India Today says that as per General Bipin Rawat , the Chief of
Defence Staff (CDS), the rise in budget outlay for pensions of armed forces
personnel is "unsustainable" and three Services are conducting a
study to analyse the feasibility of extending the retirement age of jawans till
58. The CDS is quoted to have said “I think one-third of the Indian Army can go
till 58. Today, you are sending a chap home at 38, and he lives till around 70.
So, for 17 years of service, you give 30-32 years of pension. Why not give him
38 years of service and then give him 20 years of pension? We are reversing the
trend[1]".
I am sure he made a very considered statement.
There have been many reactions from veterans and experts of high
standing. The focus has been on the dangers of greying and ageing Armed Forces.
Well they have a huge point and cannot be wished away. However, let us discount
this factor for the present. Even then, if one were to adopt the proposal of
the CDS, there are a lot of wrinkles which need ironing. It should not so happen that the CDS solves
one problem to land us in a bevy of others. I am sure that the Services will
take a holistic look at this proposal and then come to a sensible decision. This
analysis only highlights the wrinkles which are appearing ahead in this proposal.
At the outset it is presumed that the honourable intention of the
CDS is to reduce the outgo on defense pensions to increase the availability of
budgets for infrastructure and capital expenditure. That is perfectly valid and I respect it.
However, the first question to answer is that has the Government committed
itself to do so? Unless the government comes across in black and white, there
is no point in going this route. Otherwise we will have an ageing Armed Forces
with lesser budgets. Then we will be worse off.
The second issue which needs clarification is that - is this
proposal for all the Services or for the Indian Army alone? The statement of
the CDS is dichotomous. He has explicitly stated that 1/3rd of the
Army can go on till 58. What about the Navy and Air Force? Are they on board? Let
us assume that the 1/3rd rule applies to the Air Force and Navy also
and move ahead with the analysis.
The basic issue is that if the proposal of 1/3rd
retirement at 58 is applied, approximately 5 lakhs jobs will be lost to the
Government in the next 20 years at the minimum. Unemployment, Unemployment and
Unemployment. What will the social acceptability be and what will it do the
vote banks of any political party? As it is lack of jobs is a political issue. My
guess is the Government and political party which imposes this rule will be
voted out of power on a permanent basis in India. the political class will never back this proposal.
If 1/3rd of the Armed Forces retire at 58, what will be
the effect on promotions? Way back in 1997, retirement ages were increased by
two years for officers across the board. I was on the verge of being promoted
to the rank of Col and take over command of my unit. I had to wait two years to
pick up my rank. It was one of the most frustrating periods of my life. This proposal sets the clock back by 20
years! Even if 1/3rd only go on to 58, all the available promotion
will be taken up by the seniors who will go on to 58! The Assured Career
Progression Model for PBOR will be turned on its head. What about Morale? Just
imagine a PBOR in service till 58 without any promotion and stagnating wherever
he is. What will be his mental makeup when he watches an officer smoothly
climbing his ladder of success and becoming a General! Just imagine a JCO with
10 years’ service continuing for the next 20 years in that rank! Clogged
pipelines! What will be the internal fall out?
I shudder to think of the consequences.
One might save on defence pensions for now. However, this step is
only a post-dated IOU for doubling defence pensions at the minimum. Look, in
the eventuality of not reducing numbers, all those who are in the pipeline will
have to be paid pension at some stage. For 1/3rd of the Armed Forces
we will pay pension at the highest scale at the highest possible rank / pay. I
will be dead and gone, the future will bear the burden. So be it? Let us not
forget that we are talking of a 10 Trillion Dollar Plus economy with high
growth rates. Hence salaries will also grow equally. It is beyond my
imagination. I do hope some financial whiz will put down numbers and prove my
mental math wrong.
What will be the effect on infrastructure? A disproportionate lot
of senior JCOs and NCOs who cannot be posted to field areas will be in service for
two decades. This means they will be in peace stations. This will also be the
time when they must settle families and other commitments. They will need a
bigger set of facilities and infrastructure to cater to their requirements.
Have we thought of that?
Then there is an issue of inequity. Who are best suited to go on
till 58? People in Logistics and Medical Services. They do not require supreme
fitness. Who will continue to go out in the thirties like they do now?
Riflemen, Gunners, Drivers, Sappers and others who are required to be fit. Who
are best suited for civil employment? People in logistics! Who are most
unsuited for civil employment? Gunners,
Drivers, Sappers and others! The nonfighting people who are skilled during
service and can easily get re-employed outside will continue merrily in service
with assured careers and huge pensions. The cutting edge will be cast aside. What
will it do to the fabric of the Armed Forces? This is a major issue of induced
inequity and needs serious consideration.
There is no doubt that we must reduce the Pay and Pension bill so
that our Armed Forces become more affordable and modern. It is something which
the government must consider very seriously. I would be very happy if the
Government constitutes a bipartisan committee to reduce the overall strength
holistically. There are many issues involved in this. It can not be based on preconceived
ideas or protecting holy cows or on firing on a fixed line. I have already
written about this in two articles ( https://palepurshankar.blogspot.com/2020/02/modernising-armed-forces-on-contracting.html
and https://palepurshankar.blogspot.com/2019/12/modernising-armed-forces-on-tight.html ). One might ignore it. To do so
would be folly. One might not agree with all my views. That’s ok. However, come
forth with cogent views. I had also stated that we have a wider national
problem beyond the Pinaka in my article (https://palepurshankar.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-wider-national-problem-beyond.html).
I am now convinced of it.
Does not the iaf already follow this 58 y retirement structure? If I am correct effects of an ageing workforce is already there to see. Better to keep the force young. When one looks at the IN we have some unique structures such as in our artificer cadre. A highly trained workforce who serve upto 15 y (are rapidly promoted to senior supervisory high tech positions) at sea and exit providing for growth, promotions and motivations. In my understanding the technical calibre and hands on experience is so good that they are the first choice for many merchant companies and Gulf Militaries incl air forces. A model for other services to emulate. We seem to be looking at issue too narrowly. What’s needed is a deeper study engaging sociologists than these arbitrary pronouncements.
ReplyDeleteCORRECT to the core of the issue . The tech Artificers are afept in picking up higher aptitude & this they do with alacrity . In Royal Omani Navy & Saudi Navy a large percentage of the core competencies in second-level of maintenance of all platforms at sea are undertaken by our erstwhile boys . Additionally these countries know the USP's of our training modus operandi & have been Very datisfied for the last 3 decades
DeleteThe presumption that personnel of services branches can serve upto 58 years age is incorrect. They too are required to serve in tough areas. Imagine an ASC driver in high altitude and the risks that he poses to others. Not only will it be an ageing army but an unfit one too.
ReplyDeleteVery aptly put Sir. We need the CDS to put it through a good HR Company or CDM to look at the cost-benefit analysis holistically across all domains of HR and administration and not just a limited focus on pension bill
ReplyDeleteIt's the government's call to have an army, air force and navy. If it wants, it must find the money too. It's not for the army to self finance it's modernisation by monetising army land or cost cutting by some arbitrary age amendments. If one goes by the pension data of the MoD, more money is spent in financing pension of a small number of highly paid mod civilian retirees than the large number of lowly paid military veterans. If the govt. cannot afford the armed forces, shut it down or reduce the strength. Decisions must be based on study of need, pitfalls, history and affordability.
ReplyDeleteDear Friends,
ReplyDeletebefore we start increasing the retirement ages of even one thirds of the Armed Forces, we must keep in mind that almost 50 % or more of Def Budget including hefty pensions go to our Def Civilian employees incl Babu's of Def Ministry, CDAs, CDA(O)'s,Auditors, all ordanace factory employees, DRDO etc who also enjoy full OROP, NFU, & old age retirements resulting in max pensions. All these civilian employees need to be streamlined & if possible taken to/ put under a different ministry like Home Ministry etc. We as a strong & young Armed force will then not need any pruning of manpower & will even spare cash for modernising. My advice to the able CDS is to put his foot down & demand higher allocations for the Def Budgets in keeping with those of our combined adversaries. Let's not cut our vital organs & limbs lest the Babu's demand our very souls! Disbandment of the all-mighty arrogant & self appeasing IAS lobby is long over due. This reduction should come first besides the un earned & undeserved pension & perks of our MPs MLAs etc before touching the Armed Forces. Unfortunately very few of our senior generals Stand upright & prefer to be broken but succumb to bending at every whim & fancy of our politicians & cunning Babu's.
CDS has taken a myopic view. A lion's share of the defence expenditure on salaries and pension goes to the bloody civilians who work against us and that is known to all but kept under the carpet.
ReplyDeleteIf you're looking to lose fat then you need to jump on this brand new custom keto meal plan.
ReplyDeleteTo create this service, licensed nutritionists, fitness trainers, and chefs joined together to develop keto meal plans that are efficient, suitable, money-efficient, and delicious.
Since their first launch in early 2019, thousands of people have already remodeled their body and well-being with the benefits a smart keto meal plan can offer.
Speaking of benefits: clicking this link, you'll discover 8 scientifically-proven ones given by the keto meal plan.