Wednesday, June 30, 2010

IBA cannot issue offer letter for 2nd pension option until the stay by Madras Highcourt is vacated

Hon’ble High Court of Madras has granted a stay on the operation of the understandings of IBA with UFBU on 2nd Option on Pension.  Apart from IBA, workmen organisations are also made parties to the suit. According to AIBOC circular unless, the said stay is vacated, IBA cannot issue offer letter on pension. The case is adjourned  to 6th July,2010 for final hearing and order.  

AIBOC is in constant touch with the IBA and the Convenor of UFBU, to initiate appropriate steps to vacate the stay, at the earliest, to enable IBA to issue necessary instructions to member Banks on the Pension offer. 
Click on the following link to view circular. 


    Anand Plaza, Anand Rao Circle, Bangalore-560 009
    Phone : 22260185/22266469 email:
    Circular No. 4/2010 Dated: 30 Jun 2010
    Ever since the news about our obtaining an interim stay at the Hon’ble Madras High Court was flashed through the internet on 23.06.2010, we have been receiving hundreds of calls from various parts of the country requesting them to provide additional details.
    Simultaneously, a vicious propaganda was unleashed through SMS in the Tamil Nadu region that the stay is applicable only for our members and not for others. Those who had no idea about the details of our affidavit were spreading another rumour that by obtaining a stay order we have stopped all chances of getting any option for pension. In many other parts of the country, another sms campaign was going on that obtention of an interim stay is nothing but a false propaganda and there was no such stay. Many AIBEA leaders were quoting the internet and telling their members that no such case is available in the web site of Madras High Court.
    On the contrary, congratulatory messages were pouring in thousands from bank employees from various parts of the country, especially from U. P., which has taken a lead in organizing their protest over this settlement from day one.
    First let us make one thing clear. Our writ petition was filed only to quash the Clause 32 of the 9th bipartite settlement and that of Clause 1 of the pension settlement, in so far as the said clauses require the PF optees to contribute 2.8 times the Nov 2007 revised pay if they want to opt for the pension scheme. We had also further prayed to direct the respondents to strictly adhere to Clause 3 of the minutes of discussions held on 27.11.2009 between the IBA and the unions with regard to sharing the additional cost of pension.
    Ever since the signing of the settlement, the UFBU has never come out with any communication for the reasons in their sudden change of stand from the earlier agreed terms of 1.6 times (as per the minutes of discussion on 27.11.2009) the revised pay from all the employees to putting the entire load on the PF optees. Now we have made all the signatory unions of the settlement, besides the IBA as respondents in our writ petition. The real face of all these unions will now become public when they file their counter to our writ petition in the HighCourt.


  2. Contd from last comment

    The earlier orders of the court was received by us late in the evening of 25.06.2010 and on perusing the verbatim orders, we observed some error in our representation. Our advocates moved the necessary motion before the Hon’ble High Court to set right those errors at the earliest opportunity viz., on 28.06.2010. The Hon’ble Court was pleased to permit the same and accordingly our case was listed on 29.06.2010 as an adjourned admission case.
    During the course of the hearing on 29.06.2010, the advocates for AIBEA and IBA were present and they objected to the continuation of the stay and wanted the same to be vacated.. The Hon’ble Judge turned down their objections and advised them to file their counter, now that they have taken note of our writ petition. The Hon’ble Judge also ruled in the open court that he will issue amended orders as prayed for by us. Now the case has been posted for next hearing on 06.07.2010.
    Friends, we now want all of you to be clear about one thing. The interim stay is only on the operation of Clause 32 of the 9th bipartite Settlement & Clause 1 of the pension settlement, only in so far as the said clause require the PF optees to contribute 2.8 times of Nov 2007 pay to become members of the Pension Fund. It is not limited just to our members alone, but applicable for all the bank employees who are affected by the said settlement. We have neither obtained any stay on the settlement nor have we interfered in any manner with the payment of arrears.
    Our entire writ petition can be viewed in the internet at and also at, both of whom have been doing a commendable job of empowering the bank employees by bringing out the latest happenings in the industry. (Click here to view the entire writ petition )
    It has also been brought to our knowledge that another sms campaign is going around advising the bank employees not to pay any money or donation for fighting court cases. To day, we can proudly inform everybody that Canara Bank Workers’ Union has not collected a single paisa from anybody for this court case expense nor do we intend collecting any donation or levy from any source. All our expenses are met through our own resources only. Let it be remembered that this union was nurtured by the late Shri Devidas Pai, our former General Secretary, a towering personality who was well known for his impeccablefinancial integrity and high moral standards.
    With Greetings,
    Fraternally yours,
    (Balasubramanya Pai)
    Source :

  3. the fact remains that thousands of retired bank employees are still waiting for pension for the last 10/15 years. The petitioners are serving employees who are getting salary every month. Had the petitioners applied their common sense they would have waited for a few more days, and would not have caused further delay in implementation of the pension. Let them not forget that they too will retire one day when they will be in a better position to understand the feelings of the retired people.

  4. Bank officers Association are getting monthly subscription of Rs.100 to Rs.200 from each member every month. In addition they will get levy of Rs.3000/ from each member in lieu of bipartite settlement signed on 27th April 2010. Members are happy or not, that is immaterial.

    I think total accumulated fund of Officers Association in various banks will grow to hundreds of crores of rupees. This fund is not only enough to meet the usual traveling and staying expenses incurred by union leaders for various issues but also more than enough to meet even entire salaries of all union leaders.

    As a matter of fact union leaders are more often than not, busy in union matters and hence they hardly do any work for the branch or office they are posted. It is pity that even officer community in general is not happy with their performance as union leaders. On the contrary their actual energy is lost in saving bad officers and seldom used for any gain for honest workers or for any relief to those honest officers who have been arbitrarily posted in critical areas or rejected in promotion processes due to ill motive of executives. They have failed in giving relief to officers who have been made scapegoat for fraud and irregular credit committed by corrupt officers.

    In such position I am of the opinion that these union leaders should be removed from muster roll of the bank and bank should stop paying salary to these leaders. Instead such leaders should be professionally trained to serve the interest of officers who are associated with the union and they should be paid by their parent Union itself. In this way bank will save crores of rupees which are paid as salaries and perquisites to these non performing officers. Bank can use this saved money in creation of new jobs for hundreds and thousands of young unemployed persons. Besides, removing from bank’s duty, union leaders will have full time to think about their members. Since these leaders do only union activities, it will be right from all angle of consideration that their salary should be paid by union fund only.

    In case officers do not agree to this proposal or they apprehend that their interest by outsiders will be jeopardized ,they should solemnly declare and take oath that they would not nominate any retired officer as their union leader in future and make best efforts to replace retired officers serving as union leaders with officers who are in service. Because leaders who are no more in service cannot fight seriously and devotedly for better interest of serving employees, rather they look into avenues to cheat serving employees and give maximum benefit to those who have either retired or resigned or removed from the bank. Latest settlement is the ideal example for such sorry state of affairs prevailing in Bank and pitiable position of officers compared to other employees working in Central Government offices or PSUs.

    In addition to this they should be made accountable and punishable for any lapse on union activities and their performance should be judged by a group of hundred officers who are actively working in the bank. Expenses incurred by union leaders should be fully scrutinized by a team of at least ten Chartered Accountants and the certified balance sheet of union fund should be circulated among all members. Officer should also appoint some legal experts in each district or at least in state capitals to stop injustice perpetuated by bank management only because they know judicial proceedings in India is too costly and too much cumbersome and time consuming that one is constrained to bear with injustice.

    Basic pension is fixed on the basis of last drawn pay of a employee. If the employee opts for voluntary retirement at the age of, say, 55, his commutation value at that time is 11.73
    When the second pension option is introduced after a lapse of 9 years, as in the present instance, his present age will be 64 and commutation value stands reduced to 8.62, for no fault of his.

    So, age of an employee should not be arbitrarily decided due to factors totally out of his control, as in the present scenario.
    Hence along with the last drawn salary, age at the time of retirement of the employee should also be PERMANENT BASIC PARAMETER, for reckoning commutation value, irrespective of when pension becomes payable, as inordinate delay in arriving at a decision, as in the present case, deprives the pensioner of invaluable commutation value, which keeps eroding with delay of each passing year.

    With few more years left, with failing health, with meager savings at our disposal, this gesture will be an acknowledgement for the dedicated decades of service we have put in, with most of the work being done manually, without even basic calculators during those years.


    The various associations/unions striving for improvement in the 2nd pension option, should unitedly and wholeheartedly impress upon IBA and the Finance Minister to accede to the above request, as a good will gesture towards the aging retired employees, as an appreciation and rewarding the decades of dedicated, sincere and tireless efforts of the work force, who are now in their twilight years.

    (a 2001 vrs optee of Bank of Baroda)

  6. I cannot understand why the resigned employees were excluded from the purview of 2nd pension option.