An Appeal to Finance Minister

 फोरम आफ बैंक पेंशनर एक्टिविस्टस्

    Forum of Bank Pensioner Activists

                      PRAYAGRAJ

      न त्वहं कामये राज्यं  न स्वर्गं नापुनर्भवम्।

      कामये दुःखतप्तानां प्रणिनामार्तिनाशनम्॥

Sister Nirmala Sitharaman,

Hon'ble Finance Minister,

GOI, New Delhi

Respected Sister,

      Health Security of Pensioners:

Respectfully, we invite your kind attention on captioned subject with  humble request to examine followings:

1. Para 2 of the DFS, MOF, New Delhi  letter F.No.1 417- 192-IR (Vol.ll) dated 24.2.2012 addressed to Dy. Chief Executive, Indian Banks Association, Mumbai, in allocation of Welfare Funds to PSBs matter, states as under: 

"2. It is further stipulated, that

(i) No Cash payment shall be made to employees except for medical and educational purposes.

(ii) Banks may consider the option of Group Insurance Policies for both it's serving and retired employees instead of direct payment of benefit from the Fund."

IBA remain seated on this issue and in later part of 2015 formulated Health Insurance Policy. The premium for serving employees was borne by Banks, while for retired it was shifted on retirees. It was totally in disregard of DFS construction, as stated above.

2. In 2015-16 cover premium for base Policy of Rs.3 lakh was Rs.5600/-. 75% retirees responded it. However, thereafter annual premium continued rising and in 2019-2020 it reached to Rs.25000/-,. Thus, it became unaffordable and 75% retirees dropped it out. For some meagerly paid pensioners, it was equal to 2 months pension.

3. Prior to this, all Banks were extending some sort of health assistance from Banks, which they stopped after this policy came into operation. Banks absolved themselves from their obligations towards retirees health. Despite 5 fold increase in premiums & pensioners dropping out from health cover, Bankers didn't come forward to subsidize increased & unaffordable premium. It reflects their totally inhuman behavior towards their former staff.

4. Premium was to cover pensioner and his/her spouse. However, in case of family pensioner (single), premium remained same  ( of 2 person) from 2015-16 to 2019-2020. However, for year 2020-2021 it has been reduced by new Insurance Co. In this regard pertinent point to look into is that UIIC & NIC, are the Public Sector Insurers. If NIC can charge less premium for single person cover, how & why UIIC did charge full premium in last 5 years?

5. UIIC denied policy for less than Rs.3 lakh. Why so, it was never explained. Resultantly,  it pushed out financially weak and meagerly paid pensioners from health cover. Now, NIC has offered cover for Rs.1, Rs.2, Rs.3 lakh. We fail to understand, if NIC can can do it, why UIIC denied it?

6. In 2015-16 UIIC 'quoted premium' was including reimbursement of domicile treatment expenses. After premium was paid, UIIC denied domicile facility. It was arbitrary, unilateral and illegal decision of UIIC. Being public sector co. they were duty bound to honor the terms of policy and extend benefits as agreed.

7. With all aforesaid modifications, NIC has changed less premium for 20-2021, than UIIC charged for 2019-2020. It warrants explanation of rationale & justification from UIIC, that government may please look into and ask Regulator, IRDA to investigate.

8. PSBs and said UIIC or NIC are Public Sector organizations. Deal was between two State Sector companies. Naturally, there was no place for middlemen/ brokers. But, it is believed, UIIC had paid huge amount in the name of brokerage. In this deed/deal, many important  executives of IBA, UIIC & Union functionaries have been involved and worked on extraneous considerations at the cost of poor pensioner policy holders.

We, therefore, demands thorough probe in followings:

A. Why IBA remain seated on DFS letter in question for over 3 and a half years, depriving pensioners due benefits from Welfare Funds?

B. Why IBA disobeyed and denied to bear health insurance premium of pensioners from WFs, pushing lakhs in health insecurity?

C. Why retired bank employees are not given the benefits of Welfare Funds, despite government advice to spent equally on retired former employees?

D. Since it was a deal between two State Sector organizations, PSBs & PSIs, why brokers/ middlemen were involved and hefty commission was paid? Matter may please be given to CBI/ CVC to investigate this racket.

E. Why UIIC indulged in various unethical practices which tantamount to breach of trust and criminal negligence as stated above?

F. UIIC should be directed, one, to pay insured amount of domicile treatment under 2015-16 policy, and two, to refund excess premium they charged in single person cover case, i.e. family pensioners, during 2015-2020, 5 years.

Pensioners have been subjected to numerous harassments, despite government's favourable decisions. We request you, please take it seriously and order thorough probe on issues posted above by some competent authority. 

In the meantime, UIIC may please be asked to reimburse Rs.40000 to all policy holders of 2015-16 for domicile treatment coverage and also refund the premium that they charged excess in single person policy. Such amounts may please be paid with 18% p.a. interest.

Respectful Regards,

(J. N. Shukla)

National Convenor

5.12.2020

9559748834