DA INCREASE FOR BANKER 3.6% from NOV 2019

On 31.10.2019, Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the month of Sep'19 announced. On the basis of CPI data announced by the Govt for the months Jul'19 to sep'19 the percentage of increase in DA is 3.60% (36 slabs) and total revised DA slabs is 717 and total percentage of DA payable is 71.70% for the period Nov 19 to Jan 20

HERE IS THE JUDGEMENT OF KERALA HIGH COURT WHICH ALLOWS SPECIAL PAY TO INCLUDE IN ALL RETIREMENTAL BENEFITS OF BANK STAFF

HERE IS THE JUDGEMENT OF KERALA HIGH COURT WHICH ALLOWS SPECIAL PAY TO INCLUDE IN ALL RETIREMENTAL BENEFITS OF BANK STAFF.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941
WP(C).No.32386 OF 2015(W)

PETITIONERS:
1 MURALEE MOHANAN K.T AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.N.GOVINDAN NAIR, HOUSE NO.49/93-B, PADAM ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, KOCHI-682026.

2 RAMESH KUMAR P.GANGADHARAN AGED 61 YEARS
S/O.GANGADHARAN, ASHWATHY, 35/2109C, FRIENDSHIP NAGAR, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682025.

3 L.SACHITHANANDA SHENOY AGED 60 YEARS
S/O.R.LAKSHMANA SHENOY, H.NO.37/2437, NARAYANEEYAM, VADHYAR ROAD, KALOOR SOUTH, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682017.

4 IBRAHIM MOHAMED HASHIM AGED 60 YEARS
S/O.MOHAMED HASHIM, 7/709-B. BANOOR HASHIM, DARUSSALAM ROAD, KOCHI-682002.

BY ADVS.
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN SRI.V.K.PRASAD

RESPONDENTS:

1 CORPORATION BANK
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGIND DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.88, MANGALADEVI TEMPLE ROAD, PANDESHWAR, MANGALORE-575 001, KARNATAKA


2 THE TRUSTEE SECRETARY
CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND, HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.88, MANGALADEVI TEMPLE ROAD, PANDESHWAR, MANGALORE-575 001, KARNATAKA

3 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO BANKING DIVISION, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI-110 001.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.S.GOPINATH CGC
R1 BY ADV. MS.VARGHESE JACOB
R2 BY ADV. M/S.VARGHESE & JACOB R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.S.GOPINATH, CGC

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.9.2019, THE COURT ON 15.10.2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-


JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15th day of October, 2019

1. Petitioners, who are retired officers of the 1st respondent Bank have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
i. To call for the records leading to Exhibits P5, P5(a), P5(b) and P5(c) and quash the same by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari as they are violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioners in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii. To declare that the condition mentioned in the note provided to item
(6) of Annexure 1 of Exhibit P6 is null and void to the extent it affects the petitioners.
iii. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to revise the basic pension of the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the Corporation Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 by taking into account the Special Allowance introduced in Exhibit P8 as part of pay for the purpose of Basic Pension.
iv. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to recalculate the commutation pension of the petitioners on the basis of the revised basic pension by including the special allowance introduced vide Exhibit P6.
v. to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the pension arrears recovered from the petitioners as per Exhibits P5, P5(a), P5(b) and P5(c).

2. The 1st  petitioner retired from service on 30.11.2013, the 2nd petitioner on  30.11.2014,  the 3rd   petitioner on 30.01.2015


and the 4th petitioner on 28.2.2015. The petitioners contend that their pension amounts have been substantially reduced when a wage revision was effected, due to the non-inclusion of the special allowance in the calculation of pay for the purpose of basic pension. It is stated that recovery has been effected from the arrears of commuted value of pension due to the petitioners by Exhibit P5 proceedings which is also under challenge.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Exhibit P2 Pension Regulations are statutory in character. Regulation 2(d) of Exhibit P2 Pension Regulations defines average emoluments as the average of the pay drawn by the employee during the last ten months  of  his  service  in  the  bank. Pay is defined as basic pay including stagnation increments, if any,  and all allowances counted for the purpose   of making contribution to the Provident Fund and for payment


of Dearness Allowance. It is stated that the petitioners had been granted pension, taking note of the average emoluments drawn as provided in Regulation 2(d). It is stated that the pay and allowances as well as the pension of retired employees underwent an enhancement on the basis of Exhibit P6 Joint Note dated 25.5.2015. It is stated that the petitioners had  been granted pension and all allowances on the basis of the revised pay scale, but by Exhibit P5 proceedings, it appears that amounts had been recovered from the commutation arrears due to the petitioners. The petitioners were also given a statement of fixation, which revealed that amounts have been recovered from their commutation arrears, since their pension had been reduced due to the fact that the special allowances granted to them as an addition to pay was not reckoned for the purpose of calculating pension. It is stated that the action of the respondents in effecting a pay revision which results in reducing the pension payable to the petitioners, who had already retired from service as on the date of the Joint Note and in deducting amounts from the legally entitled amounts due to the petitioners is completely


unwarranted and is arbitrary and unsustainable. The learned counsel for the petitioners would rely on the decision of  the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan and others v. Mahendra Nath Sharma [Civil Appeal No.1123 of 2015 and connected cases] to contend that pension is not bounty but a legal right       of the petitioners which is accrued to them by virtue of long years of service and as such there can be no recovery from pension. The judgment of the Apex Court in Bank of Baroda and another v. G.Palani and others (Civil Appeal No.5525/2012 dated 13.02.2018) is also relied on.

5. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by the respondents. It is contended therein that the petitioners had retired from service on 30.11.2013, 30.11.2014, 30.01.2015 and 28.2.2015 respectively. It is stated that payment of pension is regulated by Exhibit P6 wage revision accord signed by Indian Banks Association and the Officers Associations. It is stated that a writ petition filed challenging one of the conditions of the Joint Note is not maintainable in view of the fact that the Joint Note is the result of a series of


consultations and negotiations between the Banks and the Employees Association and it has to be seen as a package deal and cannot be challenged on piece-meal basis.  It  is  stated that neither the Indian Banks' Associations nor the Unions or Associations who had participated in the negotiations and had entered into the Joint Note are parties to the writ petition.  It  is contended that the decision of the Apex Court in G.Palani's case has no application, since in the instant case, there is no deduction from any amounts due to the petitioners under any statute and deduction is on account of the specific provision contained in the Joint Note. It is further stated in paragraphs 30 and 31 of the counter affidavit which read as follows:-
30. It is submitted here that the pay structure of the employees of PSBs' are fixed based on the Settlement arrived on time to time. The settlement arrived in the year 2015 is called 10th bipartite settlement/ Joint Note date 25.5.2015 same is applicable for 1.11.2012 to 31.10.2017. Before this settlement, the writ petitioners were drawing salary/pension from the Bank based on this settlement/Joint Note dated 27.4.2010. Hence, once the 10th bipartite settlement/Joint Note dated 25.5.2015 was entered, based on the PSBs' were required to recalculate the salary/pensions based on the  10th  bipartite  settlement dated 25.5.2015.


31. Based on the recalculation, the Bank has paid more amount as pension to the petitioners however the petitioners were eligible for arrears in commutation. Hence the difference amount was recovered from the arrears commutation and the petitioners got arrears on salary/commutation as mentioned in reply to para 6 of writ petition.“

6. The learned standing counsel would place reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Union Bank of India and others v. United Bank of India Retirees, Welfare Association and others [2016 KHC 6432] to contend that the Apex Court has held that a Joint Note is a package deal   and it would be impossible to hold certain parts as good and accepted, while finding other parts to be bad. An interference made by the High Court in one of the provisions of a Joint  Note with regard to applicability of dearness relief was found to be bad and was reversed by the Apex Court.

7. I have considered the contentions advanced. The essential challenge raised in the writ petition is against the provision in the Joint Note to the extent it is contrary to  the provisions of  the pension regulations. The Apex Court in United Bank of


India's case (supra) has considered the applicability of a Joint Note in the case of workmen governed by the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and held that the Note being a  package deal, the petitioners who are governed by the provisions of the Note cannot challenge a specific provision thereof, while enjoying the special benefits granted by the Note.

8. However, in Bank of Baroda v. G.Palani and others, the Apex Court drew a distinction where the aggrieved employees are officers who retired from the Bank in question.  It was  held that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are not applicable to such officers. It was held that  the  Pension Regulations framed under Section 19 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 are statutory in character. In the circumstances, in view of the definition of average emoluments at Regulation 2(d), Pay at Regulation 2(s) and the provision for calculating pension at Regulation 35, it was held that employees are to be paid pension as provided in the Regulations and no reduction


from the same is possible, relying on the provisions of a Joint Note, which has no statutory force, unless the Regulations are appropriately amended. It was held in paragraph 28 of the judgment as follows:-
“28. Thus joint note/agreement could not have been in derogation of the existing statutory Regulations and regulation 2(s)(c) could not have been given retrospective effect. It is also apparent from the decisions of this Court in P.Sadagopan vs.Food Corporation of India [(1997) 4 SCC 301], that executive instructions cannot be issued in derogation of the statutory Regulations. The settled position of law is that no Government Order, Notification or Circular can be a substitute of the statutory rules framed with the authority of law. In Dr.Rajinder Singh
v. State of Punjab & Ors (2001) 5 SCC 482, this Court had reiterated that the settled position of law is that no government order, notification or circular can be a substitute of the statutory rules framed with the authority of law. In K.Kuppuswamy & Anr.v. State of Tamil Nadu  (1998) 8 SCC 469, this Court has observed that statutory rules cannot be overriden by executive orders or executive practice. Merely because the Government had taken a decision to amend the rules, does not mean that the rule stood obliterated. Till the rule is amended, the rule applies.”

The amendment to Regulation 2(s) of the Pension Regulations was struck down as arbitrary and repugnant to Regulation 2(d), 35 and 38(1) and (2).


9. In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the  prayers sought for in the writ petition are liable to be allowed. The petitioners are entitled to pension in terms of the Pension Regulations especially Regulation 2(d) and 35 thereof. The respondents are directed to revise the basic pension of the petitioners in accordance with the provisions  of  the Corporation Bank (Employees) Pension Regulation, 1995 by taking into account the Special Allowances  introduced  in  Exhibit P6 as part of pay for the purpose of  Basic  Pension.  There will be a direction to the 2nd  respondent  to  recalculate  the commutation pension of the petitioners on the basis of the revised basic pension by including the special allowance introduced vide Exhibit P6 and to refund the pension arrears recovered from the petitioners as per Exhibits P5. P5(a),P5(b) and P5(c). The necessary shall be done within  a  period  of  three months from the date of receipt of a  copy  of  this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-
Anu Sivaraman, Judge
sj




PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

APPENDIX


EXHIBIT P1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PETITIONER'S PAY SLIP FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2013.

EXHIBIT P1(A) : A TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER'S PAY SLIP FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2014.

EXHIBIT P1(B) : A TRUE COPY OF THE 3RD PETITIONER'S PAY SLIP FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2014.

EXHIBIT P1(C) : A TRUE COPY OF THE 4TH PETITIONER'S PAY SLIP FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2015.

EXHIBIT P2 : A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION REGULATIONS, 1995

EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND INFORMING 1ST PETITIONER PENSIONARY BENEFIT.

EXHIBIT P3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND INFORMING 2ND PETITIONER PENSIONARY BENEFIT.

EXHIBIT P3(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND INFORMING 3RD PETITIONER PENSIONARY BENEFIT.

EXHIBIT P3(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND INFORMING 4TH PETITIONER PENSIONARY BENEFIT.

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P4(A): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.


EXHIBIT P4(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER BY TRUSTEE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P5(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY TRUSTEE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P5(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER BY TRUSTEE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P5(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT TO THE 4TH PETITIONER BY TRUSTEE SECRETARY OF CORPORATION BANK (EMPLOYEES) PENSION FUND.

EXHIBIT P6 : A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES SIGNED BETWEEN INDIAN BANK'S ASSOCIATION AND THE OFFICERS UNIONS.

EXHIBIT P7 : A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN 1209 OF 2007

EXHIBIT P8 : A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 1-7-2015 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.1123/2015 OF SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

True copy

PS to Judge

Modi govt wave 7200 cr bank loan of ADANI GROUP

CPM politburo member Brinda Karat on Friday accused the NDA government of adopting an anti-farmer and pro-corporate stance.

Ms Karat said that the party plans to increase women membership from the present 16 per cent to 25 per cent, adding that membership in the CPM is not the one like “missed call”, an indirect dig at BJP.

She was speaking at a ‘Meet the Press’ programme organised by the Telangana Working Journalists Federation.

“Modi government waived the Rs 72,000 crore bank loans of Adani group companies while waiver of loans for the entire farmer community in the country was Rs 75,000 crore. In the last three years, waiver of bank loans to the corporate sector touched Rs 6.8 lakh-crore. 70 per cent of loans waived were of corporates,” she alleged.

Stating that the rich had become richer in the country in the past three years, Ms Karat said that properties of the rich have gone up from 48 per cent to 58 per cent, evidence of the government’s pro-rich stand.

Ms Karat alleged that gau rakshak dals in the BJP-ruled states were targeting Muslims and Dalits. CPM was also being targeted, she alleged. 

“There has been nothing to boast about in Modi’s three-year rule. It’s a rule of deceit. Modi promised 2 crore jobs but failed. All he managed was 2.3 lakh jobs. Due to problems in IT sector, we may lose 6 to 10 lakh jobs in next 4/5 years,” she said.

Extending support to chilli farmers, Ms Karat asked why Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhar Rao was silent on this and other issues.

On triple talaq, she said she strongly opposed it. “Muslim law is being misused in triple talaq,” Ms Karat said.

She alleged that the Centre has failed to handle the Kashmir issue and asserted that it needed a political solution. 

IBA REJECTS 5 DAYS WEEK, STICKS YO 12% WAGE HIKE

|BS|23.10.2019

*IBA rejects bankers' demand for five-day work week, sticks to 12% wage hike*

The IBA has also proposed a performance-linked incentive scheme to be implemented for the first time for PSB staff

The Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) has formally declined a request from employee unions to keep bank branches open for five days a week, while also expressing inability to hike wages by more than its proposal of 12 per cent.

It has not agreed to the suggestion following views of some “important stakeholders”, according to a circular issued by the staff unions, under the umbrella of the United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU). The unions have to agree to the IBA’s decision for it to be implemented.

The bank managements, represented by the IBA, have told the unions that a 12 per cent hike in wages will cost public sector banks (PSBs) more than Rs 6,300 crore annually.

The unions have been demanding a five-day work week since a long time. From September 2015, the IBA had agreed to allowing bank branches to remain shut on alternate Saturdays (the second and the fourth Saturday of every month).

“PSBs are serving rural and semi-urban areas and any move to reduce the working days may bring down the connect with customers, especially when direct benefit transfer schemes are being focused upon in a big way,” the executive added.

Sources said the Department of Financial Services, under the finance ministry, is in favour of keeping three Saturdays off in a month, but was awaiting a nod from Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on the proposal. “This was discussed in a meeting held between Finance Secretary Rajiv Kumar and bank officers’ union on September 23,” a person who was a part of the meeting said.

Wage negotiation talks are going on between the IBA and the UFBU, which include discussion on pay hike, the number of working days and other issues related to salary restructuring and pension.

“There is a possibility to get five-day working week on two counts: one is the alternative channel utilised by customers, and the digital reach. This issue is of prime importance to us,” said All India Bank Officers Association General Secretary S Nagarajan.

In the previous meeting held on October 18, the IBA stated that a 12 per cent hike in pay slip cost would result in an annual burden of Rs 6,319 crore on all PSBs, including State Bank of India. “They further stated that including the cost of superannuation benefits, the total cost would come up to Rs 11,865 crore as of March 31, 2017, which is a substantial cost and hence unions should settle at this,” a communique by the UFBU stated.

The current wage revision is due from November 2017, after the terms of the previous bipartite wage settlement ended in October 2017. In the last wage revision in 2012, which was for the period between November 1, 2012, and October 31, 2017, bank employees got a 15 per cent wage hike.

“We have rejected a 12 per cent wage hike proposed by the IBA. We will settle for this if the IBA agrees to our other demands which include improvement in the family pension formula, merger of special allowance with basic pay, among others,” said C H Venkatachalam, general secretary of the All India Bank Employees Association (AIBEA).

During the wage negotiation meetings, the IBA had initially proposed a 2 per cent hike in wages, which was subsequently proposed to be increased to 6 per cent, then 10 per cent and now 12 per cent.

The IBA has also proposed a performance-linked incentive scheme to be implemented for the first time for PSB employees. The unions will submit their recommendations to the IBA on this proposal soon, Venkatachalam said.

*as it is*

🧘🏻‍♂CD

Few question for indefinite bank strike by we banker

As Expected, Indian Banks Association has come into the action reacting on Notice of Indefinite Strike given by We Bankers. A Circular from Bank of India referring to communication from Indian Banks Association is in wider Circulation in Social Media. We understand that similar communication may have been sent to other Banks also.  In the said Circular, there are three queries to be responded:
(1) Whether United Forum of We Bankers is a registered Trade Union under the Trade Unions Act in any of the Zone?
(2) Whether in any of the Zone, our Bank has recognized United Forum of We Bankers for bilateral discussions?
(3) Whether any Zone has extended Check-off facility to United Forum of We Bankers?
IBA has asked the Bank to treat it as MOST URGENT and has advised to furnish above information by 12 noon on 24.10.2019.
Bank Employees have shown immense curiosity on above communication and have desired to know the view points of We Bankers on the said Circular.  At this moment we can just assure that We Bankers had visualized such position in advance and fully prepared to deal with it and since it is part of a well planned strategy we don't wish to share it before executing the same for obvious reasons. However, for the sake of clarity amongst Bank Employees, We hereby give our immediate comments so that there may be broader understanding:
(1) In reply to First Query, IBA and for that matter each and every bank has to answer similar question with regard to United Forum of Bank Unions. Whether United Forum of Bank Unions is a registered Trade Union under the Trade Unions Act in any of the Zone? Certainly not. United Forum of Bank Unions is composed of Registered Trade Unions so is the case with United Forum of We Bankers. It is known to each and every Bank Employee that We Bankers is a registered Trade Union both for Officers and workmen in Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh whereas it has a registered unit for Officers in Punjab.

(2) The Recognition of Trade Union is to be decided by Code of Discipline accepted by Indian Banks Association way back in 1968. Under the code of Discipline, each and every permanent bank employee has right to exercise his choice through secret ballot at Branch, Regional and All India Level. No such elections have ever been conducted in spite of acceptance of Code of Discipline. However, We Bankers has signed Settlement before the Conciliation Officers under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 relating to Industrial Dispute of Bank of India and Bank of Baroda in Uttar Pradesh and Indian Overseas Bank in Rajasthan. Several Disputes relating to Andhra Bank, Punjab Sind Bank and UCO Bank are pending and conciliation proceedings are going on.

(3) As per Notification issued by Ministry of Finance, Check Off Facility is to be extended by Banks to all registered Trade Unions. Thus, it is mandatory for Banks to extend check off facility to each and every Union which has been registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1947. As and when We Bankers got registered in Rajasthan, U. P. and Punjab, introductory letters were sent to all banks informing them emergence of We Bankers as Registered Trade Union and requesting them to extend the Check Off Facility to it as per Government of India Notification. If concerned Banks have not extended the check off facility in utter disregard and violation of Government of India Notification, We Bankers can't be held at fault.

An important judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in State Bank of India Staff Union vs. State Bank of India and Union of India is worth reading and explains the position of We Bankers in the matter of extension of Check Off Facility.

We understand that educated and enlightened Bank Employees are also aware that all sorts of obstacles and hindrances would be created by both Indian Banks Association and United Forum of Bank Unions in connivance with each other because it is We Bankers which has challenged their power, authority and competence to negotiate and sign the settlement for and on behalf of Bank Employees and has demanded abolition of present system of Collective Bargaining through Bilateral Negotiations and deciding revision of salary and pension on the basis of paying capacity/profitability. Thus, We Bankers has dared to challenge the very existence of the present system which suits both Indian Banks Association and United Forum of Bank Unions and none would be surprised to see their reaction like issuance of above circular.

We Bankers has done its duty, it has shown courage and conviction to raise the genuine demand and voice of common bank employees. The day we had submitted Notice for Indefinite Strike, we had come out to declare that our Struggle is devoted to each and every common bank employee. So now it’s the turn of common bank employees to rise to the occasion by coming forward and lead from the front to ensure that We Bankers is able to successfully clear these hurdles with the extended support from all types of Bank Employees. It is time to react enthusiastically to all such hurdles by intensifying your struggle, convincing bank employees to join our movement and by 6th November there must be consent to join the movement in such numbers that both IBA and UFBU must realize that now it is too difficult to maintain industrial peace and harmony as common bank employees are no more in support of UFBU and its constituent unions.

HALLA BOL -BE DETERMINED TO RESIST INJUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF FIXATION OF SALARY AND PENSION-RISE, AWAKE AND STOP NOT TILL PRESENT SYSTEM IS CHANGED.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1953580/

We want decent wage revision and better service conditions.

I have gone through all the responses to my earlier post with interest and lots of amusement.

I could clearly understand that most of those who commented here have neither read any Bipartite Settlement nor any CPC Report. I would request them to read and understand.

CPC is Central Pay Commission . It's for Central Government Employees. Means, it is for those employees who earn salary from the consolidated fund of India.

There are dozens and dozens of Public Sector Units under the Central Government. They pay their employees from their own income. If income is too low or losses are heavy, they face a lay-off. If profits are insufficient, they don't give any wage revision. In any case, the Central Government doesn't fund any PSU to give its employees a pay hike. This is Government of India policy and law of the land. I don't know how many of you are aware of this.

Given this basic difference, there is no question of CPC being extended to any PSU, including Bank.

Added to this, please remember that several Banks covered by Bipartite are in Private Sector. So, CPC is absolutely ruled out.

Hence, we have to get our wage revision  through the mechanism of Bipartite Negotiations.

Be calm and support the UFBU. We will get a decent wage revision and better service conditions.

From facebook wall

Axis bank posted rs 112 cr loss

*Axis Bank posts Rs 112 crore loss on a Rs 2,137 crore tax write-down*
By: FE Bureau

The bank also holds additional provisions of Rs 2,600 crore towards various risk contingencies, over and above the regular NPA provisioning and the 0.4% standard assets provisioning requirement.

Its recoveries and upgrades stood at Rs 2,213 crore, while write-offs during the quarter were at Rs 3,104 crore.
The net loss of Rs 112 crore in the September quarter of FY20, is against a profit of Rs 790 a year ago, owing to a 20% rise in provisions on a y-o-y basis to Rs 3,518 crore in the quarter and a 575% surge in tax expense to Rs 2,545 crore.

Rethinking about 11th bipartite

Rethinking need of the hour: IBA has not improved the wages of workmen.. The 9th and 10 th bipartite settlements have made bank clerks to draw the lowest salary across all sectors in the country.. Graduate clerks deserve to get Rs 35000 as initial salary (like in many sectors)  whereas they are forced to be paid a paltry  Rs 20000.. A mere 15% increase will not help clerks any way as it will again stand at Rs 22800 ... which is far below the wages of other sectors ..A huge gap lie between the wages of Officers and workmen  , hence combined talks with officers on  percentage increase  as the main theme will not help workmen at all...   Hence it is right time that we come out of talks with IBA... On the demands side , for construction of modern demands , a special committee must be formed who are experts on wage related issues who may formulate and draw up better demands for workmen.. Such committee may spell out the demands making comparisons with other sectors ...

How the privatization of banks affects the common man.

How the privatization of banks affects the common man.

The nationalization of private banks in India was a historic event. It was a struggle of the working class that could not be written down by a ruler. Behind the popularization of the banking sector, which has been dominated by the rulers and the big hands, lies the proud story of the valiant struggle of the bank employees and the masses of class conscious people.

Mass banking has decentralized the financial sector. They started working for the common man. Until then, the people had no access to the banks. What they have kept aside from their wages has become fixed deposits. The money thus collected went back to the people with educational loans and loans to small entrepreneurs and farmers.

Not only this provided the nation with a balanced healthy economy, but also the banking industry became one of India's largest employers, with opening of branches in rural areas.

Neo-liberal policies believe in dignified speculation. They make tempting offers in order to channelize people’s money into the market. Through these offers, the corporations have been gambling on trillions of dollars through unnecessary insurance schemes. The Economy has been changed so that people can invest in it by knowing that it will be a big dump, like the words which ends in Mutual Fund Investments Advertisements.

Seventy percent of the total bank deposits are from the common man. Today there are many restrictions in dealing that money. People have begun to recognize those who forbade them to eat the fruits of their labor.

Privatisation is a profit-making scheme that does not recognize the status quo of the people. They don't want to involve poor in the sector . The fact is that six thousand branches were closed and that can be seen in the parliament documents. This is equivalent to driving people out of their economic state. This is a glimpse of rejecting their hard worked earnings into banks. However if it gets into the banks after struggles it will be hit by huge charges.

Banking, which opened huge employment opportunities once, has cutshort their recruitments now, and the closures of branches signal that employees will be forced to be pulled out from the industry. Privatization of banks has its role in creating the huge unemployment ever.

On October 22, the bank employees are going on strike to protest against the privatization policies of the Govt. It is not only a workers' struggle to defend their work culture, but a fight for the rights of the people over their property too.

#AIBEA
# 22nd_Oct_Bank_Stike

Dear Leaders My view may not be liked by you but these are the Truth

Sir there will be no effects on Govt or to any Customers for mere one Day strike. It will be just like a Sunday or Holiday. If no problem in two day bank off like 2nd/ 4th Saurday with Sunday or three days off with a holiday along with 2nd/4th Saturday and Sunday. Even we demand for all saturdays off. Then what will be the effects on Govt or Customers for just one day Strike. It is a just sacrifice of one day salary to bank which will be help to increase its profit. In other side customers have to fullfil their financial requirements and bound to come on next day which is a over workload for us in the next day. Summary we have to do same work by sacrificing one day salary. And we cannot succeed in stopping Govt from bank mergers. Dear Leaders My view may not be liked by you but these are the True

Collected 

Llatest update bipartite takk between UFBU & IBA

With the latest round of 11th bipartite talks between UFBU and IBA and the UFBU proposal for merging of 6353 points (DA as at 01.11.2016) instead of 6505 points (DA as at 01.11.2017) hope for CPC pay died. What was surprising was the IBA reaction for the same,  as per the reports IBA didn’t agreed for the same and has informed that they would give their reaction by next round of bipartite talks.

Shame of our leaders, UFBU has forgotten that our demand used to be 110% neutralization and IBA used to plead for a 100% merger of DA.  It is evident that it is hard to extract a starting basic pay of Rs.56100/-  from IBA.

As usual leaders will sigh the 11th bipartite for 12%  or 15% we will get a salary jump of   around 8-9%.   Our basic pay will be around 39000/-  and total gross increase would be around 3500/- to 4500/- per month for PO in public sector bank.

Comparison between Bipartite settlement and LIC wage revision:

LIC wage revision is due on 01.08.2017, where as the 11th bipartite is due from 01.11.2017 i.e LIC wage revision expired , exactly one quarter before the Bipartite settlement.

Bank unions lead by AIBEA was a force to reckon with during the earlier days of bank nationalization. They has the muscle power and could stall, entire Indian economy with one strike call.  Unfortunately our brothers in financial sector, LIC and General Insurance unions didn’t have that  power.

In order to survive and for a better wages the LIC unions would patiently wait out for our Bipartite to be settled and with in a 3 to 6 months would clinch their wage revision citing the Bank Employees bipartite settlement.   This was happening since our first bipartite settlement.

Insurance sector wage revision used to be exact replica of our Bipartite settlement. This was more or less same with all other Public Sector Organizations,  our settlement used to be the bench mark for their negotiations.

Now let us look at what was the basic salary of  AAO of LIC ( From 1983 to Till date),  AAO post is equivalent  to PSB PO.



LIC AAO Bank PO Diff in %
1983 1175 1175 0
1987 2100 2100 0
1992 4250 4250 0
1997 7100 7100 0
2002 11110 10000 11.1%
2007 17240 14500 18.89%
2012 32795 23700 38.37%
Just notice how the LIC employees have gained on us  since 2002 (Eighth Bipartite). Remember one important point,  wage revisions for the both sectors expires in the same year.  Now they are close to achieving the CPC scale in the present wage revision.  What about poor bank employees?  Where are our mighty Bank unions.

LIC employees enjoy five day week.  They have a performance linked pay of 1% to 6% of their annual pay for all officers including the back office staff.  The performance linked pay is over and above the monthly salary. We are still struggling for a five day week.

Analysis of salaries of LIC and Bank Employees for the tenth bipartite shows the mature nature and wisdom of LIC union leaders.



LIC AAO Bank PO Diff in %
Starting Basic 32795 23700 38.37%
No of Increments 18 19
Maximum Basic 62315 45950 35.61%
No of Stagnation Increments 0 4
DA% ( as at 30.09.2018) 46.55% 54.1%
DA amount 15266 12821
Special Pay  (with DA ) if Any 0 2829
Gross Salary at first stage 48061 39350 22.13%
Gross Salary at last  stage 91322 76296 19.69%
Starting increment  for LIC officers is Rs.1610 where as the starting increment for bank officer is Rs.980/-.

Last stage of AAO salary is Rs .62315/- .  Where a PSU bank Divisional Managers basic salary at stagnation is Rs.60,820/- that too after adding the stagnation increment.

LIC AAo starting increment is Rs.1610/- per month where as the final increment is Rs.1745/- even our Divisional managers final increment is only Rs.1650/-

Now you will be understanding the intelligence of the LIC union leaders they have removed all the stagnation increments and scales were constructed.

With a higher starting salary at AAO stage,  the gap between the salaries of Bank employees and LIC employees widens while advancing to the top.

For Scale 2 in banks total  18 increments for LIC it is 13 increments

LIC AO Bank Manager
Starting Basic 44065 31705
Last Basic 65805 51490
Gross Salary at first stage 64577 52643
Gross Salary at last  stage 96437 85495


For scale 3 in banks 9 increments  for LIC 11 increments

LIC ADM Sr.Manager
Starting Basic 53725 42020
Last Basic 75005 51490
Gross Salary at first stage 78733 69771
Gross Salary at last  stage 109919 85495


For scale 4 in banks 6 increments and for LIC 9 increments

LIC  DM Bank DM
Starting Basic 65805 50030
Last Basic 86505 59170
Gross Salary at first stage 96437 83071
Gross Salary at last  stage 126773 98247


LIC DM last stage of Rs.86505/- is more than the last stage of Bank’s General Manager of Rs.85000/-



LIC DZM Bank AGM
Starting Basic 79605 59170
Last Basic 102045 66070
Gross Salary at first stage 116661 83071
Gross Salary at last  stage 149546 109704








LIC  ZM Bank DGM
Starting Basic 89095 68680
Last Basic 110575 76520
Gross Salary at first stage 130568 114038
Gross Salary at last  stage 162047 127055






LIC ZM Selection Scale Bank GM
Starting Basic 99835 76520
Last Basic 124295 85000
Gross Salary at first stage 146308 114038
Gross Salary at last  stage 182154 141136




The difference in salary from the scale 3 is huge.

The LIC wage revision is again due from 01.08.2017 and our 11th Bipartite is from 01.11.207.   LIC unions have submitted their charter of demands.  They have demanded for a starting salary of Rs.62000/- for AAO.

When the young bankers had cried for a parity with CPC there was a lot of criticism, including the duties performed to responsibilities etc.,

Now compare the job profile of a PO with that of AAO, Why PO? as per the above table Senior Manager maximum salary is just Rs.85495/- where as the AAO salary is RS.91332/-.

Comparing the job profile of a Senior Manager with that of a AAO, clearly indicates how underpaid we are..

Bank PO salary wise cannot be compared even with Higher Grade Assistant of LIC whose maximum pay is Rs.50140/-, they can at best be compared with stenographer whose maximum salary is Rs.44910/-.   The maximum basic pay of of LIC clerk is Rs.40080/-.

With great support from IBA  our great UFBU leaders will see that LIC assistant salary will be more than that of a bank PO.

Dear friends don’t let the UFBU leders do that easily.  Please express your dissatisfaction to your leaders may be in local gatherings or in forums or thru facebook or any other social media.

Let them know that you are angry with them.

This is the grave injustice done to us.  It may by the Government or the UFBU or somebody else.

Our fervent appeal,  to all our  UFBU leaders please don’t waste your time negotiating for 11th bipartite.

Get yourself trained from Insurance Association/Union leaders,  let them settle their wage revision and follow their foot steps.

If you cant do that step down and give space for others,  who can  do it.

To all members this is a important post please share it in your network.

*Forwarded as Received*

Some important progress regarding 11 th bipartite

Some important points regarding #11th_BPS gathered from the one of the leaders who attends negotiation committee meeting.

#Finalised_matters...

(1) Leave(PL) Encashment on superannuation increased from 240 days to 270 days. And the allowed accumulation of PL is also increased from 270 days to 300 days.
(2) The fares of RAJDHANI and SHATABDI express, which were not reimbursable earlier, will now be reimbursed if you undergo actual travel during LFC. Not applicable if you are encashing the LFC.
(3) Previously we used to get 30 sick leaves on half pay each year for the first 18 years of service and 90 additional sick leaves on half pay once we complete 24 years of service. That is, we used to get total 630 sick leaves on half pay during total service. Now this figure will be increased to 720 from 630.
(4) Wage revision will be made w.e.f. 01/11/2017.
(5) DA as on 31/10/2017 that is 47.80% will be merged with basic.
(6) Performance Linked Incentive (PLI), even if implemented, will be over and above the fixed wage increase percentage negotiated between the two parties. This PLI will vary bankwise and not employeewise. That is PLI % will be same for all SBI employees and will depend on the category in which our bank falls depending on the performance of the bank.

Almost or yet to be Finalised matters...

(1) UFBU representatives are firm on minimum fixed increase of 15% or more and 5 day week. In recent negotiation committee meeting, IBA jas offered 12% which was denied by UFBU. PLI will be over and above this % increase.
(2) Leave bank will be introduced for the 720 days of sick leave half pay so that these sick leaves can be transferred from un-needy to the needy. Offcourse, the un-needy will be reimbursed with some monetary compensation. But this is yet to be finalised.
(3) IBA is firm on PLI.p

Bipartite update as on 28.10.2019 discussion

Ufbu message. In today's talks with IBA we raised the following issues for taking decision. Early settlement, increase in their offer, merger of spl allowance into basic pay,  5 day week,  improvement in family pension, updation of pension, nps at 14%, PLI modalities , reduction in premium on medical insurance  for retirees,  etc.  It was decided to clinch these issues at the earliest. Detailed circular follows.

UFBU always asked IBA to improve the offer and never asked for specific increase).

Dear Friends

 Negotiations on wage revision are going on for last 2 years. Initially 4 officers’ organizations have shown the courage to prepare the Charter of Demands and demand salary revision based on Minimum wage concept (which has been scientifically designed and accepted by International Labour Organisation and implement our Govt. of India in 7th Central Pay Commission for its employees). However, this has always remained in paper only and in real terms, all the leaders of UFBU were discussing the wage revision on percentage basis (in that too they didn’t knew what was the desired level as they always asked IBA to improve the offer and never asked for specific increase).



Some of the top leaders (when enquired about the cause of their not demanding the salary revision as per Minimum Wages formula), said in murmuring tone that during all previous settlements, revision was done on percentage basis and ranged around 10-15%. Now, changing the formula to minimum wage concept will result into increase of more than 50% which is not possible. Hence, they are discussing percentage increase only. Now, if this is the perception of those leaders who are sitting in negotiations, then few questions arises:



If they are considering this increase impossible, then why they incorporated this demand in Charter of Demand?

Whether Charter of Demands is only for making fool of members if they are not going to demand/discuss things as per COD?

Whether they themselves understand the concept of Salary itself? Because salary is what and employee get in return of services offered by him/her and salary should be dependent only on job profile, risk, responsibility, transferability and status in society. It can’t (and shouldn’t) be linked to profitability of any organisation. Whether these so called leaders are themselves not understanding this concept?



Now, to prove that this much increase (even 50%) in salary is practically possible, let us analyse few data of major Banks:





SBI:

Total Employee Cost: 41055 crores

Operating Profit: 55436 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 20528 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 61663 crores



Punjab National Bank:

Total Employee Cost: 7048 crores

Operating Profit: 13170 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 3524 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 12253 crores



Bank of Baroda:

Total Employee Cost: 5039 crores

Operating Profit: 15519 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 2520 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 13102 crores



Bank of India:

Total Employee Cost: 6082 crores

Operating Profit: 8092 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 3041 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 7416 crores



Canara Bank:

Total Employee Cost: 5675 crores

Operating Profit: 10590 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 2838 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 14267 crores



Central Bank of India:

Total Employee Cost: 3566 crores

Operating Profit: 3127 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 1783 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 12139 crores



Union Bank of India:

Total Employee Cost: 3151 crores

Operating Profit: 7521 crores

50% increase in employee cost: 1576 crores

Total Amount written off during financial year: 7771 crores



All the above data are as on March 2019. These details are available on website of concerned Bank and can be verified by anyone anytime.



One more thing which has to be kept in mind that the employee cost as mentioned above includes each and every payment made to staff (salary, all other allowances, TA/HA, etc.), separate data of only salary is not available.



We can see that even after 50% increase in total employee cost (leave alone salary increase), all these Banks are still in good operating profits. One more important thing is noticeable that each bank has written off bad loans of defaulters in the range of 1.50 to 4 times approximately of total employee cost.



So, it can be inferred that our own great leaders (sitting in negotiations) are very happy in allowing such a hefty write-off to defaulters (which is a heavy burden on economy of our country too), but they don’t want to even demand the good salary increase (the formula for which has been internationally accepted and even implement by our central government also) for 8 lakh banker who are economic soldiers of country.





When the data also proves that salary increase even more than what Minimum Wage Concept envisages, is practically possible and implementable in Public Sector Banks, International Labour Organisation has accepted the concept, Our Central Government has implemented, many state governments have implemented, Honourable Supreme Court has accepted the need for it, then, still UFBU leaders (all concerned organisations) are playing the percentage game. Isn’t it a criminal offense (morally) to betray the innocent members who have accepted these fellows as leaders?



God give the wisdom to these leaders to rise upto the occasion and really fight for what Bankers deserve………………..!

*Copied*

Madras HC ( Madurai Bench) stayed 11 BPS till it decides pay on Min Wage Code 2019

Madras HC ( Madurai Bench) stayed 11 BPS till it decides pay on Min Wage Code 2019
ie
The Min Basic Pay(Rs) for an entry-level Bank Employees same as Govt employee - Clerk 
Gp C 25500 ( level 3 as per MWC 19)
Gp B 35100
Officer Gp A 56100 (Annual 3% increment)

IBA is not Government body. But it has power to determine the salary of 10 LAKH Bank Employees working in Government bank.

Just can not understand IBA.

IBA has power to negotiate, But it can not be questioned.

It is not Government body. But it has power to determine the salary of Employees working in Government bank.

It says it had no power to decide and direct member banks, but it has decided and directed its member banks to give Advance of one month Basic pay + DA, which was duly obeyed by its member banks.

But still in the court, it presents itself as a voluntary association of banks.

GREAT IBA...

Thanks

The final decision on the 11 th bi- partie settlement can be made subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition No.21535/19

*11 th Bipartite settlement update*

*Banking is the FIRST industry poised to implement Code On Wages - 2019 Act*

This Act is the first ever Act made to become applicable to All over India including J & K.

*Bank Officers who are hitherto outside the preview of Labour act since Independence are now covered under this Act*

This act envisages *BASIC MINIMUM WAGES* commensurate with standard of living and nature of work attendant on that job.

So, any negotiations for officers scale of pay shall be over and above the Minimum Wages.

*This Act discards Paying Capacity, Percentage of Increase etc.,etc.,This Act was notified on 08/08/2019*

In the above regard, *Writ petition number 21535/2019 was filled by Mr.M.Pounraj from Madurai before the Madurai bench of Madras High Court seeking direction to the DFS  Ministry of Finance, to ensure that the 11th bi-partie negotiations by IBA scheduled on 15/10/2019 take into account by considering the Code On Wages - 2019 Act and 7 th pay commission*

*The Honorable Court was pleased to order:*

 *Notice*

*Any result was made it is subject to the out come of the Writ petition No.21535/19*

Next hearing : 21/10/19

 

Canara Bank,IBA,AIBOC,CBOA are other respondents.

--------------------------------------

Now the final decision on the 11 th bi- partie settlement can be made subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition No.21535/19

I.Pinaygash

Advocate

99 Law Chambers

Madurai

18th October 2019 bipartite talks,will throw more light on the fate of the bipartite mechanism.

The Madurai bench of the Madras High court,has sent notices to IBA/Finance ministry/AIBOC/Canara Bank officer.association./The court has observed that the results of the bipartite negotiation ,would be subject to the outcome of the petition. Now, IBA/Finance ministry has to consider ,whether the Code on wages act-2019,could fit the proposed salary negotiation and state,its position clearly to the court..It has also to look into the minimum wages,prevailing at the central govt.,for the various grades,from entry level to top level as per the 7th pay commission formula.Madurai bench (Madras high court) has also ordered,to spell out the basis,on how IBA is going consider pay for officers,whether taking into consideration the 7th pay commission formula.The 18th October,bipartite meeting has to be seen in this relevance.The IBA will have to look into the Madurai bench directive in letter and spirit.First of all IBA/Govt.,will have to see whether the code on wages bill-2019 itself,gives room for any Bipartite talks.On a plain reading of the code on wages bill-2019,one gets the impression that the wage bill is neither for, nor against any negotiated settlement.Infact,the bill is silent about negotiated salary itself.However, the bill,which was passed by the parliament on 2nd August 2019,is fully applicable to all organized and unorganized sectors.Accordingly,as bank employees,we are definitely coming under the provisions of the above bill.Now,the IBA has to decide about the future course of the Bipartite talks.From,now on ,any wage negotiation,will have have to be on the basis of the code on wage bill-2019 only.The Madurai high court bench's. intervention is infact a boon to all the bank employees.The Madurai high court bench,has admitted this petition,because it felt that there is substance in the prayer of the petitioner.So there are good reasons for us to rejoice.But now,IBA will have to decide,what role it will play in the bipartite i.e to go ahead with the talks or to take a different course.of action. So,18th October 2019 bipartite talks,will throw more light on the fate of the bipartite mechanism.

Asks banks to set up joint committee of EDs to sort out HR-related issues FOR SMOOTH MERGER

The mega bank merger plan to consolidate as many as 10 public sector banks into four large entities may not face post merger Human Resources (HR)-related problems if the Finance Ministry has its way.

To smoothen the integration and address HR-related matters flagged by employees as well as their associations/unions, the Finance Ministry has directed the concerned banks to constitute a joint committee of Executive Directors in charge of HR to look into the issues concerned. The joint committee has to be constituted with the approval of the respective boards, said the Department of Financial Services in the Finance Ministry.

The committee has been tasked to submit appropriate recommendations to the top management and/or the bank’s board or relevant committee of the board, official sources said.

Recently, Finance Secretary Rajiv Kumar had indicated that the Finance Ministry was positive about the formation of a committee comprising all concerned to look into the issues raised by employee unions. Following this, four bank officers’ associations had deferred their strike call for September 25-27.

It may be recalled that Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had, in August-end, announced the mega bank merger plan as part of overall efforts to have financially-stronger public sector banks that could support a $5-trillion economy by 2023. From a level of 27 PSBs in 2017, the number of such banks after the latest consolidation drive is proposed to be brought down to 12.

Amalgamations have not been new – Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank merged with Bank of Baroda and State Bank of India took into its fold its subsidiary banks. However, the HR situation at the ground level has not been very smooth.

Indifferent treatment

Even six months after the amalgamation came into force in April 1, there are integration issues at the officers’ level in the case of erstwhile Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank, sources said.

There has to be acceptance of both Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank officials within the ranks of Bank of Baroda that they are all now part of the same organisation, and the officers of the smaller banks should not be treated as second-grade citizens. Things may be fine at the top, one can’t say the same at the ground level functioning. What happened in the merger of PNB and New Bank of India is now happening in the case of Bank of Baroda, a banking industry observer said.

In the case of SBI, the HR integration problem is severe with many in State Bank considering the employees of their erstwhile subsidiary banks as second-grade citizens.

Banking industry observers reckon the HR integration challenge will last at least for five years, even though the employees involved are only from the public sector.

Cabinet approves 5% dearness allowance (DA) for central government employees

After the announcement of the DA hike at the central level, the state governments will also likely announce the 7th CPC linked allowance for their employees.

DA is needed to compensate for the increase of cost of living due to (increase in price) inflation.

This increase is calculated by accepted formula based on the recommendations of the 7th central pay commissions(CPC).

DA calculation is done twice in every year. It will be announced in January & July then released in March & September. so all central Government employees and pensioners were waiting for the second half DA hike of the year 2019.

Today the cabinet meeting held in New Delhi  and the cabinet approved 5% DA hike to central Government employees and pensioners with effect from July 1, 2019.

This includes the increase of 5% over the existing rate of 12 % of the basic pay or pension.

This will be benefit about 1.1 crore employees and pensioners in the central Government because they have given the maximum increase in DA by 5%.

Rs 4,355 crore bank loan fraud case three(3) from PSU & one(1) from Private Bank

The father-son duo arrested in the Rs 4,355 crore bank loan fraud case had also taken loans from three nationalised banks and a private bank and failed to repay them. This is what a probe into the Punjab & Maharashtra Cooperative Bank fraud case has revealed. The amount of the loans is still to be computed.

Also, assets worth Rs 500 crore belonging to Rakesh and Sarang Wadhawan - directors of real estate group HDILNSE -4.29 %, to which the banks had extended loans - have now been provisionally attached. This includes moveable and immoveable properties, shares, demat accounts of the accused, said officials from the economic offences wing, the probe agency. With this, the total worth of impounded assets has crossed Rs 4,000 crore.

The Wadhawans, HDIL and its subsidiaries had borrowed Rs 4,355 crore from the bank between 2008 and 2019, but failed to repay outstandings. An officer said they have sought details of the loans from the other four banks. "We want to check how much still remains unpaid," said the officer.

Besides the Wadhwans, two top bank officials - suspended MD Joy Thomas and ex-chairman Waryam Singh - have been arrested. Police sources said Thomas has told interrogators he had been visiting the Wadhawans to seek repayment of the loan, but they did not pay heed.

Thomas claims he had told the Wadhawans he would classify their loan as a non-performing asset. He says they told him that it would tarnish their image in the market and, if that happened, they threatened him saying that he would have to face the consequences," a source said.

 

if aLL Bankers do not stand with the BP employees now- no one will stand with bankers when they will privatise all the nationalised banks.

All bankers should oppose the privatisation of bharat petroleum as the only motive of this government is to fill their own pockets...
This government does not give a damn about the integrity of the country and is privatising every sector...
Let it be railways, BP or banking...
Trust me if we do not stand with the BP employees now- no one will stand with bankers when they will privatise all the nationalised banks... and believe me that day is not very far...
Lets show our support for BP employees..

SHAME ON THIS GOVERNMENT...

Selling PSU to private/foreign players will further imperil our Nation as a whole.

The advocates of Privatization are citing reasons such as lack of quality services/products in the PSUs for their current predicament.

We, bankers ourselves being in the Services sector know that one of the major reasons for lack of quality services is due to shortage of staff & lack of quality infrastructure.
We all must have heard about Train18, (semi high-speed rail) whose engine was indigenously built by Integral Coach Factory, Chennai. The product was deemed highly successful & received rave reviews , even globally.

What did the Govt do.? Instead of providing more funds, promoting the product, it shut off the entire production citing various lapses (all bureaucratic & administrative).
At a time when India already imports 80% of its Oil , and economy has suffered repeatedly due to the vagaries of Global Oil prices, BPCL is being sold, with certain news reports suggesting Saudi Aramco might buy a stake in it , this means we'll be further exposed to the Global Oil economy.

Lucrative foreign air destination routes were allotted to foreign airlines over the years, depriving Air India of these profitable routes.
Every single major nation has its own state owned airlines, but soon India will not have any. Imagine our senior scientists, military personnel(with important documents) travelling on foreign airlines. How secured will they be ??

When whole world is trying to develop & implement 5G Telecom technologies indigenously for the fear that their national data might get tampered with, our country is selling BSNL/MTNL, & encouraging foreign companies like Huawei to enter & invest heavily.

In a developing country like ours, PSUs are not only for providing quality services, generating profits. They serve purposes much beyond that- providing for the socially & economically deprived people.

They are Strategically important assets. Selling them to private/foreign players will further imperil our Nation as a whole.

from 

Saumyadip Moitra  wall

Investors lose ₹6 lakh crore in 6 days as Sensex falls 1,450 points

Indian stock markets fell for the sixth straight session today, as worries over the financial sector and slowing economic growth continued to hurt sentiment. The Sensex today ended 141 points lower at 37,531 while the broader NSE Nifty closed down 0.43% at 11,126.40. In six days, the Sensex suffered a loss of 1,457 points or 3.7%, wiping out over ₹6 lakh crore of investor wealth.

Pharma, auto and IT stocks led the decline today. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd plunged 19% after the US Food and Drug Administration's inspection of the company's Telangana plant ended with seven observations. "We believe none of the observations are related to data integrity. The company is confident of addressing these issues within the stipulated timeline," Aurobindo Pharma said.

The RBI on Friday cut its real GDP growth forecast for 2019-20 to 6.1% from a prior projection of 6.9%.

Markets traded dull and lost nearly half a percent, in continuation of a prevailing corrective phase. The benchmark index remained range-bound for the most part of the day and selling pressure in the last hour pushed it to the day’s low," said Ajit Mishra vice president of research at Religare Broking.

"Going ahead, we may see some bounce due to oversold positions in the index but the bias would remain on the negative side. We reiterate our cautious view and suggest preferring hedged trades. In the absence of any major event, earnings and global cues will dictate the market trend in days to come," he added.

According to Rohit Singre, senior technical analyst at LKP Securities, if Nifty manages to hold 11,080-11,060 zone, the Nifty could see a bounce towards 11250 zone in near term.

The crucial Nifty Bank index managed to ended flat today, ending a five-session losing run. The Nifty Bank index managed to close 0.13% higher at 27,767. "Immediate support for Nifty Bank is coming near 27,550-27,350 and resistance is coming near 27950-28100 zone," he added.

Foreigners have sold India equities worth ₹2800 crore in three sessions from October 1 to October 4.

Shrikant S. Chouhan, senior vice-president at Kotak Securities said: "The market is not having enough strength to sustain at higher levels. By pushing Nifty below the level of 11,140, bears have disturbed the bullish momentum. Nifty is heading for the levels of minimum 11,050 and maximum could be 10,850. On the higher side 11,240 would be hurdle for the index."

from live mint

Finance ministry suggests shutting down BSNL and MTNL, says report

The development comes after the finance ministry rejected the proposal of the department of telecommunications (DoT) to pump in a massive Rs 74,000 crore to revive the ailing PSUs, the report added. The cost of closure won't be as high as Rs 95,000 crore as argued by the DoT earlier. The Rs 95,000 core amount was derived from the expense that will be incurred when providing an attractive voluntary retirement scheme (VRS) package to around 1.65 lakh employees of the two firms.

Shutting them down, however, will not lead to such a high expense, people aware of the matter told Financial Express. As per the report, the large volume of workers also includes officers from the Indian Telecommunications Service (ITS), who were directly recruited by the firms and those who came from other PSUs or government departments before being absorbed.

The ITS officers can be redeployed into other departments. The staff, who were recruited directly constitute, less than a tenth of the total strength of the two firms. Thus, the report added, the VRS issue will be a concern only to those who were absorbed from other departments, reducing the cost of shutting them down.