Wednesday, 7 December 2016

Railway Senior Citizens Welfare Society elaborates advantages for Pre 2016 pensioners in choosing Importance of Option 1 of 7th Pay Commission for Revised Pension

Railway Senior Citizens Welfare Society elaborates advantages for Pre 2016 pensioners in choosing Importance of Option 1 of 7th Pay Commission for Revised Pension


IMPORTANCE OF OPTION 1 OF 7TH CPC FOR REVISED PENSION
- BIG LOSS IN PENSION IF IT IS DENIED
By N. P. MOHAN, President, RSCWS

M
ost of the Pre 2016 pensioners will suffer heavy loss in Revised Pension, if the Option 1 recommended by the Seventh CPC is denied to them.

It was after 20 years that 7th CPC recommended parity between past pensioners and those retiring after 1-1-2016 under Option 1    which means  consideration of increments earned while in service as detailed in Para 10.1.67 of  the Report. This objective of PARITY (Recommended by Commission after examining all factors in depth in Chapter 10) is fulfilled  only with  the  implementation  of  option  1  without  any  dilution/deviation.  Non implementation of option 1 on the plea of non availability of record in a few cases will have the following adverse effects:
i)    Pre 2006 pensioners, in particular, who are victim of modified parity will suffer a much bigger loss compared to the post 2006 retirees because in their case the basic pension which is multiplied by 2.57 in the interim phase takes into accounts their increments before retirement. This aspect has been examined in the case of Pre & Post S 19 pensioner as an example. From the Table 1 given below, it will be clear that  the  reduction  in  pension  for  post  2006  pensioner  is  of  a  uniform  small magnitude as compared to the loss increasing exponentially with each increment lost in case of pre 2006 pensioner. Similar is the case in other scales also

ii)  7
th   CPC  has  considered  pre  2016  pensioners  as  one  homogeneous  group   (Para10.1.53 refers). It means that all pre 2016 pensioners have to be treated alike. But with denial of option 1, pre 2016 pensioners will get divided into two groups i.e. Pre 2006 and Post 2006 Pensioners - which violates the settled law of equality between the equals.

iii) In  many  cases,  Option  3  gives  much  lower  pension compared  to  option  1 recommended  by  7th   CPC.  This will  be  clear  from  Table  2  below.  Where  a comparison has been made between two options.
Enlcs: 2 Tables
TABLE- 1 SHOWING LARGE REDUCTION IN REVISED PENSION OF PRE-2006 PENSIONERS COMPARED WITH POST-2006 PENSIONERS IF OPTION 1 IS DENIED ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF LEVEL 11 (Scale S 19 - PB3)
POST 2006  PENSIONER
PRE 2006
PENSIONER
Increments
Pay with increments
@ 3% pa
Corres- ponding Existing pension(col. 2/2)
Revsd pensionwith MF of
2.57
Pension for
L 11 as per matrix table
Reductionin pension with denial of Option 1 (col 5-4)
Revsd pensionwith MF of 2.57
Reductio
n in pension with denial of Option 1 (col 5-7)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
25200
12600
3238233850
1468
323821468
1
25956
12978
3335334850
1497
323822468
2
26735
13367
3435435900
1546
323823518
3
27537
13768
3538537000
1615
323824618
4
28363
14181
3644638100
1654
323825718
5
29214
14607
3754039250
1710
323826868
6
30090
15045
3866640450
1784
323828068
7
30993
15496
3982641650
1824
323829268
8
31923
15961
4102142900
1879
3238210518
9
32880
16440
4225144200
1949
3238211818
10
33867
16933
4351945550
2031
3238213168
11
34883
17441
4482446900
2076
3238214518
1. From the above table it will be clear, that pre-2006 pensioners, as victims of Modified Parity will stand to lose more in pension compared to post -2006 pensioners if Option 1 of counting increments is not accepted by Govt.
2. The loss in pension for post 2006 pensioners is in the range of Rs.1700 (from 1468 to a max of 2076 as per col. 6) only and is nearly constant , whereas for pre-2006 pensioners  the loss in pension increases  by almost Rs.1000/- for every one increment (Refer cols. 6 & 8).

3. For example, the loss suffered in pension of pre 2006 pensioner in losing 5 increments works out to 6868 as against 1710 for post 2006 pensioner.

N. P. MOHAN 29-9-2016
TABLE 2 SHOWING REVISED PENSION OF SCALE S 29-PB 4 (LEVEL 14) PENSIONERS OF 4th CPC REGIME
WITH & 3rd  OPTION BASED ON NOTIONAL PAY OF SUCCESSIVE PAY COMMISSIONS
(Para 5 of minutes of meeting  held on 6th October, 2016) vs  OPTION 1 BASED ON INCREMENTS EARNED
Pay on retirement
Notional pay-5th CPC
Notional pay-6th CPC (Fitment table-6th CPC)
Notional pay-7th CPC with MF OF
2.57-3rd option
(col.3xMF)
Operative
Pay of col. 4 in the next cell of pay matrix (MOF OM dt   25-7-
2016)
Pay based on option
1 with increments
( as per pay matrix)
Pension as per option 3 (col.5/2)
Pension as per option 1 (col.6/2)
Loss of
Revised pension if Option 1 is not given (Difference between Option
1 &  3)
(col.8-7)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
5900184005470014057914420014420072100
72100
0
6100184005470014057914420014850072100
74250
2150
6300184005470014057914420015300072100
76500
4400
6500189005605014404914420015760072100
78800
6700
6700189005605014404914420016230072100
81150
9050
6900189005605014404914420016720072100
83600
11500
7100194005605014404914420017220072100
86100
14000
7300194005605014404914420017740072100
88700
16600
NOTE: 1.3rd Option is not suitable at all. The loss in pension is clear from col. 9.
2. Notional pay in 6th CPC in col. 3 has been taken from the Fitment table issued by MOF (DOE) on 30-8-2008.
-  Compiled by: N. P. MOHAN 24-10-2016

Source : RSCWS

Flash News

Drastic Reduction of Dearness Allowance (DA) to Central Government Employees, Opted in 7th Pay Scale

Drastic Reduction of Dearness Allowance (DA) to Central Government Employees, Opted in 7th Pay Scale Dear friends, As you are awa...