As
scheduled, the Information sharing meeting was conducted on 13.2.2014. The
meeting began with a Joint session consisting of all unions.
JOINT
SESSION
The management was represented by the
Chairman Shri S K Roy, all the Managing
Directors, ED (Personnel) & Director (MDC). NOINO was represented by Dr. S B Sharan, WP, NOINO; Shri Rajesh Dubey, OS, NOINO; & Shri Dattaraj Prabhukhanolkar, Resident
Secretary, NOINO. The ED (P) initiated the meeting. All the Managing Directors spoke one by one about
their own Departments. Then the Chairman spoke. In his speech, he took stock of
the Economic environment in the country & the world. He also lauded the
Corporation’s performance in spite of the stiff competition. He also made the
following points:-
1.
Biometric system of
attendance was being considered to replace the present system of Concurrencia.
2.
Mobility of employees was
suggested.
3.
Increase in cash hours by
one hour.
4.
The limits of
reimbursement of High Cost Protracted Treatment would be revised - with the
restriction of two chances likely to be removed & employees could be able
to avail up to 90% of the total cost after availing of mediclaim
re-imbursement.
5.
The limit of Group
Personal Accident policy which at present is 5 lakhs for all cadres is likely
to be revised with a structured cover ranging between 10 to 25 lakhs.
However, contrary to the expectations, he did not make any offer of wage-rise
in his speech.
On behalf of
NOINO, Dr. S B Sharan, Working President, NOINO, responded to the
Chairman’s and MDs’ speeches. He expressed deep disappointment that no offer of
wage-rise had been given. He said that considering the various factors like
increasing inflation, increasing work-pressure on Class I Officers due to
inadequate staff, continuous late sitting without compensation, an outstanding
performance in spite of stiff competition (retaining & improving the
market-share), the management should have come out with an offer of substantial
wage-rise. He also protested the veiled attack on union work (like union work
to be done after office hours etc) & said that unions have a significant
role to play in the growth of the Corporation & also in maintaining peace
& harmony in the Industry.
On behalf
of NOINO, he demanded that the management come out with immediate &
substantial offer of wage-rise. He further suggested that information sharing
meetings should be held at least once in six months so that the Management
could regularly know the sentiments and mood of the employees and officers.
During the joint session, NOINO
was the only union which spoke about Sabbatical
Leave/Child care leave, Late Sitting and monetary compensation towards the same,
Investment Matters, Health Insurance Policies, LTC, and ways of retaining
agency force.
When responses of all
unions completed, the Chairman gave his concluding speech. Here he assured that
on the basis of come-out of individual discussions with different unions, the
management would soon chalk-out some best possible offer on wage revision and
would soon call all unions again for discussion over that. He further stated
that one more pension option was on priority agenda and management would be
following up the matter with the Govt till it got that.
INDIVIDUAL
SESSION WITH NOINO
After the joint session, NOINO had
separate talks with the management. In this meeting the management was
represented by Shri M.R.Kumar, ED (P), Shri T R Mendiratta, Chief (P), Smt.
Aruna Seth, Secretary (P) and other officers from Personnel Deptt. NOINO was
represented by Dr. S B Sharan, WP,
NOINO; Shri Rajesh Dubey, OS, NOINO;
Shri Dattaraj Prabhukhanolkar,
Resident Secretary, NOINO; and Shri Ketan
Purandare, EC member, NOINO. The following issues were discussed (It is to
be noted that we first raised the issues which we felt that these should be
settled before & outside the wage-revision):-
- One more pension
option: - We reiterated our oft-repeated demand of settling
this issue before & outside the settlement of charter. While responding to the
Unions’ reaction Chairman had said in his concluding speech during Joint
Session that Management is concerned on this issue and assured that they would keep following
with Government about it till we got it. Here, in Individual Session
also, the ED (P) repeated the same version.
- Anomaly after
computer increment: - We once again raised this demand & reminded that
SBI had settled this issue in 1996 itself (i.e. 18 years back) by granting
one more increment to all the affected employees. We strongly insisted
that this matter be sorted out before the settlement of Charter. We
pointed out that the anomaly was crystal clear & it was a clear case
of injustice to the affected employees. Management
was not positive, however, on our insistence they assured to look into the
matter.
- Excess Wrong Payments – We pointed out that the officers
were pressurized to pay the amounts from their own pockets in the name of
fixing of responsibility. We suggested Fidelity Insurance or a reserve
fund specifically for this purpose can be the other options. Management
said that they will check with Audit Department and will check the
possibility to exclude cases of wrong payments made due to system errors.
- Running scales:- We demanded running pay-bands (continuous
increment till retirement) to avoid stagnation since promotion avenues
were restricted. We also pointed out that we had prepared & submitted
such running scales in the Charter submitted by NOINO. Management
was not positive on the same.
- Assured Career Progression(ACP):- Though exactly not connected
with wage-revision, we demanded assured career progression to avoid frustration of officers of not getting
promotions in time. On this issue the Management differed with us on the
definition of Career Progression. As
per Management view a holistic career approach is required and is under
consideration.
- Grade Pay:- We demanded that
the concept of Grade Pay on the lines of
Sixth Pay commission & RBI to be introduced in LIC. (As
submitted in our Charter : AAO -> 3000, AO -> 5000, ADM -> 7000,
DM -> 9000, SDM -> 11000, ZM(O) -> 13000, ZM(S) -> 15000). This will be a motivating factor for
accepting promotion. Management was positive in the
matter.
- Increment portion as percentage: We demanded 5% of Pay (Basic
pay plus Grade pay) as increment instead of fixed amount of increment.
This has been implemented by the Sixth Pay commission. Management
was not positive on this matter.
After
this, we discussed the following issues which are aimed at giving relief (monetary
or otherwise) to the Class I Officers:-
A.
PLLI: - You are
aware that NOINO has raised this issue continuously. We thanked the management
for considering our demand to take into account the credit of premium from
alternate channels. We once again raised this issue & stressed the
following points for the next year:- a) equal percentage to all b) Simplification of
parameters & including those parameters on which the employees have
control c) Current basic to be
counted for calculation. Management responded that the scheme stands already
notified with wage revision of 2007 and that these points will be given due
consideration in wage revision for 2012.
B.
Revision in LTC rules and Encashment
of LTC: - We
repeated our demand to simplify LTC rules; allow LTC encashment; allow
air-travel to all Class I Officers. Management was positive on this issue and informed that
this may take some time.
C.
Sabbatical/Child care leave for women
employees: - We again
raised this demand for sabbatical/child care leave for women employees &
said that the banks/central government had already introduced this leave much
earlier. We demanded that this leave should be introduced at the earliest in
LIC after proper discussions &
requisite modifications. ED (P) informed that Chairman had already taken note of
this issue put by NOINO during joint session.
D.
Late sitting/Security of employees:- We urged the management to give a
serious thought to the whole issue of late sitting & most importantly the
security of female officers & their safe transit to their respective homes.
We also demanded monetary compensation for late sitting. Management was positive in the matter of
security and safe transit of female employees/officers.
E.
Recruitment in Class III: - We once again raised this demand.
We reiterated that the Class I Officers were under tremendous pressure due to
lack of staff as they had to perform non-supervisory duties. Management
responded that this will be considered only after the obstacle of pending legal
litigation is removed.
F.
Technical allowances for Class I
Officers having professional qualifications: - We once again raised this issue. Management was not positive in the matter. However, they stated that allowance for exams
cleared from Insurance Institute of India and Actuarial Institute can be given
consideration.
G.
Election
duty:- We thanked the management for accepting our demands of appointing
nodal officers & issuing uniform instructions. However, we said that the
number of employees to be spared should be decided by us. The EC officials were
pressurizing the nodal officers in some divisions to release at least 25%
employees. It is pertinent to note that nowhere a specific percentage has been
mentioned in the Mumbai High Court Judgement of 2009. Management noted our
points.
H.
Granting
of Metro status to Pune & considering Panvel as an agglomeration of Mumbai
& treating it as an “A” class city: - We raised this issue again. Management told that they would check with Government
authorities about the changes in population and will then consider the demand.
