On September 5,
2015, in response to an agitation by retired soldiers of the Indian Army,
commonly called "veterans" for a better deal in their pensions, the
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)- led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government
announced the acceptance of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme.
There was much
celebration, in certain quarters only, on acceptance of a demand of Indian
soldiers that had been held back by governments led by both the Congress and
the BJP. Among the veterans and the defence services fraternity, there was a
sense of disquiet, since it was largely perceived that the award given was not
in consonance with the definition of OROP.While Union
Finance Minister
Arun Jaitley has recently delivered the third budget of his government and the
second full fledged one, the veterans continue to wallow at Jantar Mantar, New
Delhi, since their OROP demand has neither been met nor implemented in letter
and spirit.
It would be
fallacious to think that the NDA government would not be concerned about the
continued impasse on this sensitive topic for which it feels it has walked the
extra mile. The agony of the government would be propounded by the fact that
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has always held the country`s armed forces in very
high esteem.
No better example
of his feelings can be given beyond the fact that he spends Diwali, the most
revered festival of the Hindus, with Indian troops on the border.At this stage,
when the impasse remains an embarrassment even after the passage of three budgets,
it is time to see if there is a way out of this logjam.
The OROP order, as
it stands, is re-fixing pension on the basis of the calendar year as 2013; it
also envisages re-fixing of pensions every five years.The prime objective of
seeking OROP is seeking parity in pension for all defence forces retirees in
their particular rank to an acceptable extent.
A five-year
revision scheme will only increase the gap in the parity sought.Another
contentious issue is the clause that the personnel, who opt for discharge at
their own request after completion of colour service, will not be entitled to
the benefits of OROP. This clause does not consider the fact that leaving after
completion of "colour service," entails having served the minimum
period required by law to earn a full pension.
The veterans feel
that the aforementioned award is not in consonance with the accepted definition
of OROP, as approved by Parliament. The veterans further feel that this
dispensation will lead to a situation of One Rank Many Pensions instead of One
Rank One Pension.The apprehensions of the veterans and even the serving
personnel of the defence services stand further aggravated by the position on
the subject taken by the 7th Central Pay Commission (CPC) that, in its
recommendations, has failed to cater for traditional compensation granted to
defence personnel to cater for their truncated careers.
The idea is to
bridge the massive gap between civilian and defence retirees. As things stand
now, the defence personnel are at a disadvantage vis-a-vis their civilian
central government counterparts in terms of life time earnings due to early
retirement further compounded by aborted pension.Since the pension of current
retirees is passed on to the past retirees through OROP, the position of the 7th
CPC will adversely impact the effectiveness of the OROP scheme.
Unlike the OROP
scheme for defence pensioners, a similar scheme recommended by 7th CPC for
civilian/CAPF personnel, is superior, especially since it has no conditions
regarding applicability.
All seemingly
complex issues have an inherent simple solution. In the case of OROP, there is
a simple solution in case the government can muster the courage to implement
the same. The government can easily grant pension based on maximum model
instead of average and award revision of OROP biennially instead of five
yearly.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/government-should-bring-closure-to-orop-impasse_1862316.html
Veteran's Day, who are we honoring?
ReplyDeletemilitary history