PMR
option for armed forces
Genesis: DMA after internal study felt that due to lesser vacancies, and certain service
restrictions, number of personnel were boarded out. Also, the super-specialists
and specialists who were highly trained for specific jobs in the service opted
out to work outside.
Therefore, “Loss
of highly skilled manpower leads to void within the Services skill matrix. For
the armed forces, this is counter-productive.” The review of pension
entitlements is based on this.
Remedies proposed
1. Proposed new
retirement age in Indian Army and equivalent posts in IAF and Indian Navy:
Colonels -57
yrs
Brigadier - 58
yrs
Major
General - 59 yrs
JCO & OR
– 57 years
50% of
entitled pension for 20-25 years of service.
60% of entitled
pension for 26-30 years of service.
75% of entitled
pension for 31-35 years of service.
Full pension for
35 years and above service.
Point of
view:
Remedy, most
importantly the best remedy will be the one which reduces or removes the root
cause of the problem. In instant case, the problem being faced by defence
forces as indicated by DMA is out flow of manpower due to following reason:
1. Lesser vacancies
2. Service restrictions
3. Super specialists and
specialists opting out to work out side.
Will the proposal
of DMA:
a. Increase vacancies in armed
forces?
b. Help in identifying those
service restrictions and remove or reform at least those which can be safely
done away with?
c. Stop Super specialist and specialist
from opting out to work outside.
I think
answer is a big “NO”.
In that case
what is the rationale behind such proposal? It seems there can be two possibilities.
Either reasons shown are wrong or remedy proposed is wrong. In both the cases
govt. of India must reject this proposal of DMA in totality and direct them to
do RCA (root cause analysis based on five Ws).
