Small Committee Minutes

Small Committee Minutes: P&H HC dismissed our appeals stating that Small Committee minutes are not the final agreement on pension and they are only parleys before agreement and the final agreement came in the form of Pension Regulations. This may be because of the fact that the minutes contained certain points raised by the Unions/Associations which remained alive for further discussions.

After signing the Minutes, the members met again after about a week and finalised the draft Regulations. This draft was signed by all the members of the Committees and was forwarded to the Government for approval. (It appears the points raised by Unions/Associations which remained for further discussion were abandoned.) The draft Regulations have the agreement reached on Updation and Dearness Allowance that they should be in line with RBI formula. Thus the draft Regulations only will conclusively prove our claim that Banks/IBA have agreed to update pension by following the RBI formula.  Instead of relying on the Minutes of the Small Committee we should bring the existence of the Draft Regulations to the notice of the Court. Court may not accept the Small Committee Minutes as the final agreement on pension.

I learn that the copy of the draft Regulations is available in the documents filed by IBA.

Regulation No.35: This was amended in 2003 and the words "wherever applicable" was included. Wherever applicable means it is not applicable to all.

In the Karnataka HC and Kerala HC, IBA stated that Regn.35 is applicable to pensioners who drew their last ten months salary under two Bipartite Settlements and in all such cases updation has been effected as per the formula found in the Regulations. This was accepted by both the HCs. In the Karnataka HC the Court directed the Petitioners to submit a list of pensioners whose pension has not been updated as per the given formula so that it can pass the necessary orders. As no list was not submitted even after the stipulated date, the petition was dismissed.

The pre amended Regulation may be relied on to prove that Updation was there in the scheme which was subsequently removed.

Updation under Regn.35, will not fetch any substantial increase in Pension. Therefore we should focus on RBI formula only.

IBA's acceptance of the fact that Pension Scheme of Banks and RBI should be similar in all respects: In the meeting held on 10/11/1997 to discuss the demand of Unions/Associations for the removal of the clause on forfeiture of past service of the employee who participate in illegal strike and certain other residual issues, Unions/Associations asserted that Pension Settlement in Banks was arrived at explicitly on the premises that it will be exactly in the lines of RBI Pension Scheme.  IBA accepted this claim of the Unions. As Pension Regulations of RBI did not have the clause on forfeiture of past service, IBA agreed to the removal of the clause from Bank Pension Regulations.

The minutes of the meeting should be brought to the notice of the Court to establish that updation as per RBI formula should be extended to Bank Pensioners also.

Pension Funds: Funds available in the Pension Funds include funds provided for payment of pension to future retirees also. Employees who joined the Bank till 31^st March 2010 are eligible for Pension. An employee who joined in 2010 will start drawing pension only in 2045 (assuming he joined the bank when was 25 years of age.) Therefore, the income earned by the funds will exceed the payments out of the funds till such time majority of the members start drawing pension.

Amount available in the Pension Fund is sufficient to meet all the obligations undertaken. As updation has not been accepted by IBA so far, no provision would have been made for updation.

In view of what is stated in the foregoing, claiming availability of funds to meet updation is wrong. Instead the profitability of Banks can be brought to the notice of the Court to establish that Banks can meet the updation cost without difficulty.    

. I have brought the above points to the notice of the Associations in the last three to four years. None of them have reacted to the points raised by me.