayanan Venkateshwaran]

Friends

There appears to  be paranoia with IBA that

 pension has to be serviced only out of  

A.Statuatory credit by Banks in lieu of PF

B.Interest Earning from investment

C.Banks' credit of shortfall after acturial annual exercise.

IBA seems to be in illusion that fund has perpetual existence

It was true when pension scheme was conceived in 1993/1995

After advent of new pension scheme in 2010 the old fund needs of existence only till last of eligible candidate lives.

The balance keeps dwindling to become zero at the end

In the said scenario it has to be seen whether drawal from corpus for updation  would sustain fund till last

Here only effective role of acturial experts come

One can be sure that both pensioners side and IBA would not have done this exercise

Then what is the earthly use of fight about adequacy

The role of Banks to replenish fund after annual acturial  exercise stands.

Lastly it wasn't needed of banks to repenish 18000 crores upfront related to family pension revision .

It was flea bite of amount in total corpus of 3 lac crores

The banks could have waited till  following balnce sheet to see deficit effect with actuaries

How can the deficit be exactly the disbursed amount.

It will be in mutual interest if an effective acturial exercise is jointly done by two parties to study the effect of bulk drawal from corpus and methodology to replenish without strain

IBA has to shed negative mind set of banks continuing poor show in coming years 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDQ4_P1Ghkexvnt6tAW_UwS_NmLUJCRDs8r-CLU0TwgLLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Wilson]

True sir. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAGcEjHG3XuvDPHTUqpcR5BTtg0SN_qX_cu-mfSQ9%2BFKALkJQOg%40mail.gmail.com.

[bhaskara sarma]

Cost of granting of Second option for pension is reported as Rs 6000 crores.If that is true,the cost of Pension updation may be around Rs 3200 crores.This may also be true.

Earlier Individuals used to lie.Nowadays Institutions twist the facts in the name of actuarial valuations etc.

With regards,

P Bhaskara Sarma.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/6a8d37a1-0827-4f43-bbe1-90f98aaf272cn%40googlegroups.com.

[Narayanan Venkateshwaran]

Pension fund no more retains its original character after new pension scheme in 2010 took away a sizable contribution that would have otherwise come to the fund relating to that segment of employees

There is no more sense in creating corpus to earn that much of income matching with additional liablities like recent updation of family pension 

Govt had unwittingly committed for pension with index limked da which as a natural corollary includes updation also. states(govt)alone commit for this type of pension

Looking for some technical aberration to wriggle out of commitment is unbecoming of state

Pension fund is only one of the sources to meet the obligation and is not THE SOURCE as it stands now.

Days ahead are going to be tough with more employees retiring depriving credt relating to them from employer.Current interest regime is also low

As the pension fund is also self limiting meant to serve present crop of old scheme pensioners IBA should shed the old thought of pension as fund based

The income from fund should be viewed as supplemental and hereafter charge pension payment to revenue expenditure as they do for salaries 

 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/0b46ad00-978b-4d8a-a5c8-c53cd3f79efdn%40googlegroups.com.

[Anantharaman Tg]

I do not think that the new pension scheme for those

recruited from 2010 onwards is in anyway connected

to the pension fund created out of contributions of Banks 

and surrendered by the pension optees.

Members having uptodate information on this may

enlighten please.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAJev%3Da_Kz9mMPf0fDjk4c8a50w583ZbJrQL1WtDa3DaA87BB3w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sridhar Mandyam]

Why bank should create pension fund from the PF surrendered by retirees?

It is the fund belonging to bank and they can use any way they wish. Can't have cake and eat it too

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAGpzJrDivE3uHaP0gsvCbt0Kx27_NC-0rsBK_vpKz-DqGLWJ4g%40mail.gmail.com.

[NSS]

Anantharaman Sir

You are absolutely right. Also, no bank can escape from building a pension fund as it is mandated by Accounting Standard 15.

Regards

N.Sankara Subramanian

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Whatever we discuss and how many representations we submit to DFS, MPs.it does not in any way affect UFBU and IBA. They just don't care. They will do whatever they want. Like IBA medical scheme agreement they will not disclose any details about updation talks and on one day they will sign some agreement and move on, They continue to get subscriptions.levy and claim they are champions of the workforce.

For the last 7 years Medical Insurance premium has been increasing every year but we are unable to do anything. Likewise if we do not like Updation agreement signed by UFBU and iBA we have no other option except to continue fighting in courts.

Retiree associations as usual continue writing letters.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/af9df874-931f-4387-ae77-54917d9833abn%40googlegroups.com.

[Krishnamurthy V]

It is interesting to read the debate on pension fund by the house of elders.  Some are having dream figures and some are empty mud pots.  Few things, we are supposed to have in our Begging bowls, some clear that it is our right.  One pension is our right over the property, for which we worked. We created a huge surplus.  Some Rs.6000 or 8000 crores deposits (1969) had grown to 173 lakhs crores in financial sectors as deposits.  We laid the foundation for that huge expansion.  Our human service or role in this growth is more than the software times. Proud performances deserve their merit till we die.  So also,  central government employees  and defense sectors got their pension revisions.  Whatever is lost by banks by way of a write-off, is not the inefficiency of our performance, but it is the wanton diversion of our funds to failing or falling corporate sectors.  Banks were nationalized to feed the poverty-stricken and drought-prone rural in the 60s and 70s.  The nation grew even though we had written off a small part of the loan.   But,  today it is another way.  Banks have paid heavily from the surplus we created. Instead of shifting the fund as RESERVE, the government and bankers resolved the defaulter's disastrous management. Those who are not reconciled with our statement, please go through WTO directions to governments, on how to do, tax write-offs and loan write-offs to corporates. Banks were victims of their game, we bear the cross, and depositors pay the penalty.  

We, the seniors, shall focus on the central government and its disastrous policies and tell them in the perfect language, that we have our right to deferred wages or value additions we have created. We were the original capital and the dividend shall continue for our work done.

KRISHNAMURTHY V

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 3:51 PM NSS <nsanka...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/af9df874-931f-4387-ae77-54917d9833abn%40googlegroups.com.

[Anantharaman Tg]

Thanks, Sir, for the information.

Regards.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/af9df874-931f-4387-ae77-54917d9833abn%40googlegroups.com.

[Chandrasekaran V]

Can anyone present the contributions made each year by the member banks to IBA and the total expenditure of IBA ?  Also the Establishment Expenditure of IBA ?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKVuK%2BqLMuRXRH2n-0D6vEvu0hbbhP7SKWUTBaQdNPzve6ZpsQ%40mail.gmail.com.