If insiderers in at least two important Indian government ministries are to be believed, the Centre has not really discarded the move altogether, and the announcement could come sometime during the current UPA regime, and it could be as early as 2010 though it makes more political sense to announce it three years from now possibly in an election year. But economically speaking, the government with a large fiscal deficit, could lessen the burden by raising the retirement age as it may save more money by not paying the retirement benefits such as gratuity etc. for two years though the government's salary budget would immediately be inflated.
However, such an important decision would not be taken purely on economic considerations. Yet, the proposal is still being considered for two reasons. First, it may earn goodwill from about one lakh government employees and their families who comprise an important contituent in any election. Secondly, raising the retirement age is a continuous process and the UPA may like to go down in the history as a catalyst to this process. In fact, the age of superannuation was increased from 55 to 58 following the 1962 war with China during Jawaharlal Nehru’s time. Then the BJP-led NDA governmnent under Atal Bihari Vajpayee raised it further to 60 in 1998.
Significantly, many civil servants at the top get either extension or post-retirement full-time assignments and virtually work till 62. In some cases, the retirement age is much beyond 62. Secretary in Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and 1972 batch Bihar cadre IAS M N Prasad, for example, is already officially retired and is continuing in the PMO on a contract basis. Similarly, cabinet, home and defence secretaries get two-year fixed tennure, implying that they generally work till almost 62. There are instances where the government gives further extension to an officer's extended period. Cabinet secretary K M Chandrasekhar, a 1970 batch IAS, had completed his two-year tennure as cabinet secretary in June, 2009, but got one year’s extension.
Two bureuaucrats who are much older than the rest are 1958 batch IPS and national security adviser MK Narayanan, and principal secretary to Prime Minister and 1963 batch IAS TKA Nair --- both of whom have a rank of a minister of state.
It is not understood as to why the retirement age should be increased just to postpone or delay the payment of pension and gratuity. Increasing the age will only block the career aspiration of youngesters. Senior officers of Secretary level have already opened their job opportunies in various commissions and regulatory authorities and perhaps they should be satisfied with it.
ReplyDeleteRetirement age, in no circumstances, should be enhanced to 62 year. Rather it should be lowered. Let the deadwoods be weeded out. Amakudari has become a deep rooted practice in this country. The civil servants like politicians want power and authority till death. However, the politicians have to pass the litmus test every 5 years and come good in that. No such requirement is prescribed for bureaucrats. Those bureaucrats who fail to get absorbed into political spectrum desires be to be Chairman / Members / Advisors of various Boards, Tribunals and Committee under the control of government to satisfy their desire for unbridled authority, power and money. To meet their post retirement ambitions, they create such institution during their service career with prime focus on themselves. Such is their unsatisfied desire for power, authority and freebies that they have put estopple on the engagement of officers of other services in such boards and committees. The amount of expenditure to sustain top echelon, i.e. Joint Secretary and above in the Government of India itself would be mind boggling.
ReplyDeleteMost of them have endless governmental resources at their disposal such as band of vehicles, army of officials to take care of their “BEGAR”. The government vehicle runs to drop and pick their kith and kin whole day and night. Someone should tell them that they survive on TAX PAYERS hard earned money. Millions of Dollars are spent of their maintenance everyday in this country.
Most of them have failed to uphold Rule of Law. They are so stratified on the basis of caste, religion, region, language that they failed to uphold Equal Protection of Law to the people of this country in last around 58 years of democratic functioning. They are more faithful to their henchman rather to the Constitution of this country. So corrupt they are morally that they accept bribe even under the sign displaying that “Taking Bribe is Criminal offence”. They are so pliant and spineless and can stoop to any extent for getting a small thing like a posting. They are instrumental in the spread of lawlessness and have failed to uphold Rule of Law in more than 15 states of this country.
This bureaucracy is not a steel frame rather a rotten wodden casket unable to sustain the pressure even a drop of water. Have they ever been held accountable? One must ask at whose cost all these freebies are enjoyed by them and with what face they are pleading before PM for extension. Due to this Amakudari, Indian Bureaucracy is termed as worst even in Asia. Shame on all those who are asking for extension of age of retirement.
Excellent News of Raising Retirement Age...Do It Mr.PM by 62 years at least...
ReplyDeleteA Look through the mist :Government should restore the retirement pension and should rather reduce retirement age :*Daya Sagar
ReplyDeleteThese days government employees of some Indian states are demanding retirement age be raised from 58 yr to 60 years as is in central Government .Some are saying Union Finance Minster has already recommended the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to even increase the retirement age for Central Government employees from 60 to 62 yrs . .
Those in government service suggest that in case retirement age is raised the liability of the government to pay superannuation benefits would be deferred for two . Their reasoning is wrong, the liability has to be after all paid. The medical costs of elderly employees will grow. With two years additional service the pension amount will increase, gratuity will grow, leave encashment would grow. And above all the allowances / perks related to basic salary would also be more during increased service period ( 58 to 60Yrs. ) for the job that would be done otherwise at lower cost.
The proposals on the wage increase and retirement age increase appear more prompted by employees sitting in senior positions ( even IAS ). These bureaucrats / senior officers overlook social needs and instead donot rightly not advise Political masters. Pay Commission recommendations get extended to pensioners simultaneously . The cost affect of increase in service years goes for many years . Looking at a 6 monthly increase in DA ( 8% wef 1 Jan10) & annual increments the salary of the Gov employees in general increases by nearly 20% every year, in the private sector there may be remote cases of 20% yearly appraisal . The VIth pay commission Wage increase was implemented but the performance related conditions /recommendations were not implemented. Why did the superior bureaucracy (IAS, IAAS) not get the same implemented or advise the Ministry for implementing that also , could be asked.
Pension provision has been discontinued for Central Government employees appointed from Jan2004. Since it did not affect officers already in service no protests were made nor any otherwise advice was made by most distinguished services ( IAS) as it affected only new entrants . Where as considering the social responsibility that the government servant has to carry , the provision of pension should not have been withdrawn. A government employee has to check law breakers& economic offenders, collect state revenue & see that the expenditure by government is not misused/corrupted. ; he has not to be allowed to rear any private material trade interests.This day people have lost faith in the trueness of the government employees related to revenue matters/ schools,/ material security /general efficiency on the whole / credibility of vigilance departments has fallen /elder government employees more concerned about material security so the aged employees may not be that prepared to face challenges/ stand to political pressures. Above all the Government services are not for giving simple employment to people . So, therefore, instead retirement age could be reduced from 58 yrs to 55 . Where ever it is felt that a Government employee has sound health, rare experience / service record &would be of benefit inspite of reduced agility , he / she could be appointed on contract.after 55Yrs. ( * Daya Sagar ::Sr coloumnist of Kashmir affairs and a social activist dayasagr45@yahoo.com)
Retirement is a write-off of potential man-power. Retirement causes inaction for an employee who knows nothing else to do after
ReplyDeletesuperannuation. Since one can do his or her job actively with far more life-expectancy as at present, increasing superannuation from 60 to 65 is sagacious on the part of the Government. We appreciate the move.
good work Mr PM If possible raised the retirement age to 70
ReplyDeleteIt is a welcome news that the Govt. is mulling raising the retirement age of Gov. employees to 62. Now that the average life span of an Indian has increased considerably, the employees can put in a few more productive years in nation building. More than deferring terminal payments by two years as has happened in Italy, considering the huge work force both skilled and managerial stated to retire soon, a vacuam is bound to happen in Govt as well as public sectors. It is noteworthy that practically no recruitment took place in the last 20 years. The pressing need of the hour is to raise the retirement age to 62 and at the same time induct new blood who can take the mantle when the time comes. By deferring terminal payments for two years, the Govt can use the huge amount for infrastrucural development which will pay itself back in a couple of years.
ReplyDeleteAs far as corruption in the system is concerned, no mercy should be shown and dead wood and corrupt officials should be thrown out.
very VERY BAD INCREASING RETIREMENT AGE.
ReplyDeleteLOOK UNEMPLOYEES FUTURE. JUST FOR THE SAKE OF POSTPONING GRATUITY AND OTHER PAYMENTS NOT A PROPER. CAN ADJUST WITH ALTERNATE MODE.
STOP STOP RISING RETIREMENT AGE. SEE INNOCENT YOUTH.
RETIREMENT AGE SHOULD BE INCRESED TO 65 YEARS.THIS WILL GIVE A LOT OF BENEFIT TO THE NATION OF EXPERIENCED MANPOWER
ReplyDeletesir please retirement age must be increased because this will give a lot of profit to many Indians who wished to do something special for their children like marriages,education,home etc.
ReplyDeleteTHIS IS NOT A SERVICE TO SERVE FAMILY BUT IT IS MEANT TO SERVE PEOPLE. AN OLD MAN CAN ONLY GIVE SUGGESTIONS BUT HE CAN'T GO TO THE REQUIRED PLACE. WE CAN TAKE THE HELP OF THEM RATHER THAN INCREASING THE AGE LIMIT. TODAY INDIA IS FACING MANY PROBLEMS ALL THESE HAS TO BE SHORTED OUT BY THE YOUNG CIVIL SERVANTS WHO KNOW THE NEED OF THE HOUR.
ReplyDeleteKerala is the only state where retirement age has just been raised to 56. With the retirement age of 5-56, Kerala is perhaps the only state where liability of Govt. is much less than any other state. There has always been rumor that Govt is considering to raise the age of retirement to 62. It is to be remembered that Govt. in this way can defer the payment of pension to few employees but with the enhanced age of retirement, the employee will get two more increments and since the pension is fixed on the basis of last pay drawn, the liability of Govt. on pension will increase manyfold and will have recurring impact.
ReplyDelete