Pension Is A Welfare Measure ----Reactions of Bankers

I wonder how a new theory of payment of pension is a welfare measure is accepted by the ufbu. The pension rules are passed by the central govt and duly notified in the govt. gadget. It is formed in the lines of Central Govt. And RBI Pension rules. On this ground only the management contribution of the PF and NRW PF are recoverd with interest and creditted to the Pension Corpus. Hence it is a deffered wage as clarified by the S.C.

If it is a payment as a welfare measure , th...ey are at liberty to stop at any time.It is irony that the unions which fought for pension scheme (the present leaders might not be there} are party to such arguments. Further the new theory of no contractual obligation is also rediculous. The pension scheme in banks itself is an outcome of bipartite negotiations.

It is also irony that the signatories to the document are telling now that it is not a contract.
Further the UFBU objected for the presence of retiries organisations in the negotiotin process since beginning,arguing that retirees issues are part and parcel of the bipartite negotiation.

 Hence I agree with the suggestion of the one of the group member that we create a legal fund and even if 1 lach retirees out of 1.25 lakh retireescontribute Rs.500/ per head the amount will be 5 crores. we can hire a good lawyer and contest. at first we have to seek the S.C.for early hearing of the 100% D.A.case and 50% B.P,case

A.M.Kallappa,
SvRS Syndicate Bank




Banker's contribution towards PF or towards pension or in NPA scheme is a mandatory requirement and is part of the salary. As such when basis pay of working employees is raised, PF contribution towards PF fund or contribution towards pension fund is supposed to be increased and hence there should necessarily be a rise in pension aIn case of major part of government employees , government has to be made budgetary allocation for payment of pension , but in case of only Banks, that government has not to make any budgetary allocation , it is largely the profit generated out of pension fund which is given in form of pension to bank staff on retirement. It is earned by bank staff  by their three to four decade long service to banks. It is not the alms which bank management or GOI give to retired bank staffmounWhen a staff works for 3 to 4 decades, his loyalty is compensated by employer by contributing every month at least ten percent of basic pay towards pension fund and then it is the duty of trust or managing body which manages pension fund to earn more and more interest or profit by investing in various funds and share more and more with retirees. t and rise in benefits accruing to retirees. 

Summing up the judgment in the case of S.P.Gupta  Vs Union of India, the Supreme court stated that:

 

“ it can be said with confidence that pension is not only compensation for loyal

 

 service rendered in the past, but pension also has a broader significance, in that it

 

 is a measure of socio-economic justice which inheres economic security in the fall of life when physical and mental prowess is ebbing corresponding to aging process and therefore, one is required to fall back on savings. 

 

 

 

One such saving in kind is when you gave your best in the hey-day of life to your employer, in days of invalidity, economic security by way of periodical payment is assured. The term has been judicially defined as a stated allowance or stipend made in consideration of past service or a surrender of rights or emoluments to one retired from service.

 

 

 

Thus the pension payable to a Government employee is earned by rendering long and efficient service and therefore, can be said to be a deferred portion of the compensation  for service rendered. In one sentence, one can say that the most practical raison d'etre for pension is the inability to provide for oneself due to old age. One may live and avoid unemployment but not senility and penury if there is nothing to fall back upon.

 

 4.            Further, in the case of  M.R.Prabhakar & Ors. vs Canara Bank & Ors. on 3 October, 2012 ( (2012) 9 SCC 971),  it has been clearly enunciated that voluntary retirement maintains the relationship for the purposes of grant of retiral benefits, in view of the past service. On account of maintaining the relationship for the purposes of retiral benefits, the second option to retirees was given. Moreover, in the relationship is between the banks and retirees, the IBA and constituents’ of UFBU are privy to the relationship between the parties and they have no locus standi to say that there is no contractual relationship between banks and retirees. On account of such contractual relationship, the  monthly pension is being paid to retirees. Retirees demands are not welfare measures, they are made as per the existing regulations. Payment of pension is not welfare measure, it is for the past work done to the organization/country. In Nakara case, it has been held that Pension is their statutory, inalienable, equally enforceable right and it has been earned by the sweat of their brow. As such it should be fixed, revised and modified and changed in ways not entirely dissimilar to the salaries granted to serving employees. ( 1983 LLI 0101 SC )