Pension updation of Bank employee

Sharing this lengthy but important message for Pensioners. Please read it minutely 👇

*MSG from Shri. S.B.C Karunakaran on Pension Updation*

_Dear Comrades,_

_I am still receiving anxious queries about the proposal to introduce in piecemeal Pension updation.  I give my personal views on this._ 

_1) Pension is not Charity but a Right. That too, a Right under Pension Regulation, a subordinate Legislation and is therefore a Statutory Right._ 

_2) Pension is an entitlement to receive a prescribed sum under Bank Employees Pension Regulations (BEPR) and hence a Property protected under Article 300A of the Constitution. So Pension is a Constitutional Right too._

_3) Pension Updation has been made mandatory by amendment in 2003. It is incumbent upon IBA/Govt/Banks to incorporate Updation formulae for every Wage Revision. Having followed the Updation formula of the Govt., when BEPR was framed, the Govt. Updation formulae of subsequent Pay Commissions may be followed. Inasmuch as, RBI too followed the Govt. Updation formula when it framed its Pension Regulations and hence both RBI and BEPR had identical Updation formulae when Pension was introduced. RBI Updation formulae for subsequent periods may be followed. Whatever be the formula, incorporating Updation formula is a must because updation is Mandatory in terms of Regulation 35 (1) which reads as *“Basic pension and additional pension. wherever applicable SHALL BE UPDATED  as per the FORMULAE GIVEN in Appendix I*.”_

_4) Please refer to Regulation 37(1) which reads as - *“ Dearness relief SHALL BE GRANTED  on Basic Pension or Family Pension or Invalid Pension or on Compassionate allowance in accordance with the RATES SPECIFIED in Appendix II.”*  Can IBA/Banks stop specifying the rates in Appendix II and hence no DA becomes payable and UFBU will also not press for it on cost consideration and tell in every platform that DA is NOT payable because rates are not specified in Appendix II. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander too! If Regulation 37(1) makes DA mandatory and consequently publication of rates in Appendix II is mandatory, so also when Regulation 35(1) makes Updation Mandatory, publication of Updation formulae too becomes Mandatory._

_5) Cost can be a consideration only for introduction of a new Benefit, but, never for implementation of an EXiSTING Benefit. Pension updation in terms of Regulation 35(1) is an existing entitlement._

_6) Right to Pension and so also Right to Pension Updation gets vested in every Pensioner  as soon as he/she Retires.  A Right already vested in every Pensioner cannot be abridged, altered or abolished even by a mutually agreed settlement because this vested Right is a constitutionally protected Right to Property._

_7) Pensioners being one homogenous class, they cannot be subdivided and there can be no piecemeal implementation of a vested Right through any arbitrary sub-division._

_8) it is welcome that UFBU has now spelt out after AIBPARC’s notice to CLC that Pension Updation will be for all those who retired upto 31/10/2017, implying thereby Pension will be Updated upto the Wage Revision of XI Bipartite. But IBA is yet to make its stand clear about what it means by Past Retirees._

_9) Even for argument’s sake, a piecemeal implementation is proposed, is it of any use? For instance, if Updation is extended only to those who Retired before 1/11/2002, they are all (barring VRS pensioners) past 80 now and almost reached the actuary presumed Life expectancy. Statistically speaking Updation for the Retirees up-to 31/10/2002 should therefore require no funding. Further their Pension can be Updated only to the wage revision of 1/11/2002 and NOT beyond. One cannot update the Pension of those Retired before 1/11/2002 to the Wage Revision of 1/11/2007 and beyond WHILE not updating the Pension of those Retired between 1/11/2002 and 31/10/2007. Does a meagre Updation to the Wage Revision of 1/11/2002 after 36-20 years make any sense? Is it not a mockery and rubbing salt into our wounds? Does it not amount to treating the Senior Citizens as senile fools? In fact, 100% DA neutralization itself would bring more benefit to pre-Nov 2002 Retirees than this ridiculous insulting proposal of piecemeal implementation of Pension Updation. It has to be rejected lock, stock and barrel._

_10) How are we to stop it? Let us all be first convinced  that:_

_a) there shall be no piecemeal Updation,_ 

_b) Pension Updation is mandatory and consequently publishing Updation formulae in Appendix I is also Mandatory,_

and 

_c) Pension Updation is already a vested Right which cannot be altered, abridged, abolished or bypassed by any Bipartite settlement. Further, this matter is already before the SC (sub judice) and IBA/DFS/Banks cannot unilaterally change adversely the subject matter of writ appeals (ie prayer for implementation Pension  Updation in terms of Regulation 35 (1) by publication of formulae as per Appendix I)._ 

*_Conrades, We have to fight arbitrary adverse proposals on the Streets and in Court Halls while continuing to request negotiating parties and Govt. to implement Pension Updation gracefully keeping with the tradition of this Nation that Respects Elders._*

_S. B. C. Karunakaran_

Working President

AIBPARC