National

Defence Dissent

Parliament suggests a separate pay commission to address the forces' grievances

Advertisement

Defence Dissent
info_icon

JUST three months after the Fifth Pay Commission submitted its recommendations, stirrings of dissent are audible. Last week, on the basis of grievances voiced by the defence forces, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence directed the government to examine the feasibility of setting up a separate pay commission for the forces. Making many observers wonder whether the three-year exercise undertaken by the Pay Commission had come to naught. The defence personnel's grievances stem from certain basic discrepancies. While 13 months' pay in a year has been recommended for BSF, CRPF and ITBP personnel, this benefit has not been extended to the forces; while the Model Cadre Structure for the IAS and other Group A services prescribes that 17 per cent of the total service strength be at the joint secretary-level, only 0.5 per cent of the forces enjoy the salary and perks of that seniority. Worse, for troops serving in the North-east, a special allowance (12.5 per cent of the basic pay) has not been provided for. "This is blatantly unfair and a perfect recipe for a national disaster," says Brig S.P. Sibal, the armed forces adviser to the Commission. In fact, so vehement was the opposition that last month  the three service chiefs met the then prime minister, H.D. Deve Gowda, to protest against "a bid to demoralise the forces".

Advertisement

But dissent is not limited to the defence forces. Employee unions are up in arms against the proposal to increase the retirement age from 58 to 60 years on the grounds that it would hamper job openings; and central government officers have alleged inherent biases in the Commission, saying it is "a report by the IAS for the IAS".

 Even the recommendations relating to administrative reforms are being dubbed impractical, despite the fact that the Committee of Secretaries, constituted to vet the proposals before they are placed before the Cabinet, gave most proposals a green signal. Only two, regarding Income Tax exemption for government servants and a proposal to introduce a telephone-operator allowance for those above the rank of deputy secretary, were rejected outright. "We are very hopeful of pushing most of the proposals through," claims an insider.

Advertisement

However, for all practical purposes, a bureaucratic stamp of approval in a coalition government means little. Soon after the report was submitted to the government, the Left termed it "elitist and retrograde". And with Prime Minister I.K. Gujral's self-proclaimed "Left to the centre" leanings and the financial implications of the proposed wage-hike, the chances of the recommendations being implemented remain doubtful. So much so that Pay Commission insiders are wondering: was the effort worth it?

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement