Welcome

Welcome

Readers write here

READERS MAY LOG IN AND CONTRIBUTE THEIR IDEAS HERE. WE WELCOME SUGGESTIONS AND CRITICISM. WE WANT TO GROW.
THOSE WHO WANT TO WRITE, ARE REQUESTED TO CONTRIBUTE IN THE SPACE PROVIDED. IT WILL HELP IF YOU CAN PLEASE MENTION YOUR E MAIL ID, SO THAT READERS CAN ALSO DIRECTLY COMMUNICATE WITH FELLOW PENSIONERS.

Name:
Email:
Website:
Subject:
Icon:
Message:
 
Antispam:
What is 3 - 1 ?
What is the 6th digit in 3623574?
 

There are 1305 entries available on

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >

Gopal Ji Tandon (Website) wrote at 14-10-2014 6:17 pm:

 7th Bp case at Delhi High Court
7th.BP Case at Delhi High Court
Please Let the pensioners know as to what transpire in our case No.1875 which was listed for final hearing on 14-10-2014.
 
Comment: 14.10.2014 : LATEST NEWS OF DELHI HIGH COURT CASE

UNFORTUNATELY, OUR CASE WHICH WAS LISTED AT SL. NO. 24, TODAY, IN DELHI HIGH COURT DIVISION BENCH, COULD NOT BE HEARD BEFORE THE CLOSE OF COURT'S PROCEEDINGS. THE NEXT DATE FOR HEARING HAS BEEN FIXED ON 27TH NOVEMBER, 2014.


SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 14-10-2014 2:30 pm:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
Mr.Shripad Gudi-your post of 13.10.2014-- This was a trade off by the working unions for junking the pension rules for the benefit of the next settlement pensioners,which as we all know, the very substantial benefits they derived.and the other MP cohorts took advantage of that.After all, how much longer are the 7th.BPs. going to last. Sujoy Ghosh
 

suresh chhatre PF no 1330381 wrote at 13-10-2014 8:26 pm:

 10 th Bipartiates
UFBU met today in Banglore decided to conduct rallies/ demonstrations on 30 th Oct. inall state capitals and other centers, observe one day strike on 12 th Nov. followed by relay strikes, i.e. 2nd Dec. Southern region, 3rd Dec in Northern , 4th Dec in Eastern and Northeast region and 5thDec in western region followed by more strike actions including indefinite strike, circular follows , Murali, Convenor, UFBU
 
Comment: Dear Mr Chhatre,
Thanks for the information which has already reached our Association, directly. Our demands for removal of anomalies in pension, improved family pension, etc. figures in the charter of demands of UFBU. But we are not sure as to what extent our demands will be pursued, in the backdrop of the breakdown of the 10th Bipartite talks. Our Federation will have to decide on how the different Associations of pensioners will support the agitation programme planned by UFBU.

Raghunathan.T wrote at 13-10-2014 3:57 pm:

 Wage Revision Talks.
Dear Admin,
How the following news item appeard in the Hindustan Times(Indore) will affect/benifit the pensioners particularly the 7th. BPS victims?

"NOBW, one of the constituents UFBU has abruptly demanded for scrapping BPS/Joint note mechanism and for setting up for Pay Commission ."

traghunathan44@outlook.com.
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 13-10-2014 12:07 pm:

 The big sell out - 7th B.Ps
Mr. Sujoy Ghosh has rightly observed the reason for the plight of 7th B.Ps. However, what is important is that the SBI Pension Rules have Statutory status and cannot be altered by Bipartite Settlements. It was for the Bank to ensure this kind of legally untenable are not allowed to take effect
 

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 13-10-2014 10:54 am:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
Mr.Udayan Dasgupta-your post of the 11th.October 2014--Bipartite settlement is a settlement between two parties.But in the case of SBI three,possibly four parties are involved.SBI,RBI,GOIand the serving unions and possibly IBA.The settlements proceed beyond the implementation date and the next multi-party settlement negotiations get initiated.Thus the serving unions,in order to maximise the benefit of the next settlement works in collusion with the other three parties.That is my firm belief.Thus,the consent of the GOI is obtained for the implementation of the settlement-i.e 7th.MP(BP).But the anomaly having been noticed subsequently,the bank tried to set things right and took up the issue with the GOI,who took shelter under the 7th.MP(BP) settlement.If your or other's are of a contrary view it would be interesting to know that.Sujoy Ghosh
 

Rohit Sharma wrote at 12-10-2014 9:54 pm:

 Distinction between the V.R,S. emploees after the commencemnet of & B.P. and the normal due ciurse retirees after such promulgation of 7 th B.P.
1. The offer of 50 % was made applicable for those seeking V.R.S. and the rest who got retired in due course were subject to the prevailing pension rules.

2. Amendments in the Pension Rules as for V.R.S pensioners has had been made but no amendments were made for those retirees other than V.R.S. employees.

3. This is what is infer as is the distinction between the demand of the V.R.S. pensioner and the regular pensioners.

4. V.R.S. pensioner were given in writing that their pension would be given at pre-revised scale and later they would be regularized as per the V.R.S formula adopted by the Bank.

5. I just do not understand as why the pre-revised scale of the V.R.S.pensioners have not been regularized up till now.



 

Udayan Dasgupta wrote at 11-10-2014 9:42 pm:

 7thBPs Pension
Why would the Bank seek the consent of RBI/GOI for the fixation of 7th.BPs pension based on the last pay drawn when there is no any deviation from the normalcy??????
 

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 11-10-2014 2:44 pm:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
The above spells out the sell out by the working unions.Otherwise why would the Bank have to seek the consent of RBI/GOI for the fixation of 7th.BPs pension based on the last pay drawn, subsequent to the 7th.BP wage settlement.On the same lines,the Delhi High Court case salted for the 14th.October 2014 is likely to be dismissed outright because no discrimination is built up in the petition per se.Sujoy Ghosh
 
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
Please do not jump to premature conclusions. Let us wait for the verdict of the Court.

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 11-10-2014 2:26 pm:

 The big sell out
Like some others I had written to the new PM/FM and this is the reply I had got-...Pension Scheme in SBI is governed by SBI Emp.Pension Fund Rules which are framed in excercise of powers conferred by Section50 of the SBIACT(23 of 1955 by Central Board of SBI after consultation with RBI and with previous sanction of GOI.Unlike other nationalized Banks in SBI the amount of pension is not automatically linked to last drawn salary and after each bipartite settlement for wage revision Bank has to obtain sanction of GOI to index the pension to the revised salary.Proposal for alignment of pension based on last drawn salary under 7th.BP was not considered favourably by GOI.Sujoy Ghosh
 
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
This is indeed the official position. But, if the intention of the Govt is not malafide, a solution can emerge, even from this apparently hopeless situation. Decisions of the court can also create the desired pressure on the Govt. Please recollect that Family Pension in our bank was introduced on the basis of the verdict of Supreme Court in the year 1989, with retrospective effect from 1986. The arbitrary ceiling of Rs 1000 etc was also removed by the verdict of Supreme Court.

Udayan Dasgupta wrote at 11-10-2014 10:29 am:

 BARIUM MEAL FOLLOWTHROUGH (EXRAY) denied

Kolkata L.H.O. has denied me X-ray with above Barium meal though in our Clinical test List 'all type of X-ray 'is included.I request the proper forum to make it included in 'ALL TYPE OF X-RAYs' included as exray
 

Pasang Thendup Sherpa wrote at 09-10-2014 12:32 pm:

 Gratuity
All other banks accepted the date of bipartite agreement 1.11.2007 as base date for payment of max.gratuity of Rs. 10 lacs except SBI which set a date 24.05.2010 as cut off date of retirement.Employees retiring during the intervening period missed on the benefit. I retired on 30.10.2009. Central Government employees and other bank employees were paid gratuity in arrears but not for me. I am in search of a suitable reason.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Sherpa,
Unlike other banks, gratuity in SBI is paid as per Gratuity Act, which was amended with effect from 24.05.2010. Hence the misfortune of SBI pensioners who retired between this period. A case is pending in Kerala high court. But we are not hopeful of a favourable verdict.
Hope we have answered your query. Do keep in touch.

Raj Kumar Negi wrote at 08-10-2014 3:40 pm:

 appointment of chairman for General election 2014
Sir, there i a general perception among the pensioners, for one point, will you please guide us in this aspect.
1. we have nominated one person/pensioner to conduct the election,as chairman and after a few days came to know that he is a co petitioner in Supreme court case filed by the federation jointly with one of the main candidate for the post of President/General secretary , should we change/replace the person or not, to avoid the further in between talks among the pensioners. What is the better solution , please guide us. Thanks.

Rajkumarnegi
 
Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
We do not know whether it will be proper on our part to furnish any comment on this issue. We will only say this much : that the only criterion to be checked is whether the pensioner in question is a bonafide member of your Association. His being a co-petitioner, should not be of any consequence. However, it occurs to us, that usually a Returning Officer is appointed by the Governing Body, for conducting an election. The existing President continues to preside over the General Meeting, and the Returning Officer conducts the election. But we do not know the provisions of your Bye Laws and Rules, which should offer the correct guidance in this regard.

dhanabalan a wrote at 08-10-2014 2:35 pm:

 pensioners plight
Recently a pensioners confedration cicular is under circulation which says among other things retirees are stum,blng block and that almost settlement is nearby whereas UFBU says that IBA is not agreeable to offer beyond 11%. Why I am referring this is to say that retirees benefit, updation of pensipon and 100% neutralisation are mingl3ed with wage settlement. Pensioners have the right to view any website and exchange information as long as their pay pocket is cut short by some vested interest. God save pensioners. We are no more to believe preaching . we expect action and result before it is too long
 

dhanabalan wrote at 08-10-2014 1:21 pm:

 updation
I got the answer from AIBRF circular under circulation among pensioners.
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 08-10-2014 5:04 am:

 pension updation
In the absence informaton sought by me on with whom u r fighting for updation I presume u r fighting with UFBU
 

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 07-10-2014 4:29 pm:

 Bank's Dispeneries at Branches
The pensioners,by and large, are and dependent for life on some medicine or the other.The principal ailments that occur to me which are lifelong drug dependent are; blood pressure,enlarged prostrates,diabetes and may be a few others.Is it possible for the PenAss Bengal Circle to take up with the Circle authorities to stock at the dispensaries, such medicines on the basis of the prescriptions of the attending physician which would be submitted to the Med.Off. at such dispensaries?Sujoy Ghosh
 

Raj Kumar Negi wrote at 07-10-2014 9:45 am:

 Medical facilities to V.R.S retirees 2001
Sir,
in continuation of my E mail dated 5..10.2014 I may add that the officer got retirement under V.R.S In 2001 and there was no scheme for the enhancement of medical facilities for the V.R.S retirees from 2001 to till date. What is there fault. They have accepted the banks proposal for V.R.S and now facing difficulties.
There pension is Basic Rs,4250/- under n7th bipartite and they have been deprived from 50% pension from the date of their retirement. hardship to those retirees
now medical facilities only 30% , as two lacks facility has been enhanced to 7 lacks for others.
This is great injustice with them .please give your valuable comments.

Rajkumarnwegi
 
Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
We fully agree that gross injustice was done to the 7th Bipartite retirees, not only regarding restricting their REMBS facilities within the ceiling of Rs 2 lacs, but also in calculating their pension on the basis of their pre revised 6th Bipartite salaries. The anomaly of 40% and 50%, is however applicable to all pensioners, not just the 7th Bipartite ones.

It is possible that these anomalies may be rectified through consolidated struggle for justice. Let us wait and see.

jwala prasad tiwari wrote at 06-10-2014 3:45 pm:

 transfer policy for women of state bank asper direction of finance ministary
Sir!finance ministry of India issued instruction to all banks in aug2014 to formulate transfer policy so that they may be posted as per their choice either their husband place or parents place .Is there any improvement banks showing in the matter.Thanks

 
Comment: Dear Mr Tiwari,
The issue is debatable, as to whether there should be a gender bias favouring ladies in the bank, or decisions should be taken on merit, irrespective of gender. A male officer might be so ill or having such disadvantages, that he ought to merit greater consideration than an able bodied lady officer.
However, we pensioners need not break our heads over this issue.

dhanabalan a wrote at 06-10-2014 2:50 pm:

 updation
It now comes to light that UFBU have cheated us by making us believe that they are taking up the matter of updation for the past one decade. No more cheating as they have done for the 7th bipartite retirees. Please let me know whether pensioners confederation has been recognised. If not with whom our federation is fighting for updation without any ceiling as suggested by Sr.R.Parthasarathy .
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 06-10-2014 11:20 am:

 updation of pension
I retired in 2000.As the payment of the above has been stopped from 1995 I did not know it. I could not expect either the federaton or UFBU to make it known to the ordinary members. Perhaps it was convenient for them. I expect at least now concerned organisation to make availble updation for all retirees.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,
Only during the 9th and 10th Bipartite charter of demands of UFBU, have the demands of pensioners figured. But effectively, they have not done anything for pensioners so far. Even during the 9th bipartite, they had the scope of solving the problems of pensioners, with the Pension balancing Fund, but they chose to distribute the 6.4% as Special Allowance among the working employees.
Our Federation is fighting for not only 50% pension for all, but also for flat 30% Family Pension and automatic updation of pension. Let us hope for better days for pensioners.

Rajkumarnegi wrote at 05-10-2014 8:30 pm:

 Medical facility to 2001 retirees
I have received one quarry from one of our reader and that I am asking your guidance.He referred and just want to know the total amount payable to him under medical facility to pensioners.
He retired in 2001 and got two lacks medical facility by paying two months pensions He has some medical problem and has enquired from the banks approved hospital the cost of the treatment,The cost of heart problem treatment in 2001 was under Rs two lacks which has now gone more than Rs.five lacks.He has never claimed the medical bill from the bank for the last 13 years from the date of his retirement. Is the bank will pay him while calculating the inflationary effect on the present day cost of the operation.He was sincere to the Bank and now when he needs the money , what will be the total limit under the medical facility. the total limit should be enhanced with inflationary effect ,so that he can go for the operation. Please give me your guidance
Rajkumarnegi
 
Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
Those who had opted for the Rs 2 lacs plan of REMBS, (except the VRS optees) had been given an option to pay an additional sum and get covered by the enhanced limit of Rs 7 lacs. But the last date for exercising the option has already lapsed long back. Moreover, the option is not available for the VRS optees.
So unfortunately, your fellow pensioner will not be able to get any benefit in excess of the limit of Rs 2 lacs. The scheme is not dependent on sincerity and diligence exhibited during tenure of service.
Any pensioner in this situation, including those having no coverage, should arrange for Mediclaim facility individually.
Our Federation is however still trying to persuade the Bank to agree to extend the coverage of REMBS to all pensioners, irrespective of their mode of retirement.

R Parthasarathy wrote at 05-10-2014 8:37 am:

 Pension updating process
Pensioners in the financial sector in our country have become acutely aware of the necessity for periodical pension revisions along with wage revisions, as done in the government sector. Perhaps, this awareness has come to us a little too late. IBA has refused to do this but has suggested that a revised but more cost-effective way is suggested to them. One rank one pension is the rule that is just and fair. Perhaps the Federations can suggest a maximum cap for basic pay or for DA attracting maximum pay so that justice is done to all. Otherwise, the disparity, already glaring, in the pension on the basis of age and date of retirement will become unreasonably huge and totally unjustifiable.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Parthasarathy,
You are right in expressing the concerns about the plight of pensioners in the bank, specially the older ones, who draw pitiable amounts as pension. We often wonder how difficult and painful it is for them to maintain their families. The only solution is automatic pension updation, with every Bipartite settlements, as is done for Govt pensioners, with every pay Commission implementation. General Managers of yesteryears get lower pension than currently retired clerks. This is a ridiculous anomaly. Let us see what the Federation can do for us.

dhanabalan a wrote at 05-10-2014 4:18 am:

 fullpension
Federation is trying in its own way to solve the problems of pensioners inclusive of 7th bipartite. I have hopes that ON 14TH they will aim at 50% of lAST DRAWN BASIC PAY WITH INTEREST FOR DELAYED PAYMENT WITHOUT DILUTING AND COMPROMISING FOR THE SIN CREATED BY SOME OF ELDERS FOR WHATEVER REASONS THEY OBLIGED THE EARLIER FINANCE MINISTER. DHANABALAN
 

S K MEHROTRA wrote at 04-10-2014 11:19 pm:

 R E M S Reimbursement of 1% of medical limit
I retired from bank's service in October 2005. During last 3 years have been undergone bypass surgery for heart and prostat. To keep heathy body i have to incur an expenditure of Rs5000/- pm on medicines.Further myself as well as my wife is suffering fron hypertension and her expenditure on medicine is seprate. The most of medicines prescribed by Apollo Hospial New Delhi are not dupplied by Bank's dispensary resulting these are purchase from market. Please guide me whether price of medicines purchased from market can be reimbrsed from Bank excluding 1% of REMS Reimbursement
 
Comment: Dear Mr Mehrotra,

Please forgive us for the delayed response. After we are all aged pensioners, trying to help each other, through this website. The Bank's instructions are clear, even if prima facie unjust. The Bank's Dispensaries provide 53 medicines as per list, that too, if stocks are available. Medicines not available in the Dispensaries, may be purchased externally, and reimbursement may be claimed under the category of Domicilliary treatment (1% per year of the REMBS limit).

S K MEHROTRA wrote at 04-10-2014 10:48 pm:

 Terms and condition on which demand loan is granted to pensioners
I retired from Bank's service in October 2005 and intend to avail demand loan against my pension. Please guide me on which terms and condition I can availed of demand/overdraft against my pension. My date of birth is 25th October 1945
 

R K TRIKA wrote at 04-10-2014 5:13 pm:

 REMBS
Please refer to my e-mail sent just now. Please read Nov. 2013 in place of Nov.2010. Error & inconvenience is regretted.
 

R K TRIKA wrote at 04-10-2014 5:05 pm:

 REMBS
My wife is diabetic for the last 20 years. In 2009, she was diagnosed liver cirrhosis & is already listed for liver transplant in a Govt. Medical & Research Centre, Chandigarh. She has also developed other related problems - ulcer, hernia etc. In last five years, she remained admitted five times for liver problem; last time in Nov. 2010 for OLT; now waiting for a suitable donor. She is under numerous costly medication. As a pensioner's wife, is she eligible for reimbursement beyond Rs.7,000/-. Thanks
 

meysam (Website) wrote at 03-10-2014 11:22 pm:

 thanks
I enjoy looking through your web site
 
Comment: Dear Sir,
We enjoy receiving such compliments. Thanks a lot. Please send your future posts, mentioning your name, so that we may address you by name. Hearty Dassehra greetings.

suresh chhatre.PF 1330381 wrote at 03-10-2014 4:31 pm:

 DASARA
Shaanti rastu, Pushti rastu.Tushti rastu,

Let there be Peace, Prosperity, Contentment in your life !!
 
Comment: Dear Suresh,
Bahut bahut shukriya. Aap sab ko Dassehra ka shubh kamnaayen.

Shripad Gudi wrote at 03-10-2014 11:32 am:

 Transfer Petitions at Supreme Court
In response to Mr. Sujoy Ghosh's enquiry, the petitions slated for disposal on 22.09.2014 was delisted. The next date is not known as yet.
 

TUSHAR KUMAR MUKHERJEE wrote at 03-10-2014 10:34 am:

 SUVO BIJOYA
Amar sokol pensioner bondhuder janai Suvo Bijoyar antorik priti, suvechcha o abhinandan. Sobai bhalo thakun.
 
Comment: Dear Tushar,
Why did you rob the Nabami ? Anyway, please accept our sincere Bijoya Dashami greetings.

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 03-10-2014 10:32 am:

 Transfer petitions at Supreme Court
Transfer petitions(Civil) nos.750-752/2013and T.P(C) 753-754/2013and T.P.(C)no.755-758/2013.These relate to Madras High Court on the applications filed by SBI for the transfer of the cases to Supreme Court and relate to the single judge bench orders reg.7th.BPs.It was listed on the 22nd.September 2014.Can anyone update the position? It is before the Registrar of Supreme Court of India-Sri M K Hanjura. Sujoy Ghosh
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 02-10-2014 3:13 pm:

 Pensioners Plight
due to technology improvement and pensioners bringing out their difficulties in various websites and due to the upsurge of youngsters movement and critical websites blocked facilities like 7th bipartite being cheated by our own elders and signing agreements by blocking one years da merger each time and not being transparent eg now it is said IBA was agreeable for benefits upto Scale III level. However I am for benefit to every one . Now it is known through Shri Shripad Gudi that SC Judgement dt 23.2.89WP Civil 305/1987 enabled bank pensioners to receive 50% of last pay as pension. In the ircumstances each federation may place in their website all developmentsm then and there with tranbsparencytransparency
 

PRADIP KUMAR BASU wrote at 02-10-2014 2:09 pm:

 ON FAMILY PENSION
ON FAMILY PENSION ---

In reply to KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-10-2014 by 10:57 am On family pension---
IF it is @15% as told by Sainisaheb, then it is extremely pitiable condition of our family pensioner vis a vis Indian Women of State Bank (actually it can be told as "BHIKCHHA") which must immediately eradicated and make it @50% as proposed. There is sufficient rational behind it.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Basu,
Family Pension at present, is calculated at 15%, 20% or 30% of the last average salary of the deceased pensioner. 40% or 50% is the rate of pension.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-10-2014 10:57 am:

 family pension
SHRI PRADIP KUMAR BASU HAS MISUNDERSTOOD THE CONCEPT OF FAMILY PENSION.AT PRESENT FAMILY PENSION IS BEING PAID AT THE RATE OF 15% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY AND U.F.B.U DEMAND AT THE RATE OF 30% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY AND D.A ON THIS FAMILY PENSION SHOULD BE UNIFORM AS THIS FORMULA HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY R.B.I.I MEAN TO MENTION THAT FAMILY PENSION IS NOT OF 30% OF THE PENSION OF THE DECEASED PENSIONER.
 

PRADIP KUMAR BASU wrote at 02-10-2014 9:17 am:

 REGARDING FAMILY PENSION
REGARDING FAMILY PENSION -------
Regarding family pension why after husband's demise the bereaved family will get only 30% of the main basic pension drawn by her late husband ? This means that she will wore 30% Clothes , will eat 30% diet etc. etc. Again while we were in service, the management allowed medical facility for our spouse @75%, now 'OVERNIGHT' how their pension after husband's demise settled at @30% and we accept it silently ? Such 'TORTURE' against our "INDIAN WOMEN" must not be tolerated and must be protested in the proper Forum. How it has come down to 30% . Let us we all unite alongwith our elder brother's bereaved family and will move to the Court or to the IBA or to the Federation, which suits the present protest and proper Forum.
WE all say our wife as 'ARDHANGINI', So is it not legally correct to settle their pension @ 50% in connection to their husband's pension. Again while fixing the pension to an employee, Bank takes care of the pensioner's wife (Also makes a provision of percentage in PF's Contribution) i.e what amount of pension settled to the pensioner will be survived by the two persons, not lavishly but any how, in this Colossal "VAMPIRE PRICE RISE' ERA".
So cutting short of Legitimate 50% share in the family pension and make it 30% is a clean Torture to the Women in this India, which should be stopped forthwith and violently protested.
Our Leader while debating and discussing on the matter often set examples of other institutions and escaped out but never accept that this was their or their senior's mistake which should be rectified forthwith, now this should be taken care and get protested and to be nipped in the bud. Thank you my all Pensioner Brother. Shuva Maha Astami.
This "REGARDING FAMILY PENSION" statement is dedicated to our bereaved Boudi on the eve of "MAHA ASTAMI" who needs our proper attention by this time.
LikeLike ·
 

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) wrote at 30-09-2014 8:51 pm:

 Pensioners’ Mail for month of October 2014‏‏
We have uploaded the following file, which you can be view/download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website: http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/

1. Chandigarh Circles’ Monthly Bulletin Pensioners’ Mail for the month of October 2014.


With Regards,


Sudhir Suman Kumaria
Email: - s_kumaria@hotmail.com

On behalf of General Secretary, SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle)
 

Syed wrote at 30-09-2014 1:29 pm:

 Gross injustice
:right infront of all concerned injustice done to a section of retires whereas Union and association reps were silent spectators even during eighth and nineth bipartite settlements. They have moral as well as obligation to their own erstwhile loyal members. High time they act transperantly.
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 30-09-2014 12:37 pm:

 In response to the "Comments" to Mr. Dhanabalan's anguish on behalf of 7th B.P. Pensioners dtd. 30.09.2014
Everything stated therein is correct. But the Pensioners' Federation went on delaying the issue by not approaching the judiciary immediately on noticing the denial of pension at 50% of the actual salary drawn by those who retired between 1.2.1984 and 31.12.1985. Please read the SC Judgment dated 23.2.1989 in W.P.(Civil)No.305/1987. Had the issue been raised by the SBI Pensioners' Federation pointing out against the diluted implementation right then, no SBI pensioner leave alone 7th B.P. all the pensioners including 8th B.P., 9th B.P. etc would have had to suffer partial holding of pension restricted to previous scales or 40% of the substantive pay. The past is past. I ardently hope that the Federation will at least be now transparent, share all the developments from time to time and take all steps with all the energy at its command to ensure that the settled laws on pension are honoured by the SBI without leaning on to three retiral benefits etc. Please do not raise hopes among the pensioners about up-datation etc. The existing provisions if implemented without dilution will bring considerable relief to all the pensioners. I wish all the best to the Federation.
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 30-09-2014 12:32 pm:

 7th bipartiteretirees
It is not my intention to blame anyone excepting ourselves. Earlier I have expressed the same opinion. I appreciate the commentator for having brought to light how we have been cheated. My only apprehension is that no more expectation from such organisation. I am not misusing the forum for my personal benefit. Views and criticism are not well taken. All the best
 

PRADIP KUMAR BASU wrote at 30-09-2014 12:31 pm:

 Family Pension Of a deceased Officer of Basic Pay Rs.16,405.00
An State Bank Officer of Basic (Pension) 16405 retired on or after Dec'2011 & become died what will be the family pension fixed for his bereaved spouse as on to-day ?
 

R.Parthasarathy wrote at 30-09-2014 8:36 am:

 7th Bipartite and pre-2002 pensioners
The basic issues faced by the Bank Pensioners are: 1.Denial of pension to eligible CRS based/Resigned ones: Supreme Court has already passed a verdict in their favour. 2.Non revision of basic pension for the 7th bi partitie pensioners of SBI: There is a case pending in DHC but it is not specific to the gravely wronged. Irrespective of the the outcome, the Bank is to be persuaded to do justice at least now. If the Bank writes again to the MOF, if it is deemed necessary by the bureaucratic set up in the Bank, approval chances are brighter. 3. 100% DA neutralization issue: SBI had once written to IBA on its own regarding this. IBA said the matter was sub- judice. Now, it is known that IBA has granted in-principle approval for this. Implementation in SBI can be done now. 4.Pension updating issue: UFBU supports the issue.
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 30-09-2014 6:58 am:

 penseioners plight
Thanks to the commentators view and guidance. Please expedite your efforts to secure the benefits to 30000 7thbipartite retirees.Aleady 17 yrs have goneby.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,
The damage to the cause of 30k 7th Bipartite pensioners, was done while celebrating the historic victory of the 8th Bipartite settlement, in 2006. Even the 8th Bipartite pensioners got revised pension only from 1st May, 2005, and not from 1st Nov, 2002. This was the handiwork of the two working employees' Federations and not our Pensioners' Federation. Again, during the 9th Bipartite, they had promised to ensure redressal of the pensioners' grievances, but they failed to keep the promises. We think that we pensioners should know these facts, before blaming anyone.

dhanabalan a wrote at 29-09-2014 1:15 pm:

 federation
I totally agree with Mr.Parthasarathy whom I know at Erode in early sixties and who was as officebearer in 2000 in chennai circle assn. Earlier the better as the present set up is unable to deliver goods for long
 
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,
We respect your opinions. You have every right to feel disappointed with the turn of events. But we request you not to use this website for propagating the views. If any change in the leadership of the Federation is required, it has to be brought about by the delegates of different Associations, in a democratic manner. Till such time, we have to observe organizational discipline. We are sure you will appreciate this.

R Parthasarathy wrote at 29-09-2014 7:26 am:

 7th Bipartite Pensioners
It is now very clear that pension updation is a long way off. Revision of the basic pension for the 7th Bipartite pensioners is the immediate need. The Chairman of the Bank can do this if the request for the same is put up to the MOF afresh,if necessary. The Federation should otherwise think of a way to do this at the Bank's level. The court cases will not bring us benefits, as the legal system in our country has already been vitiated. The Federation leadership has failed totally in respect of this matter. A more dynamic leadership is the need of the hour.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Parthasarathy,
You are entitled to your own opinion. We do not agree that Court cases will not bring us any benefits. In fact, let us remind you, that it was the case in Supreme Court in 1987 which brought the first concrete relief to pensioners, by removing the earlier ceilings, and fixing a new ceiling of Rs 2400 (50% of the erstwhile DMD's Basic salary of Rs 4800) and also introducing Family Pension.
If any change in the leadership of our Federation has to be brought about, then this has to be done democratically by mobilising support among the constituent Associations.

dhanabalan a wrote at 29-09-2014 5:01 am:

 corrigendum regarding 7th bipartite retiorees
The approach may be at taluk level dharnas demonstration in front of banks at the centers in rotation unded the banner of aibparc with immediate effect. We havw waited enough with patience for long
 

dhanabalan a wrote at 28-09-2014 8:09 pm:

 7thbipartite plight and updation
Respected commentatator
In fact I have been expressing the same opinion in the recent past. Let us stand on our own legs. I only differ with the approach of the present set up. Dharnas and demonstrations should nbe conducted under the banner of aibarc and should arrange for press and media cover. dhanabalanaa90@gmail.com
 
Comment: Dear Shri Dhanabalan,
Please try to appreciate that as long as we cannot fight our own battles on our own, we have to depend on coordination with the two fraternal Federations, and also with a joint movement, on common issues with the two other pensioners' organizations. Simultaneously, our battles in the Court should continue.

dhanabalan adhanabalanaa90@gmail.com wrote at 27-09-2014 9:27 pm:

 Pensioners plight.
With due respect to the commentators view I am the view that UFBU has the right to represent in their demands for the benefit of existing members when they retire and I do not expect them to solve our problems. I recall your comments that in the historic 8th bipartite settlement ourf interests have been overlooked even though we joined them in the historic strike in 2005 with the fond hope that our problems will be solved. It is now clear that only resort for the past retirees is through court only. In the light of non recognition of pensioners how come iba to solve the problems of past retirees.Please enlighten and suggest ways and means to solve the problems past retirees. With hopes alone we cannot have a decent living with 50% percent of our eligible pension 17 yrs have gone by for the 7th bipartite retirees.dhanabalan
 
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,
The glaring mistakes of the past, specially for the 30000 7th Bipartite retirees, have taught us not to depend on the Wage settlements for helping the pensioners, Even in the 9th Bipartite, the 6.4% Special Pension Balancing Allowance, (the fund needed by the other banks which did not pay pension) which was not needed by SBI, could and should have been easily utilized for solving all the anomalies and aberrations of SBI pensioners. But this amount was merrily shared by the existing employees.
The only and ultimate solution lies in all the pensioners of the banking industry coming together and negotiating directly with IBA. A beginning in this direction has been made by the signing of a joint memorandum by 3 such organizations of pensioners : one affiliated to AIBEA, another to AIBOC and our own SBIPF.
We are hopeful that ultimately our perseverance will pay.

N.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 27-09-2014 4:36 pm:

 DHC Hearing
The Govt side though requested for postphonement of the hearing ,the HC ignored the plea and advised our Advocate to present case . The presentation lasted for about 45 minutes whereafter the court adjourned the case for further hearing to 14th Oct. IBA has also not relented from its earlier stand with the result UFBU are thinking of launching agitational programmes the details of which are yet to be finalised. One side, the court case seems to get further prolonged and on the other side if solution to our pension issues depend upon/linked to the BP settlement that also does'nt seem to get finalized soon. Result- we will be the sufferers and we have to wait for justice for more time. How long is the question? Whether it is Mr Jaitely or Chindambaram, Cong or BJP nothing makes a difference as far as we are concerned. Let us be happy and keep praying God to bestow us with peace of mind and good health until our D day.
 
Comment: Dear Mr. Subramanian,
Please do not be so despondent. UFBU cannot solve our problems in the 10th Bipartite settlement. We can only feel good in a way that for a change, the pensioners' demands have been included in the charter of demands.
As regards the attitude of the new Govt,. we are hopeful that unlike the earlier Govts, this Govt will get the problems of pensioners resolved by IBA, soon.
The commencement of the hearing of our case in the Delhi High Court Div Bench, and the fixing of an early date for the next hearing, are also positive developments.
Let us hope for better days for pensioners.

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >


go to top