NOINO meets Managing Director

A NOINO delegation consisting of Shri Ganesh Kamath, GS, NOINO; Shri Dattaraj Prabhukhanolkar, Divisional Secretary, NOINO Mumbai; & Shri Manish Patankar, EC member, NOINO met Managing Director Shri Sushobhan Sarker on 11^th October 2012. After raising some individual issues, the following general issues were discussed:-

1. Discussions on Charter- We submitted that the Information sharing meeting which was scheduled on 3^rd & 4^th August was postponed. After that, there has been no word on this issue by the management. We demanded that the unions should be invited for discussions on charter immediately. MD assured to discuss this issue with Chairman.
2. PLLI---We strongly demanded payment of uniform PLLI to all with the rise in total income as the sole parameter. MD replied that though no PLLI was payable as per the current norms, the management would certainly explore the possibility of paying some amount.
3. Pension option:---We strongly demanded the settlement of this issue outside & before the wage-revision to pre-empt the possibility of inclusion of the cost of such pension option in the wage-revision. MD said that though things had not moved in this front, he agreed with the demand of settlement of this issue outside wage-revision.
4. Restoration of NGI:- Though we were not part of it, but, in the interest of Class-I community as a whole, we strongly demanded the restoration of NGI against the strike dated 18^th February 2010. MD noted this point & assured to look into the matter.
5. GSLI----We pointed out that the GSLI limits had not been revised after the previous wage-revision & demanded substantial revision of limits immediately. MD assured to look into the matter.
6. Anomaly after Computer Increment----We once again raised this point & demanded that this injustice be removed immediately & the concerned employees be granted one additional increment. MD noted this point.
7. Encashment of LTC & Air travel to all Officers:- We pointed out that in other financial institutions both these facilities were available to the officers & these should be immediately accepted in our institution too. MD has noted this point also.
8. Subsidy on Mediclaim premium:- We pointed out that while this subsidy was 3/4^th for Class III, Class IV & also retired employees(including retired Class I Officers), the subsidy was 2/3^rd for Class I Officers & strongly demanded that the Class I Officers should also be granted 3/4^th subsidy. MD assured to look into the matter.
9. Excess & Wrong payments:- We pointed out that the employees were being pressurized to pay the amounts from their own pockets under the garb of fixing of responsibility. We raised the following points in this matter:-
1. After shifting our dependence to the Computerized system, it is illogical to fix the responsibility, except for gross negligence or intentional mistakes. Even here, it is difficult to prove the gross negligence.
2. The incidence of such cases (the proportion of excess/wrong payments to total payments) is very low. The Outstanding amount is about 40 crores. Out of this only about 40% was outstanding from policyholders.
3. Other options like legal measures can also be explored.
4. Due to shortage of staff, it is not possible to adhere to the usual procedure of one employee each for preparing, checking & passing the voucher. Resultantly, only two instead of three employees do the job. Thus, the risk increases, so also the amount of recovery from each employee.
5. On one hand, we expect the employees to meet the dead-lines of Claims settlement as well as maintain ‘NIL’ ratio & on the other hand we expect that no errors should be committed & manual calculations should be done. It is also expected that while settling claims, even premium should be calculated. This is practically impossible.
6. For the last few years the percentage of recovery is very good (close to 95%). This means that the bulk of the outstanding recoveries pertain to earlier years. This obviously means that the recoveries will be that more difficult since these are old issues. In that case, it would be unjust to push the burden on the employees.
7. We suggested that Fidelity Insurance or a reserve fund specifically for this purpose can be the other options to tide over the bonafide errors of the employees.

     We appealed to the MD to adopt a more humane approach in this matter & instruct the divisional authorities not to be very strict in implementation. Otherwise, the employees would be demoralized after putting in an honest day’s work. MD assured to look positively in this issue.

NOINO would continue to follow-up the pending issues.