PDA

View Full Version : retirement age at 62 years.



Mitakanjilal
12-07-2009, 08:54 PM
Dear friend , Is it true that Govt. All medical offier will be retired at the age 62 years?then why not for others?
mkanjilal

jitendraacr
12-07-2009, 10:06 PM
Dear friend
there is no truth that retirement age is going to increase in near future. All authorities including FM/PM have denied it. Why we are hoping so.
Jitendra

Mitakanjilal
13-07-2009, 09:55 AM
Dear friend

Mitakanjilal
13-07-2009, 10:04 AM
Dear friend
I am sure that in my hospital it is already applied the retirement age for Specialist doctor at the age of 62 years . And now another processing is going on for all Medical officers the retirement age at the age of 62 .Just all MO are waiting for orders from head qurters. I am sure because I am working in ESIC it is a CENTRAL GOVT. organization and our head querters is at NEW Delhi Kotla road, The authority says that it is a reomendation from 6th pay ommossion order for DOCTORS only.
my question is why this should not be applicable for others ?

coolgoose2
13-07-2009, 11:50 AM
Dear friend
I am sure that in my hospital it is already applied the retirement age for Specialist doctor at the age of 62 years . And now another processing is going on for all Medical officers the retirement age at the age of 62 .Just all MO are waiting for orders from head qurters. I am sure because I am working in ESIC it is a CENTRAL GOVT. organization and our head querters is at NEW Delhi Kotla road, The authority says that it is a reomendation from 6th pay ommossion order for DOCTORS only.
my question is why this should not be applicable for others ?

My dear friend,

Why do the Govt need to increase the retirement age ? I personally feel that the retirement age should be reduced to 55 years to make young people an opportunity and also to make average age of goverment servants young.. No body can dispute that as age progress, the ability to work decreases. It is high time, Govt thinks seriously about reducing the retirement age of employees, except in cases like Doctors etc, and make Govt service a contract-based one.

Inviting a serious discussion on this issue from the seniors

regards

:):):)

CGman
13-07-2009, 02:14 PM
But will the unions agree for reducing the retirement age?

vnatarajan
13-07-2009, 06:39 PM
Dear All

After 6CPC, the Govt appears to encourage early retirements with good benefits. I feel it is the wisdom of babus, who have nothing but the "self-interests" as their motto. May be it is because they ensure reaching the top by everyone among the elite, and hence there is no need or use for them to continue in the Govt. and instead if they can get out and barge into many MNCs/ similarly large domestic Corporates, they will have best of all the worlds.

Many of them hold multiple posts while in service and so their cumulative multi-service far exceeds 33 years achieved within a span of 20 to 25 years! So why serve more?

Doctors in Govt service-PARTCULARLY like CGHS - I feel must be allowed to enter service only after 60-62 years as I feel quite a few of them are not reconciled to do the noble duties of a doctor that has to be in "Govt environment" because of the bureaucratic conditions, limitations, administrative/ managerial problems, facing unions, NOT BEING ABLE TO COPE UP WITH THE NATURAL SENILITY OF A FEW VERY OLD/ HELPLESS PENSIONER-PATIENTS with patience, correct temperament, compassion etc. So I felt OLDER/ MATURE/ SELF-LESS, COMPASSIONATE, LESS AMBITIOUS DOCTORS may be better suited to serve in Govt. environments etc.!

I have written this with a mixed feeling of dejection and appreciation- based on my 11 years of "after-retirement" contact with CGHS dispensaries/ doctors!

vnatarajan

sundarar
13-07-2009, 09:17 PM
Dear Sirs,

The 6CPC Report in this regard is reproduced for kind information.

"Para 6.2.3: The Commission has received many demands for increasing the age of superannuation further keeping in view the increased longevity and better health care facilities leading to improved health standards.
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had sent a proposal seeking enhancement of the age of superannuation of General Duty Medical Officers of Central Health Service.

Para 6.2.4:............................................ .........................
The Vth CPC, in their wisdom, thought that a general increase in the age of superannuation coupled with total ban on extension of service except for certain specified categories will remove this tendency to seek extension beyond the prescribed age of superannuation. This has clearly not happened..................
The Commission is also not in favour of recommending a blanket increase in the age of superannuation for all GDMOs belonging to CHS.
The Commission recommends that the current age of superannuation should be maintained. Further, except in the case of Scientists, and Medical Specialists, no extensions should be given in any other case. Tenure based posts should be filled by incumbents who have sufficient period of service left before the stipulated age of retirement. Medical Specialists and Scientists, may however, be allowed extension of service of upto 2 years on a case to case basis".

Best Regards
Sundarar.

Kanaujiaml
16-07-2009, 03:44 PM
Reducing the retirement age to 55 years is in everybody's interest. It should be done in steps so that the would be retirees could plan their settlements timely. It should be made equally applicable to all, without any exceptions. However, Govt. would not accept it because the pensionery burden would increase initially, though, it would come down gradually. More jobs would be available for the younger lots easing out unemployment problem. Secondly and most importantly, Govt. should make use of pensioners of age 55 and above and upto 60 (who are being paid pensions from Govt. exchecker) in some manner or the other, without any payment. It is amazing that we have got such a large force of people (i. e. pensioners) having the vast experience,knowledge and training, but actually having nothing to do, except a few of them ?

jarunan
18-07-2009, 11:27 PM
There is a strong rumour that the retirement age is being reduced by two years i.e. 58 yrs across the board. Is this only a rumour or is there some substance in this. Can anybody clarify?

kgkacharya
14-08-2009, 09:55 AM
There is a strong roumer about enhancement of retirement age from 60 to 62 by the Government. Please see staff corner.com website http://staffcorner.com/blog/2009/08/13/retirement-age-of-central-government-staff-to-be-raised-to-62
Retirement age of central government staff to be raised to 62?
Written by Administrator on August 13th, 2009

The government is actively considering raising the retirement age of all central government employees, including those in the armed forces, from the present 60 to 62 years.

Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has submitted a report to the prime minister outlining all the pros and cons of the move, including the “cascading effects” on government employment and the huge savings, at least for two years, on account of retirement payouts.

If the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) and the prime minister find the arguments forwarded by the finance ministry credible and convincing, the announcement may come as early as August 15, as part of Manmohan Singh’s Independence Day speech.

The Cabinet may discuss the matter tomorrow.

Although the finance ministry is making a strong case for the move, the DoPT is taking time to make up its mind, possibly out of consideration for the 1979 batch of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and other central services. Officers of the 1979 batch have been empanelled for promotion to the ranks of additional secretary and secretary but can take up their posts only after the present incumbents retire. If an announcement extending the retirement age comes before November, a batch of empanelled joint secretaries stand to lose their future ranks. In turn, this will also affect those who joined the central administrative services in 1980. The DoPT also says that the age profile of Indian bureaucrats, instead of becoming younger, will become older, out of tune with the rest of the world.

For the finance ministry, the gains from the move are clear. The pension payout of all armed forces personnel of the rank of Lieutenant General and equivalent who were to retire this year will be postponed by 24 months; the government will also defer by two years the liability of paying pension to more than 100,000 employees. While salaries will have to continue to be paid, this will be cheaper than paying upfront benefits like gratuity.

This is all the more important given the government’s other financial liabilities on account of stimulus spending and one drought, though the effects of the latter will kick in only in the next fiscal year. The fiscal deficit is 6.8 per cent of gross domestic product this year and a two-year lag in paying pensions will help in bridging this.

In 1998, the National Democratic Alliance government had raised the retirement age from 58 to 60, a move that benefitted 90,000 government servants and 50,000 defence personnel. At the time, the logic was: the retirement of 140,000 employees would have cost Rs 5,200 crore whereas paying salaries cost only Rs 1,493 crore.

That move came in the wake of the 5th Pay Commission report which had just been implemented by the then United Front government. In 2003, the government also right-sized the central government employee workforce by 30 per cent.

Every time the Centre announces an increase or concession on pay packages, both public-sector units and state governments follow suit. If the prime minister does decide to raise the retirement age, state governments and Public Sector Units (PSUs) will mirror this action. This has its own implications for many cash-strapped states like Punjab.

If the decision is finally taken, it will only be the third time the government will have raised the retirement age. Jawaharlal Nehru was the first prime minister to have increased the age of superannuation from 55 to 58 following the 1962 war with China. The Atal Bihari Vajpayee government did it a second time in 1998.