Pension option to Resignees/VRS News!!

UPDATED 14.11.2012

Here is the letter by UFBU seeking Pension option for resigned employees!

UFBU’s LETTER TO IBA

Reg.:  Extending the benefit of joining the Pension Scheme as per Settlement / Joint Note dt. 27.04.2010 to employees / officers

                      who had resigned from bank service

In terms of the Settlement / Joint Note dated 27.04.2010 between IBA and the Workmen Unions / Officers Associations, one more option was given to the following employees / officers to join the pension scheme.

a)    Those who continued in service on date of settlement.

b)   Family of those who had died during the period.

c)    Those who had retired from service during the period.

d)   Those who had relinquished their job under the special VRS in 2001.

All these eligible employees / officers were extended the option and most of them have already given their option and are now covered by the Pension Scheme.

There was a set of officers in some of the banks who do not fall under the above categories but nonetheless had retired from the service of the banks under their bank-level Voluntary Retirement Schemes.  Since for all practical purposes, these cases are at par with regular retirements, the Government has already clarified that such officers who had retired under these Bank Specific Regulations be also covered by the settlement and hence to be extended the option.  Vide our letter dated 18^th September, 2012, we had requested the IBA to advise the banks to implement these Government clarifications.  We once again request you to expedite the instructions.

Further, there are some employees and officers who had relinquished their jobs through resignations.  Recently a few judgements have come stating that resignation is one type of retirement and hence be extended option to such employees who had resigned their jobs.

Since according to the judgement and legal interpretation, resignation and retirements are treated alike, we urge upon the IBA to consider and extend another option to join the Pension Scheme to these employees and officers who had ceased to be in service on account of resignation.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

                                                                                                           Sd..

P.K.SARKAR

CONVENOR

All India Nationalised Bank Officers' Federation comes to the rescue of those who denied pension option!

ALL INDIA NATIONALISED BANK OFFICERS’ FEDERATION (Registered under Trade Unions Act 1926) (Regn No: 25127/West Bengal)

C/o Bank of India, Parliament St. Branch PTI Bldg. 4, Sansad Marg, New Delhi:110001 Tel. Nos. 011-23730108 Fax:23719431 Email-id: ainbof.sectt@yahoo.com

Ref. No:2012/08/12 Date:19/09/2012

The Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, New Delhi

Respected Sir,

RE: PENSION OPTION THOSE WHO LEFT THE SERVICE BY TAKING VRS, BY RESIGNATION

OUR SUBMISSIONS ONCE AGAIN

Firstly, we convey our sincere thanks to you for your very clear and speaking communication to the Indian Bank Association vide D.O. letter No. DO 10/30/7/2010/-IR, dated 25 July 2012. We understand that IBA has with sole intention to delay the captioned pension matter, has sent a letter dated 6th August 2012 to the Ministry raising frivolous and unrelated points. We humbly submit that when the Hon’ble Ministry, after giving careful thought & consideration conveyed the decision, the same should be / have been complied with by the IBA.

In above matter our further submissions are as under:

The Principal Document for agreeing to the decision of second pension option to the PSB employees is the Joint Note date 27.04.2010. The said Note is very clear does not discriminate between the officers / staff who retired on superannuation or by VRS or by any other mode. Actually the pension option was agreed to be extended to all staff who were in service on 29.09.1995 in case of Nationalised Banks/26th March 1996 in case of Associate Banks of SBI, and who could not exercise their option and retired in between and / or who could not exercise their option and continued in the service till the date of joint note. The said joint note was duly accepted by the Govt. of India. Hence after approval of the Joint Note by Government, there was no occasion for the IBA to include certain conditions related to the word “retirement” used in the note.

In addition, we may respectfully submit that while calculating the cost factor for sharing of pension burden by the employees and the Banks , the total number of staff working in the banks as on 29.09.1995/26.03.1996 was taken and accordingly the amount of sharing was decided, hence to deny the pension to those officers / staff who left the bank on account of VRS o r where VRS scheme is not available, by resignation, (but they were otherwise eligible for pension taking into account their length of service), they can not be refused pension option. This would be totally against the specific understanding and language of Joint Note as well as inclusion of all officers working in the Bank on 29.03.2005/26.03.1996.

The IBA in its letter dated 6th August 2012 is known to have raised several issues, which can be replied as under:

The definition of “Retirement” as given in the Bank (Employees) Pension Regulation 1995, was not discussed in the Joint Note nor the same was agreed therein that Pension scheme would be applicable to those who retied from service as per Bank (Employees) Pension Regulation. The IBA’s communication dated 10.08.2010 which introduced the word “who retired on superannuation” was against the Joint Note and against the agreed terms. Actually that was a wrong interpretation of the word “retired”.

The Joint Note dated 27.04.2010 clearly indicates the categories of employees for extending another option for pension. The Note includes all officers/ employees who were in service on 29/09/1995/26/03/1996 who could not opt for pension earlier and retired during the period from 29.03.1995/26/03/1996 to the date of joint note. Those who retired voluntarily in terms of Regulation 19 (1) of Officers Service Regulations, have not be barred, anywhere in the Joint Note. This discrimination between retired on superannuation and retired under Regulation 19 (1) of Service Regulations is all creation of IBA vide their Circular dated 10.08.2010.

The IBA’s objection that in all PSBs Rules under Regulations 19 (1) has not been framed makes no difference. the Banks, where Voluntary Retirement Scheme is not in existence, the employees would have retired on SUperannuation or taken another route to retire from the service, that would be acceptable for the purpose of word “retirement” mentioned in the Joint Note dated 27.04.2010.

In different Banks, Rules for Voluntary retirement vary say in some banks eligibility is 20 years of service while in others it is 30 years. This too makes no difference. The Officer / Employee if has put on his service, making him eligible for pension, then his option should be considered accordingly.

The concept of VRS is not for award staff, makes no difference, rather cases of VRS optees in Award Staff would be nil. The other mode of retirement from the service (other than retirement on superannuation i.e. resignation) should be accepted as retirement.

The IBA’s contention that inclusion of those who retired on VRS will give rise to demands from all who resigned or compulsorily retired after putting in 20 years of service, is irrelevant. The issue was never discussed during the negotiations; There is no record for negotiation between IBA and Banks’ Associations. The Staff who, has been compulsorily retired or dismissed from the service on account of some misconduct and have been debarred from terminal benefits, even they have not been debarred from opting for pension as per the Joint Note. There is no mention in this regard.

We humbly submit, IBA has influenced the Banks to overlook the terms of Joint Note and be guided by their Circular dated 10.08.2010, which included all this categorization of retired employees i.e. retired on superannuation and / or otherwise.

The IBA’s contention that any interpretation of Joint Note or Change in the contents of Agreement can not be made unilaterally is not correct. Firstly there is no change in interpretation or in contents of the Note. Secondly, the Circular dated 10. 08. 2010 is required to be modified, not the joint note. There is no need of anybody’s concurrence when a decision taken and mentioned in the Joint Note is implemented. This plea that representations from other category of officer may be raised, can not be a cause to deprive the eligible employees. Here we may mention that when a benefit is given to the Employees (for whatsoever reason) that does not require approval from Employees / or their Associations / unions. This can be given generously in the light of pending litigations/ representations and wider interest of the employees. These kind of decisions create a good image of Bank’s Management (IBA) among the employees and the Public at large. The VRS optees under Special Scheme in 2001 are covered under the Circular Dated 10.08.2010 who not only retired voluntarily but also took handsome amount from the banks, but those who opted VRS under Regulation 19 of Service Regulations are barred. This is clearly discrimination, injustice and should be done away.

The IBA’s contention not to open the Joint Note till next bipartite settlement is absolutely arbitrary and baseless. This pension matter has been very clearly agreed in the Joint Note dated 27.04.2010 and lingering the same till next Settlement would be very harsh on the part of affected officers / employees.

Sir, we may point out that IBA has created this anomaly by issuing the Circular dated 10.08.2010, which was against the terms of Joint Note dated 27.04.2010. They are delaying the issue un-necessarily despite clear instructions from the Ministry. The bunch of Writ Petitions filed by the affected officers (who took VRS during the period from 29.09.2005 to date of Joint Note) have been decided by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court ( W.P. No. 32475 / 2010 Dada Peer Vs Union of India Karnataka High Court),wherein this issue has been decided in favor of Petitioner Employees. The copy of Judgment passed in the above Writs can be had from the Internet (we will also send the same separately). Now in the light of said Judgment, IBA has to extend pension option to all those officers who were in service on 29.09.1995 and could not opt for pension and retired or took VRS during the period from 1995 to date of Joint Note. Alternatively IBA can file SLP before the Supreme Court of India.

We humbly submit that Officers who have put on more than 20 years or more years of service in the bank, were in the service in September 1995 and could not opt for pension, took VRS as per Bank’s Service Regulations, should not be deprived of their right to exercise their option for pension on whimsical conditions put by the IBA. We at the same time request the IBA to be generous towards banking community, to avoid big anomaly/ discrimination and to cut short long litigation, accept the true spirit of Joint Note dated 27.04.2010 and allow pension option to all categories of retired employees of bank.

With Best Regards,

Yours faithfully,

(HARVINDER SINGH) GENERAL SECRETARY)

  UPDATED  

I just received an forwarded e-mail from Mr.Venkatesh shriyan which states...JUDGEMENT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT-FAVORABLE VERDICT-CONGRATULATIONS
To: 

Dear ,

I just came from the court.  Honorable Judge gave an exhaustive judgment for 2 hours 15 mts.  Two lady stenos took the dictation standing... As I had told you, he has given a very clear cut judgment for all category of employees...

I just give below the synopsis... of about 50 pages judgment....

1. Only qualifying service is to be considered irrespective of the category like VRS, Resignees, CRS, Exit optees, etc..

2. All those who were in service before Sept 1995 and retired/resigned before 10.4.2010 Joint note date...are eligible for pension...

3.  Those who resigned/retired After 10.4.2010 the date of joint note is also eligible....

4. Pension is not a charity it is a social security...

5. There should be no discrimination between the  employees of an institution for pension benefits..

6. If so, it is against article 14 of Constitution of India...

Honorable Judge delivered this historic judgment for 2.15 hours....to the fully packed hall No.22 in KHC....

Hats of to his memory power and focus....all the dates and events.... and quoting all the court cases that have come in favor of employees in pension case, so far, from all courts, has been clearly mentioned in the judgment....

Hope I have given the main part of the judgment.... please wait for the judgment copy... another 3 or 4 days...

Our advocate had taken up cases of different banks of different categories, and all the cases have come to an end... all of them in favor of employees....

Congratulations to all.

Regards

Balu

      Circular issued  by AIBRF:

A L L  I N D I A  B A N K  R E T I R E E S ’  F E D E R A T I O N 

Ref: 2012/1036                                                                          Date:07.08.12

Shri D.K.Mittal,

Secretary,

Department of Financial Services

Government of India

New Delhi

Dear Sir

               Pension Option to bank retirees under 9th Wage Settlement

We understand that the Department of Financial Services has asked Indian

Bank Association (IBA) to review its decision contained in its communication of

2010  to the effect that the pension option as per the 9^th wage settlement would

be available to only those who retired on superannuation and  who took VRS

under special schemes of banks ,in view of the large number of cases filed in

courts on this issue.

We welcome the government decision and convey our

thanks to you and officials of the department for such positive and

pragmatic decision  This is the right step to avoid unwarranted litigation.

2.We hope IBA would issue suitable advise to banks  to withdraw word

“superannuation” from its earlier communication and offer pension option to all

those who retied within the prescribed period.

3.In this regard we would like to draw your kind attention on the recent

judgement of Karnataka High Court in WRIT APPEALS No. 2956-2977 0f 2012

filed by Vijay Bank management dismissing the appeal and asking banks to

give pensionary benefits to the resignees  also provided they  have already put

requisite number years of service as there is no difference in resignation and

retirement for the purpose of terminal benefits in  view of the judgements

pronounced by the Supreme Court in the matter.

 In view of this it is our

earnest request to you to give specific direction to IBA to include

resignees and compulsory retired  employees for option purpose while

communicating the government direction to banks.

In the absence of this

we are of the view that it would not put end to the litigation in this area and the

purpose for which the government took initiative  would get defeated .It is seen

that the IBA officials are in habit of taking narrow and negative views in

employees/retires matters which result into avoidable litigation.

Here we would

like to draw your kind attention on the earlier Supreme Court decision where in 

the court  asked IBA to give pension option to the resignees too while 

introducing pension scheme in the banking industry.
 Now Karnataka High Court

has further clarified the position.
In view of this clear and definite legal position .

we request you to ask IBA to give clear advice to banks to offer pension option

to the resignees and compulsory retired employees and  spare senior citizen

from further  harassment.

                       With Regards 

 

                                                                       Yours faithfully,

                                                                          ( S.C. JAIN )

                                                                GENERAL SECRETARY   

EARLEIR NEWS ABOUT THE ABOVE SUBJECT >> 

02.08.2012:

AL L IND I A B AN K R E T IR E E S ’ F E DE R AT ION

 Ref: 2012/1001                                                                    Date:31.07.2012

The Office Bearers/ Central Committee Members

AIBRF

Dear Comrades

Re: One more pension option

We are pleased to inform that Government of India has sent communication dated 25 th July,2012 asking IBA to modify the advice given to PSB vide its circular dated 18.10.2010 and 

“give pension option to all the employees who
retired during the prescribed period that is . between 29.09.1995 ( in case of nationalised banks) and 26.03.1996 

( in case of associate banks of SBI ) and date of settlement/Joint Note. and not restrict to only those retired on superannuation. Accordingly, IBA has been asked to withdraw the word
‘superannuation’ from its above referred circular.”

2.The Government of India instruction to IBA in the matter are likely to

benefit about 7000 retirees coming under this category and provide them

opportunity to the retirees to join the time tested defined benefit pension

scheme TO lead respectful and dignified life.

3.On this occasion, we wish to congratulate our constituents and members who fought the legal battle in courts with all sorts of sacrifices successfully. 

The Government of India has acknowledged in Para 5 0f above referred

communication which says” Taking into consideration that there has been

huge litigation on the issue, after due examination, it has been concluded

that the benefit of the pension option should have been extended to all

those retired from service of the banks in the prescribed period and just

those retired on superannuation.”

In view of this the success is because of

the sacrifices and efforts of our comrades and constituents.

About 450 WPS

were filed by the affected comrades in the different high courts.

In Canara Bank alone about 75 retires filed WPs under the guidance and support of Federation of Canara Bank of Retirees Associations.

We thank all our members and constituents for these successful efforts

4.We would also like to convey our thanks to UFBU and its leadership for

extending organisational support on the issue .We are also grateful to the

Department of Financial Services and its officials for considering the

issue favourably and issuing suitable instruction to IBA.

5.We are awaiting IBA circular in the matter advising modalities to banks to implement the instruction of the government and advise the details in the due course. WITH REGARDS

Yours fraternally,

( S.C. JAIN )

GENERAL SECRETARY

31.07.2012: Punch No.2:

News received from 

Venkatesh Sheena Shriyan,

Treassurer, UFOPFO, Maharashtra,

This is to inform that the APPEAL BY VIJAYA BANK AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18^TH APRIL 2012 BY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS FOR GRANTING PENSION TO THE RESIGNEES IN THE WRIT PETITION NUMBER 24158-24160/2011 IN THE BANGALORE HIGH COURT WAS DISMISSED TODAY 30^THJULY 2012.

Click  following link to read full judjement.

Appeal by Vijaya bank dismissed.

IT IS INDEED A LANDMARK VICTORY TO THE VIJAYA BANK RESIGNEES WHO  HAVE FOUGHT THIS CASE TOOTH AND NAIL.

22.07.2012:10.00A.M.:  When I contacted my source of this news he maintains that the news is true. Let us wait hopefully for some time. Let us not get  confused. Truth will emerge at last. Till such time keep your fingers crossed.  

14.07.2012: FLASH NEWS !!

Govt., has cleared(i.e .allowed to opt) today, Long pending issue of

"Second option of Pension to employees who Resinged/VRS from Bank services".

Communication sent to IBA by Govt., today.

Note:  This news now become  a debatable issue. I have received e-mails  stating that it is a fake news. Authenticity of the news  now become questionable.  Pl. wait. I will come back after  verification.

In previous occasion so many SMS received at different times about 5 days working. I have expressed my view as “don’t believe unless it come with authenticated circular” in my earlier post.

My expectation is the concerned Union leader who’s name was used may come with a circular to clear all clouds over the issue.(Though he is not responsible if his name is misused)

I still believe one day or the other Resignees / vrs Employees will get the pension option since the demand is just and right. Nobody can stop it. 

*****************************************************************

PreviousPost:

23.05.2012:  

First punch on the face of IBA and unions!!

 Yes, High Court of Karnataka gave historic verdict that

 Resigned Bank employees also

eligible for pension (second option)!! 

This shows that settements between IBA and Unions

 are not final unless it provides natural justice to all employees!!

Expect many more punches!!

 Following is the copy of the judgement:

click on the following link, 

SCAN COPY OF JUDGEMENT