Friday, November 29, 2013
A NOINO delegation consisting of Smt Anagha Sant, GS, NOINO; Shri Dattaraj Prabhukhanolkar, Resident Secretary, NOINO; Shri Sanjay Ramdasi, Treasurer, NOINO & Shri Ganesh Kamath, Chief Advisor, NOINO met ED(Personnel) Shri M R Kumar today, i.e. 29th November 2013 to discuss the pending issues of the officers and employees. Shri T Mendiratta, Chief(Personnel) was also present at this meeting. Following issues were discussed:-
1. One more option for pension: - We once again inquired about the current status of this issue. ED (P) said that the issue was high on their agenda & all efforts were being made.
2. Discussions on charter of demands: We once again forcefully demanded the commencement of talks on wage-revision. We also pointed out that there was no official dialogue with unions since 19.3.10. ED (P) said that they were waiting for the go-ahead from the government. We have insisted that the preliminary discussions can begin even without the go-ahead, wherein a consensus can be arrived on the common points of the unions so that the time-lag is reduced.
3. Late sitting and working on holidays: We again raised this issue & pointed out that the situation in our offices, particularly in branches was deteriorating as far as late-sitting was concerned. In this context we raised the following issues: - a) Monetary compensation for late sitting b) No work on holidays c) Recruitment of Class III employees at the earliest d) Security of officers especially female officers—we demanded that the respective division should arrange for conveyance facilities for safe escorting to home. We have suggested that in case of cluster of branches in the near vicinity, minibuses can be arranged by the office. e) No proposals should be registered on the day of completion. ED replied that a possibility of first fortnightly closing in time can be explored after talking to Marketing department. He also said that recruitment of Class III was also on the cards. He further said that the management was sensitive & serious about the security of female officers & would definitely look into the demands that we have made. He was also positive about our suggestion of no registration of proposals on the day of completion.
4. PLLI: - You are aware that NOINO has raised this issue continuously. We once again raised this issue & stressed the following points:- 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 d) Giving credit of premiums collected through alternate channels to respective branches/divisions. E) Making parameters known to the employees before the commencement of the year. ED was positive about the issue of current basic to be counted for calculation purpose (however, this is likely to materialize in the next PLLI). He was also positive about the issue of giving credit of premiums collected through alternate channels.
5. Promotions 2014: You are aware that this issue was raised by NOINO earlier too. We once again raised this issue & reiterated the following points:- a) promotion by application b) Identifying areas of hard postings & relaxation of transfer norms for those posted there. C) declaring areas of posting as in HGA promotion for promotion from HGA to AAO. D) posting ADM where SBM is posted(just as AO is posted where BM is posted) E) Abolish DOPA. ED was not positive about these points. However, he said that all aspects were being considered to accommodate maximum officers.
(Promotion Batches have not been decided yet. Are likely to be declared soon.)
6. Election duty- We once again raised this issue & said that many employees were drafted for election duty in Central Zone. We reminded the management that we had raised this issue on 12.7.13 & had urged that CO should write to all Zones giving reference of the judgments of Mumbai High Court Division bench on 25th September 2009 & 20th June 2013 & give suitable instructions to tackle this issue. ED said that they would be talking to the legal department & thereafter would instruct the Zones accordingly.
7. Mini Offices: The following points were raised :- a) Only Class I Officers have been posted though service is not of a supervisory or managerial nature. b) Forced transfers. C) Inadequate infrastructure-e.g. toilets not available d) No proper connectivity. E) Hardly any enquiries or collection in a day.
We strongly demanded for a review of all mini offices and also for infrastructure available there. ED assured to look into these demands.
8. Sabbatical leave/Child care leave to female employees: - ED said that the management was working on this issue, but it would take time.
9. Restoration of NGI postponed due to Strike dated 18th February 2010- ED was not positive on this issue.
10. Remuneration to SDC staff on migration to Efeap: --ED assured to look into the matter.
11. .Accumulation of PL up to 300 days:- ED was not positive on this issue.
12. 5 days week---ED said that the management was thinking on this issue, though it may take time.
13. LTC & Transfer TE:- We raised the usual points:- a) Airfare to officers b) Cash Re-imbursement if journey not undertaken c) Simplification of rules d) Farthest point of India to be the distance allowed. E) Transfer incidentals not revised for 27 years f) Transportation/packing charges not revised for 16 years. ED said that they were working on all these issues. He was positive on simplification of rules. He was also positive about the revision in transfer incidentals & transportation/packing charges.
14. Revision in limits of high cost treatment:- a) 10 lakhs each time total 20 lakhs should be the limit b) Removal of condition of fixed percentage of re-imbursement. ED was positive about the removal of condition of fixed percentage of re-imbursement.
15. Restriction on mail recipients:- ED was not positive on this issue.
16. Premium for GI scheme & service tax on the same: - We asked as to why the premium seemed to be on the higher side. ED replied that it was due to factors such as increasing average age of the group(due to lack of recruitment) & also due to the fact that the scheme has to go to the re-insurer when the sum assured is more than 10 lakhs. We also demanded that the Corporation should bear the service tax. ED was not positive about this issue.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
NOINO today wrote to ED(Personnel) suggesting some steps which can remove the rising resentment (dissatisfaction) among the officers / employees on this issue. The letter is reproduced below:
The Executive Director (Personnel),
L.I.C. of India.
Re: Payment of PLLI
The PLLI for the FY 2012-13 has been declared. The declaration has evoked more consternation & resentment than joy among the employees. Preliminary enquiries reveal that almost all divisions in CZ, SZ, WZ, EZ & NCZ would be getting less than the Corporate 3% (mostly 1.5% or 2%). According to our information, the employees of some branches have even decided not to accept PLLI.
We have been time & again placing our objections in the modalities & formula of calculating such an incentive (?!). We have also been giving our suggestions on this issue through our discussions with & letters to the management. However, till now, these have not been considered. As a consequence, we are facing such a situation. Here we would like to once again draw your attention to the points raised in our letter submitted on this issue on 30.11.2011. At the cost of repetition, we would reiterate the same along with some additional suggestion/objections:-
- Equal percentage:- The percentage of PLLI payable should be equal to all employees. Paying different percentages to each office divides the employees & causes unrest. This does not bode well for an institution which is facing intense & stiff competition. Here, the basic point is that the policy making/devising strategy is done at Central Office level in all matters be it devising plans, marketing strategy, provision of manpower, publicity of our plans et al. The success or otherwise of the institution largely depends upon these policies/strategies. Branch/Division employees have no say in all these matters. So, it is paradoxical & ironic that the branch/division employees get less PLLI than that of the Corporate level. Hence we maintain that equal percentage of PLLI should be paid at all levels.
- Too many parameters :- Too many parameters have made this concept complicated. We have been insisting on a single parameter e.g. increase in Total income.
- Payment on pre-revised annual pay of August 2007 :- We have been insisting that the payment should be based on current annual pay.
- Performance parameters to be made public(to employees) :- How many employees know what the performance parameters are? How can we expect the employees to achieve the target without knowing it? We reiterate that the performance parameters should be declared before the commencement of the Financial year & all the employees should be in the know of the same.
- Faulty parameters :-
a. Point 1.3:- %age growth of Total premium—As per our information, about 50 to 60% renewal premium comes from alternate channels i.e. ECS/online payments etc. The credit of the same is not given to the branch/division. This policy has not been decided by the employees. Naturally, the Total premium income is less.
b. Point 1.3 continued:- In the previous years, focus was more on Single Premium Income. The Corporation also did bumper business due to this. Now the focus has changed to non-single premium. Logically, more Single Premium business in previous years means less renewal premium in consequent years. Thus, it is very difficult to show growth. The policy of shifting focus has not been decided by employees.
c. Point 2.1:--Conservation ratio:- In this, it is decided that Single premium & ULIP premiums is to be excluded. Once again it depends on the points raised in point 1.3. The employees have no control on the marketing strategy decided by Central Office.
d. Point 2.2:- Overall lapsation ratio:- If a policyholder doesn’t pay premium even after sending premium notice/default notice & follow-up through agents & development officers, what can the employees do? The employees have no control over this.
e. Point 3.1:- Productivity measured in terms of total premium income per employee:- In the aftermath of liberalization(?!), the demography of states & the nation is changing. A lot of people are migrating to metro cities & bigger towns. Consequently, though they pay premium where they have migrated, the credit of such premium is not available to the branches where it is paid. The result is that the employees in such places have to provide more services in proportion to the premium income. The employee have no control over this factor.
f. Point 6.1:- Skill enhancement of employees & agents:- As far as the training of agents is concerned, it is observed that many agents do not attend training in spite of being nominated & urged to attend the training. How can be the employees penalized for this?
g. Point 7.1:- E-governance:- E-payment to customers:- The employees can motivate the policyholders to submit NEFT mandate form, not force them. Hence, this factor is also not fully under control of the employees.
h. Point 9.1:- Micro Insurance Schemes:- It depends upon geographical area & economic status of the division. It is unlikely that in metro cities the scheme will be successful as compared to other areas. How much publicity has been given by Central Office to these schemes? Here again the role of the employees is limited.
From the above analysis it is crystal clear that maximum PLLI is not possible as the above points affect nearly 36% marks.
As said in our earlier letter, the objective of any Incentive scheme should be motivating the employees in putting in their best instead of demoralising them. As it is, due to the artificial & low ceilings, an overwhelming majority of the employees have been deprived of the bonus for years together. BMS, the Central trade union to which NOINO is affiliated has putting forth its view that bonus is nothing but deferred wages which is a cushion for inflation not taken care by the skewed DA formula. PLLI could have been our own answer to deferred wages & also an alternative to break away from the “bank pattern”. It still can be, if rational & reasonable suggestions from the employee organizations are heeded.
We request you to have a re-think of the whole issue of PLLI & consider our demands at the earliest.
Anagha SantGS, NOINO
by Ganesh Kamath
We are happy to inform you that NOINO President Shri Prakash Javadekar has been adjudged ‘Best political leader’ by Newspapers Association of India (NAI) for its NAI Achievement Awards 2013. The award was conferred upon him on 30th October 2013.
NAI was established in 1993. It is a not-for-profit association representing owners/publishers/editors of local & national newspapers. It has about 6000 members, making it the largest National newspaper association in India.
Our President, Shri Prakash Javadekar is one of his kind. He is a law graduate. Contrary to the popular perception of an average politician, he is unbelievably gentleman in his behavior. Easily accessible, he has neither any hang-ups nor any hangover of the heady power potion of politics. He travels without security & is exceptionally free of any blot on his character. He has been quietly propelling a water revolution in 11 vilages of Kolvan Valley (Mulshi Taluka/Pune district). Through contour bunding & trenches, the water has been prevented from flown away & its percolation has been enabled. Due to these efforts, the water table has gone up so significantly that now the farmers in these 11 villages are raising 3 crops(including sugarcane) instead of 1 crop earlier.
Beneath his humble demeanour, lies a steely resolve. He raised his voice against the draconian Emergency in 1975 & had to languish in jail for 19 months. He had to undergo heart surgery(which was not very common those days) during this period in jail. He survived it due to the grace of God, his will power & due to his noble deeds.
As far as his involvement in NOINO is concerned, it is simply incredible how the gentleman finds time to devote for the LICians. It is simply because of him that the previous charter got the necessary boost & push, a fact which we cannot forget. Even today he is moving heaven & earth to see to it that the charter talks in LIC commence soon. He has lent all his might to our struggle against increase in FDI in Insurance sector as well as the proposed amendments in the Insurance Act.
He has never lobbied for any political or other benefits or awards & as a disciplined soldier of the party carries on undeterred. This award has been earned by him on the basis of some truly outstanding work & he is the most deserving person to receive this award.
The NOINO family is proud to have such a person at its helm!!!
Monday, November 4, 2013
NOINO President Prakash Javadekar (MP, Rajyasabha) has been adjudged 'Best Political Leader' by Newspapers Association of India (NAI) for its NAI Achievement Award - 2013. The award was conferred on him on 30th October 2013.
Friday, November 1, 2013
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
NOINO's EFFORTS PAY OFF …!!!
3% PLLI for the year 2012-13 at Corporate level has been cleared. ZO/DO/BO level to be worked out by respective offices. The instructions would be released shortly by CO. The threshold limit for any office is 1.5% on pre-revised pay as on 1.8.2007.
As you are aware, NOINO was consistently raising this issue with the management. It had earlier formally raised this issue with the ED(Personnel) on 12th July 2013 & 14th October 2013 besides several informal follow-ups.
NOINO will continue to fight for the employees & officers of the Corporation.
Monday, October 14, 2013
A NOINO delegation consisting of Shri Ganesh Kamath, Chief Advisor, NOINO and Shri Manish Patankar, EC member, NOINO met ED(P) Shri M R Kumar today i.e. on 14th October 2013 & discussed the following issues:-
1. PLLI:- ED said that at this moment it looked difficult. He, however, said that the management would explore the possibility of ex-gratia.
2. One more option for pension:- We said that this issue was pending since long. We demanded that the matter be expedited. ED said that the management was making all efforts to secure the benefit.
3. Wage-revision:-- ED said that after the concerned authorities gave the green signal, the talks would commence. He also said that efforts were on to secure one more pension option before & outside wage-revision as demanded by us.
4. Sabbatical leave/Child care leave:- ED said that the management was considering all aspects of this issue before taking any decision.
5. LTC:- We reiterated our earlier demands of airfare to all Class I officers & other allied demands (refer our Charter of Demands, 2012). ED was positive on this issue & said that the management was working on the same.
6. 5 days week:- We again raised this demand & said that now that the majority of collection was from alternate channels, there should be no excuse in not accepting & implementing our demand. ED sounded positive & assured to look into the matter.
7. Raising the limits of re-imbursement of High Cost/protracted treatment for major diseases: ED said that this issue was also on the agenda of the management.
8. Election duty:- We again raised this issue & said that now in some divisions the EC was summoning employees for training. We demanded that the CO should once for all settle the issue in the light of the two judgements delivered by the division benches of Mumbai High Court in September 2009 & June 2013 by making it applicable to All India. ED was positive on this issue & assured to look into the matter.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Saturday, September 21, 2013
NOINO wrote a letter to the ED (OS/SBU-Estates) pointing out discrepancy in their circular dated 02.09.2013 on above subject. The letter is reproduced below:
The Executive Director (OS/SBU-Estates),
L.I.C. of India.
Re: Mobile handset cost re-imbursement to officers retiring before completion of 3 years
We invite your attention to the circular Ref:CO/OS/Mobile/2013-14/03(a) dated 2.9.2013. In this circular, the clarification regarding officers retiring before completion of 3 years (of purchase of mobile handset) is as under:--
“In case of normal retirement of an officer/superannuation before completion of 3 years from date of purchase of mobile handset, he she will have to pay 30% notional depreciated value of the mobile phone”
Now kindly refer the earlier circular Ref:CO/OS/Mobile/2013-14/03 dated 1.7.2013. In this circular, following are the relevant references regarding the officers retiring before completion of 3 years from date of purchase of mobile handset:-
“a. In case, an officer is compulsorily retired/removed/dismissed from service….then he/she will have to pay the notional depreciated value of the mobile handset”
“b. In case of voluntary retirement/resignation etc, before completion of 3 years from date …then he/she will have to pay the notional depreciated value of the mobile handset”.
Thus, nowhere in the earlier circular, there is a mention of normal retirement or superannuation before completion of 3 years from date of purchase of mobile handset. Not only there is no mention of normal retirement or superannuation, there is specific mention of officers who would compulsorily retire/removed/dismissed/voluntarily retired/resigned before completion of 3 years from purchase of mobile handset.
It is clear that anybody will logically deduce that the criterion for payment of notional depreciated value; therefore, do not apply to officers on normal retirement/superannuation before completion of 3 years from purchase of mobile handset. Based on this logic some officers in the above category have purchased the mobile handset. Many of them also got the re-imbursement promptly. It seems unfair & unreasonable that we should recover the notional depreciated value from such officers who have purchased the mobile handset during the period from 1st July 2013 to 1st September 2013.
We, therefore, request you to issue instructions specifying that the clause regarding the officers on normal retirement/superannuation in the circular dated 2nd September 2013 would apply prospectively & not retrospectively.
Anagha SantGS, NOINO