- Equal percentage:- The percentage of PLLI payable should be equal to all employees. Paying different percentages to each office divides the employees & causes unrest. This does not bode well for an institution which is facing intense & stiff competition. Here, the basic point is that the policy making/devising strategy is done at Central Office level in all matters be it devising plans, marketing strategy, provision of manpower, publicity of our plans et al. The success or otherwise of the institution largely depends upon these policies/strategies. Branch/Division employees have no say in all these matters. So, it is paradoxical & ironic that the branch/division employees get less PLLI than that of the Corporate level. Hence we maintain that equal percentage of PLLI should be paid at all levels.
- Too many parameters :- Too many parameters have made this concept complicated. We have been insisting on a single parameter e.g. increase in Total income.
- Payment on pre-revised annual pay of August 2007 :- We have been insisting that the payment should be based on current annual pay.
- Performance parameters to be made public(to employees) :- How many employees know what the performance parameters are? How can we expect the employees to achieve the target without knowing it? We reiterate that the performance parameters should be declared before the commencement of the Financial year & all the employees should be in the know of the same.
- Faulty parameters :-
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
NOINO writes to ED(P) on PLLI
NOINO today wrote to ED(Personnel) suggesting some steps which can remove the rising resentment (dissatisfaction) among the officers / employees on this issue. The letter is reproduced below:
The Executive Director (Personnel),
L.I.C. of India.
Re: Payment of PLLI
The PLLI for the FY 2012-13 has been declared. The declaration has evoked more consternation & resentment than joy among the employees. Preliminary enquiries reveal that almost all divisions in CZ, SZ, WZ, EZ & NCZ would be getting less than the Corporate 3% (mostly 1.5% or 2%). According to our information, the employees of some branches have even decided not to accept PLLI.
We have been time & again placing our objections in the modalities & formula of calculating such an incentive (?!). We have also been giving our suggestions on this issue through our discussions with & letters to the management. However, till now, these have not been considered. As a consequence, we are facing such a situation. Here we would like to once again draw your attention to the points raised in our letter submitted on this issue on 30.11.2011. At the cost of repetition, we would reiterate the same along with some additional suggestion/objections:-
a. Point 1.3:- %age growth of Total premium—As per our information, about 50 to 60% renewal premium comes from alternate channels i.e. ECS/online payments etc. The credit of the same is not given to the branch/division. This policy has not been decided by the employees. Naturally, the Total premium income is less.
b. Point 1.3 continued:- In the previous years, focus was more on Single Premium Income. The Corporation also did bumper business due to this. Now the focus has changed to non-single premium. Logically, more Single Premium business in previous years means less renewal premium in consequent years. Thus, it is very difficult to show growth. The policy of shifting focus has not been decided by employees.
c. Point 2.1:--Conservation ratio:- In this, it is decided that Single premium & ULIP premiums is to be excluded. Once again it depends on the points raised in point 1.3. The employees have no control on the marketing strategy decided by Central Office.
d. Point 2.2:- Overall lapsation ratio:- If a policyholder doesn’t pay premium even after sending premium notice/default notice & follow-up through agents & development officers, what can the employees do? The employees have no control over this.
e. Point 3.1:- Productivity measured in terms of total premium income per employee:- In the aftermath of liberalization(?!), the demography of states & the nation is changing. A lot of people are migrating to metro cities & bigger towns. Consequently, though they pay premium where they have migrated, the credit of such premium is not available to the branches where it is paid. The result is that the employees in such places have to provide more services in proportion to the premium income. The employee have no control over this factor.
f. Point 6.1:- Skill enhancement of employees & agents:- As far as the training of agents is concerned, it is observed that many agents do not attend training in spite of being nominated & urged to attend the training. How can be the employees penalized for this?
g. Point 7.1:- E-governance:- E-payment to customers:- The employees can motivate the policyholders to submit NEFT mandate form, not force them. Hence, this factor is also not fully under control of the employees.
h. Point 9.1:- Micro Insurance Schemes:- It depends upon geographical area & economic status of the division. It is unlikely that in metro cities the scheme will be successful as compared to other areas. How much publicity has been given by Central Office to these schemes? Here again the role of the employees is limited.
From the above analysis it is crystal clear that maximum PLLI is not possible as the above points affect nearly 36% marks.
As said in our earlier letter, the objective of any Incentive scheme should be motivating the employees in putting in their best instead of demoralising them. As it is, due to the artificial & low ceilings, an overwhelming majority of the employees have been deprived of the bonus for years together. BMS, the Central trade union to which NOINO is affiliated has putting forth its view that bonus is nothing but deferred wages which is a cushion for inflation not taken care by the skewed DA formula. PLLI could have been our own answer to deferred wages & also an alternative to break away from the “bank pattern”. It still can be, if rational & reasonable suggestions from the employee organizations are heeded.
We request you to have a re-think of the whole issue of PLLI & consider our demands at the earliest.
Anagha SantGS, NOINO