07 June, 2015
Armed Forces (army, navy, airforce) Veterans are chary
of going public on defence matters particularly on issues of their own
rights and entitlements. This is because of years of service in a strict
disciplinary environment under the Army, Navy and Air Force Acts of
Parliament, which expressly deny them the fundamental rights of freedom
of speech & expression. Thus there was a time when Veterans believed
in staying out of the news. But times have changed. Politicians and
bureaucrats have tested the Veterans' patience.
Short history
The demand for One-Rank-One-Pension (OROP) dates back to the 1980s.
Nothing much happened until the Congress promised OROP in its poll
manifesto in 2004, but the UPA government rejected the OROP demand in
December 2008, resulting in Veterans returning over 22,000 gallantry,
war and service medals to the President of India along with symbolically
signing a letter with their own blood in 2009. Under the Indian
Ex-Servicemen's Movement (IESM) banner, Veterans have been taking
delegations to the Ministry of Defence, writing letters to the Prime
Minister and Defence Minister, and holding peaceful and dignified
rallies and public demonstrations.
With continuing pressure from MP Shri Rajeev Chandrashekhar and IESM,
the the Parliament Standing Committee on Defence studied and accepted
the concept and definition of OROP in 2013. OROP was featured in the UPA
government's budget in February 2014 and was reflected in an executive
order to that effect in the same month. After the BJP-NDA government
came to power, granting OROP was mentioned in the budget speech in July
2014, and the MoS for Defence confirmed it in the Rajya Sabha in
December 2014.
During the campaign for the 2014 general elections, BJP PM candidate,
Shri Narendra Modi, made a promise at a Veterans' Rally in Rewari,
Haryana that, if elected to office, he would ensure OROP. In March 2015,
during PM Modi's much-hyped visit to the troops on Siachen glacier, he
volunteered the statement that the OROP demand would be fulfilled.
However, even after two successive governments have agreed to OROP, and
the PM's promises on its implementation, Veterans see OROP as a distant
and receding light at the end of a tunnel.
What is the fuss about OROP?
But first, what is OROP? OROP simply means “uniform pension for military
personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service
irrespective of their date of retirement, and any future enhancement in
the rates of pension be automatically passed on to past pensioners”.
The reason for demanding OROP is that Veterans who have retired earlier
receive much less pension than those who retired more recently. It can
be argued that this also happens in other government jobs, so why are
Veterans making such a fuss? To answer this perfectly valid question one
needs to know some little-known facts concerning the military, at least
insofar as service, retirement and pension are concerned.
One, Armed Forces (AF) personnel are compulsorily retired at a very
early age, and retirement age depends upon their rank. Early retirement
is necessary to “keep the army young” because older men cannot fight
battles which make huge demands on stamina and strength. Soldiers
(Sepoys, or in general, Jawans) who have not been promoted to NCO or JCO
rank retire compulsorily after just 15 to 17 years of service, when
their age is 35 to 37 years. Sepoys who are promoted as NCOs or JCOs
retire at age 45 to 47 years. Officers compulsory retirement age is
connected with rank as follows – Major-50, Lt Col-52, Col-54, Brig-56,
Maj Gen-58, Lt Gen-60, General-62, noting that promotions depend both on
performance and severely limited vacancies due to the rigid pyramidal
rank structure. That is why, of all AF retirees, soldiers constitute
about 90%.
Two, a soldier who was retired, say, in 1986 would receive pension on
the basis of his salary according to the Fourth Pay Commission, while
the pension of a soldier who was retired after the Sixth Pay Commission
(20 years later) would be considerably higher because successive Pay
Commissions fix salaries according to the rising cost indices. Thus, a
Havildar (NCO) who retired earlier with over 20 years of service may
receive less pension than a soldier who retired later with only 15 years
of service. As an example for the officer cadre, the pension of a
post-2012 retiree Colonel was Rs.35,841, whereas a pre-2006 retiree
Major General’s pension was Rs.26,700. These disparities are grossly
unfair because the soldier is retired compulsorily at an age depending
upon his rank, and his pension is fixed upon the pay according to the
CPC in force at retirement.
Three, compulsory retirement after just 15-17 years of service at age 35
years means that the soldier is effectively denied salary earnings of
25 years which other government employees (including the police forces)
receive because they retire at age 60 years. There is negligible scope
for lateral entry into government service even for soldiers who retire
without disability attributable to military service. He is forced to
seek employment to supplement his meagre pension at a time when his
family and other commitments are just beginning to increase. This, along
with lower pension of earlier retirees is a combination which makes for
near-destitution of a soldier who served in hard conditions to defend
the nation. For comparison, a CRPF policeman retires at 57 years age,
and CRPF authorities are pressing for the retirement age to be increased
to 60 years.
Four, there are huge differences in the military officer cadre vis-a-vis
IAS and IPS. Consider the rank of Maj Gen, to which only 0.8% of
officers get promoted because of the command-control-discipline rank
structure of the army, after about 30 years of service. But the
equivalent rank (in terms of salary) in the IAS is Joint Secretary (JS),
which 100% of IAS cadre attain after only about 18 years of service,
and about 80% of IPS cadre after about 20 years. It is this unfairness
in parity in addition to early retirement age which is at the root of
the OROP demand. Further, and even more unfairly, the Jawan is equated
with a Class D government employee.
Public cost
There has been much discussion regarding what OROP would cost the
exchequer. Many opined it was unaffordable, and further that other
government servants would also demand OROP if granted to Veterans.
However Veterans maintain that OROP cannot be withheld from them because
some others, whose conditions of service and promotions are entirely
different, also demand OROP.
MoD sent the final proposal to implement OROP for Rs.8,300 crores to
Ministry of Finance on 17 February 2015. Adding Rs.8,300 crores to
Rs.43,000 crores of Defence pensions, the total is Rs.51,300 crores per
annum. Veterans argue that when the BJP-NDA budget allowed Rs.5.72 lakh
crores as “revenue foregone” to provide concessions on corporate tax,
commercial tax & customs duties to business houses for just one
year, hesitating at spending less than one-tenth of it on Veterans who
have given the best years of their lives for the nation's defence was a
deliberate slight.
Deliberate neglect of Veterans
There was no member in 6CPC and earlier CPCs to represent soldiers, who
form not merely the single largest segment affected by the decisions of
6CPC, but also form the only segment that is denied fundamental freedoms
under Articles 19(a) and 19(c), and have conditions of service,
promotion and retirement that are adverse when compared with other
categories under consideration of the 6CPC.
The Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare (DESW) was set up in 2004 within
MoD, to formulate policies and programmes for the welfare and
resettlement of Veterans. However, without a single serving soldier or
Veteran in its setup, it has actually been working at cross purposes
with Veterans' welfare. Factually and outrageously, as a matter of
policy DESW contested all cases won by individual Veterans in courts of
law, including one case concerning a paltry Rs.702 per month won by a
disabled soldier after litigating in a High Court.
Last word
A large section of the public including legislators, are ignorant of
soldiers' working conditions – early retirement, non-family stations and
long separations, continual life-threatening stressful situations,
risks on-the-ground and in-the-field, high casualty rate, strict
disciplinary regime under military law, denial of fundamental rights,
etc. The tragedy is that they are not even interested in knowing, let
alone understanding.
After promises have remained unimplemented, very recently PM Modi made a
statement that OROP was not clearly defined. This raised doubts among
Veterans regarding which vested interest has sown this “doubt” in the
PM's mind, though most believe that these are IAS-sourced machinations.
This belief is supported in large measure by the composition and conduct
of successive CPCs and the attitude and manner of functioning of the
Department of Ex-Servicemen's Welfare (DESW) under MoD, outlined
earlier.
Veterans hold Mr. Modi accountable to promises made as PM-candidate and
later as PM. Sensing the growing disappointment and anger among
Veterans, the PM is reported to have tweeted that Veterans have waited
40 years and should not mind waiting a little more to solve the OROP
muddle. IESM has demanded that government commit a definite date by
which OROP would be implemented, failing which a peaceful, dignified
Maha-Rally would be held on Sunday 14 June 2015 at Jantar Mantar, New
Delhi, with simultaneous rallies in some state capitals and other cities
with a large Veterans' presence. This is to be followed by an
indefinite relay fast starting 15 June.
Government's continued neglect of veterans is actually a double whammy
on the country. On the one hand, valuable trained manpower is being
lost, and on the other hand impecunious soldiers are joining the ranks
of the unemployed or under-employed and exacerbating the current high
levels of country-wide discontent.
It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that OROP is a matter
of simple justice. Some Veterans say that governments playing with their
patience at the behest of vested interests that delay or deny OROP, are
figuratively playing with a bomb with a slow-burning fuse. Only time
will tell whether the Maha-Rally will result in grant of OROP, or
whether the vested interests succeed in destroying the bond between the
soldier-veteran on the one hand and the government on the other.
Major General S.G. Vombatkere, VSM, retired in 1996 as
Additional DG Discipline & Vigilance in Army HQ AG's Branch. He
holds a PhD degree in Structural Dynamics from I.I.T, Madras. He is
Adjunct Associate Professor of the University of Iowa, USA, in
international studies. With over 400 published papers in national and
international journals and seminars, his current area of interest is
strategic and development-related issues.
E-mail:sg9kere@live.com
(Source- Countercurrents.org )
No comments:
Post a Comment