Tuesday, 23 December 2014

21st All India Conference


Bhilai entices you. Representatives, Delegates and Active Corps of the Postal National union movement will converge at Bhilai from 20th to 22nd January, 2015 in the mammoth gathering to review the activities of the union in the last two years, analyze the present situation, take a peep into the future, and resolve upon the further steps to be taken to realize our objectives in the 21st  AIC of NAPE, Group C.

A new Government at the center formed and there are apprehensions in the minds of postal workers about their future. New Technology is introduced rapidly into the India Post for modernization and entering into the market competition. The burden of UPSO and consequent cross border subsidy continues. India Post mooted to have a strategic plan for  development and sustenance.

The task force on leverage of post office net work suggested holding companies with subsidiary companies designated as strategic business units, 100% owned by Department of post. Corporatization of postal services in very near future is  a reality.

There is no tangible movement for the sectional problems like  DA merger Interim relief, MACP, Postmaster Cadre, problems faced in the New Technology. we have to formulate our demands and resolutions. The efficiency in the service is our concern. We are capable of doing it in Govt. owned Departments.

          Trek to Bhilai in large numbers, we are looking forward to return from Bhilai with hands laden with destiny. Let us make the 21st AIC  a historic one. And again, on to Bhilai


No proposal to reduce retirement age from 60 to 58 years:

  1. No proposal to reduce retirement age from 60 to 58 years:

There is no proposal to reduce the retirement age of employees from 60 to 58 years, the Centre said on Thursday even as it noted that 78% of its total wage bill of over Rs one lakh crore is spent on three departments-- railways, home and defence (civil).
In a written reply in Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,Jitendra Singh said, "The retirement age for Central Government employees was revised from 58-60 years in 1997 on the basis of recommendations of the fifth Central Pay Commission," and that there is no such proposal "at present" to reduce the age. To a query whether the Centre's was aware of the Haryanagovernment's move to reduce the retirement age of its employees, Singh replied in affirmative saying, "The various state governments are having their own service conditions for their employees."
He also ruled out that there was any proposal to fix single retirement age limit policy in all state government's and PSU in the country. "There is no such proposal at present. Age of retirement in state governments/PSUs is decided by respective state governments and board of PSUs etc depending on their requirements," Singh said.
The Minister also said that the total wage bill of central government employees in 2012-13 was Rs 1.04 lakh crore whereas in 2011-12 it was Rs 92,264.88 crore and in 2010-11 it was Rs 85,963.50 crore. The details in  the reply showed the highest wage bill was that of the railways which incurred Rs 38,560 crore (almost 38% of total wage bill) in 2012-13, Rs 35,097.08 crore in 2011-12 and Rs 33,580.41 crore in 2010-11.
Followed by the railways, the home department had the next highest wage bill of Rs 25,113.14 crore in 2012-13, Rs 20,036.76 crore in 2011-12 and Rs 17,809.16 crore in 2010-12, he said. The Minister said defence (civil) had the third highest wage bill with Rs 14,502 crore incurred in 2012-13, Rs 13,102.38 crore in 2011-12 and Rs 12,127.92 crore in 2010-11. The cumulative wage bill for three departments was Rs 78,175 crore which comes to about 78 per cent of the total wage bill of over Rs one lakh crore incurred in 2012-13.

Can’t recover excess salary paid to class III, IV staff: SC

Supreme CourtNEW DELHI: Recovery of excess amount paid to Class-III and Class-IV employees due to employer's mistake is not permissible in law, the Supreme Court has ruled saying that it would cause extremely harsh consequences to them who are totally dependent on their wages to run their family. 

The apex court said employees of lower rung service spend their entire earning in the upkeep and welfare of their family, and if such excess payment is allowed to be recovered from them, it would cause them far more hardship, than the reciprocal gains to the employer. 

A bench of JS Khehar and Arun Mishra also directed that an employer cannot recover excess amount in case of a retired employee or one who is to retire within one year and where recovery process is initiated five years after excess payment.