Strike Threat BY Bank Unions

The United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU) had decided to observe strike in all banks on August 22 and 23. 

May I ask why?  

Is it for wage hike?   No

Is it for safeguarding bank’s interest?    No

Is it for improvement of legal system to accelerate recovery of overdues from defaulters and for reduction of Non Performing Assets?  No

Is it for ensuring timely and seniority based promotion to employees without any discrimination and for stopping of recruitment, transfer and promotions taking place in public sector banks based on flattery and bribery to powerful bank officials and powerful leaders of bank unions?  No

Is it for refund of illegal money recovered from officers who exercised second option of pension given by government to PF optees during last Bipartite Settlement after two decade long so called agitation?  NO

Is it for expeditious disposals of writs and cases filed by aggrieved group of officers, individuals and also some militants unions in various High Courts and Supreme Court against injustice occurred in 9^th Bipartite Settlement, injustice occurred in promotion processes during last two or three decades, unjustified dismissal of staff, arbitrary rejection of non-flatterers and non-bribe-gives in promotion processes, whimsical transfers of officers from one corner to other undertaken by corrupt bank management, illegal withholding of terminal benefits of retired staff or is it for avoidable issue of chargesheet to retiring employees just before their retirement  and so on ?   No

Is it for enhancement of pension amount? No

Is it for increase of amenities, for increase in perks, for reduction of Income tax,for respectful working of staff, for improvement in service conditions?  No

Is it to reduce the work load on existing staff due to large scale branch expansion undertaken by banks to increase in business without adding new manpower?  No

Is it to reduce the stress and strain of bank staff who are forced to work for 12 hours a day?  No

Is it to help officers who have been transferred form one corner to other in the country where there is no arrangement for quarter for new comers and neither the hotel facility is available to such officers which was earlier available to transfree for 15 days?  NO

Is it for stopping reckless expansion of branches in remote villages where profitability is nil? No

Is it for stopping closure of loss making branches and stopping of further opening of branches in loss prone areas? No

Is it for CBI investigation into assets of top ranked bank officers , EDs and CMDs who have by unfair means accumulated disproportionate wealth? No 

Is it for stopping of direct recruitment officers  in scale II , scale III and scale IV onwards to please the wards of some powerful VIPs? No

Is it to stop  union leaders and top ranked officers who frequently interfere in function of HR departments and who are exerting undue pressure to give favour to officers of their choice, their caste , their community, their region, their religion etc?  No

Is it for stopping campus recruitment taking place to recruit the sons and daughters  of top bosses from a particular college ? No

Is it against mergers and consolidation of banks or against proposal for issuance of new licenses to big corporate house or against large scale expansion undertaken by banks without increase in manpower? No 

Any other valid reason ?  No

UFBU has called strike  primarily against unilateral directions on human resource issues. Hitherto union leaders where working in nexus with each other. They were working together to reject good officers and select bad officers in Promotion processes by resorting the tools of Interview where members of Interview panel could award 0 to 25 marks without looking into any reality of staff appearing for promotion. If union leader recommended top bosses for promotion of any bad and corrupt , that very officer he could get 25 marks in Interview and on the contrary any best performing officer could be rejected, the number given in Interview used to be below 5. After all what is the record of Interview? What is the necessity of Interview when the services of an officer is tested and attested in tow or three decades of time.

Normally no questions are asked when an officer is to be promoted and when officer has support of some prominent union leaders or some top bank officials. On the other hand if a meritorious officer (who is not flatterer) has to be rejected in promotion process, members of Interview panel will be unanimous in asking toughest and irrelevant questions. 

After all there is nothing to be judged about an officer in Interview appearing for promotion because he has already worked in the bank for five to 35 years. Ability and capability of an officer cannot be judged in 2 to 3 minutes of interview when the management could not judge him performance of several years.

During last six months or so , Ministry of Finance have issued some guidelines to bring about certain improvement in quality of bank officers, to give value to actual performers, to minimize misuse of powers by top officials, to stop whimsical transfers ,to make promotion policy more transparent and effective  and for strengthening recovery process to bring down NPA and for improving  profitability. 

It is a matte of pleasure that Element of transparency and value to good performers have been given some importance through guidelines issued during last six months from Ministry of Finance.Though it is a drop of Amrit in the ocean of Poison.

Though guidelines on Human resource issues dictated by MOF are not absolutely perfect, ideal and justified, MOF has at least thought and awakened from deep slumber for bringing about reformation in bank HRD policies which were hitherto totally whimsical and arbitrary and giving large scope for manipulation and fraud with good performers .

It is pity that the union leaders who were supposed to protect the interest of working class started exploiting working class by using the powers of top bank officials . I salute to officials of MOF that they have started playing the role which union leaders were to play.

Unfortunately union leaders during the course of time became puppet in the hands of top corrupt officials and started selling transfers and promotions .Now their self interest has been adversely affected to some extent by new dictate of MOF on HR issues. This is why they have been provoked by top ranked officials to resort to strike and protest the government intervention on HR issues. 

I am unable to understand why union leaders are so much perturbed when MOF is trying to make polices transparent and justifiable.I am unable to visualize how mountain has fallen on so called union leaders by  issuance of a few guideline by MOF on HR issues who are after all owner of Public sector banks.

I would like to request so called protectors and so called union leaders  to specify issues which are against the common interest of bank employees and which have forced them to call for Protest Day or for Strike. 

MOF has dictated that all transfers and promotions should be completed by the end of June so that family of officer is not disturbed and education of children of staff is not adversely affected. MOF has said that whimsical transfer of officer from one corner to other after June should be approved by Board of Directors so that any officer is not whimsically transferred to remote places by corrupt bosses on the plea of exigencies of work. 

If bank feel that any officer is really of huge importance the transfer decision may be approved by Board. Hitherto union leaders used to recommend transfer of an officer from one corner to other only because officers were not blind supporter of union leaders and the officer was not earning bribe to share with bosses. 

Union Leaders never resorted to strike or protest when good performers but probable whistle blowers were transferred by corrupt bosses from a place to most critical place. This is because top officers of management always used to accomplish their evil task taking union leaders into confidence. 

Union leaders never protested unjustified transfer of an officer to critical place, unjustified rejection of an officer in promotion process and unjustified promotion to corrupt officers who were flatterer to union leaders and top bosses. 

They never protested when bank management resorted to violation of transfer policies framed by them to punish an officer who did not blindly sanction a loan proposal to please his boss. 

They never protested when corrupt officers after taking huge money in bribe sanction huge loan and added to volume of bad assets. 

They never raised questions when due to corrupt officers, bad assets increased, profit came down and as a result wage revision was much below the expectation and much below the wage structure prevailing in other central government offices.

Union leaders should therefore make it clear why they are so much unhappy on certain changes on HR issues suggested by MOF and what better suggestion they like to put forward in the common interest of working class.

At the same MOF should try to ascertain whether the union leaders are supported by officers’ class blindly or on merit basis. Bank employees are like sheep and they follow blindly what their leaders dictate to maintain unity.

Is such blind unity beneficial for the bank, for workers and for the country?

Unity should not be used to create terror and should not be used to carry out terror attack as Naxal and foreign based terrorists are from time to time doing to prove the world that they are super power.

Union leaders, Bank management and MOF should all try to collect the opinion of ground level workers and they decide the best course of action on HR issues.

I urge all bank employees to ponder over the dictates of union leaders and that of MOF and then decide who is wrong and what is better in their common interest. They must stop using strike as a tool to shut the mouth of those who are trying to stop malpractices prevailing in banks and who are making some efforts to make the policies more honest, effective and transparent. Delegation of powers to Indian more often than not results in misuse of power.

Mere issuance of circulars that officer will not build illegal and undesirable pressure on members of Interview Board or recruitment board is not going to serve any purpose. Mere hanging of banners like “Vigilence Observance Week” or that of “Customer Service Day” or ‘Honesty is our tool to grow” etc are not going to stop corrupt practices. 

Until stern actions are taken against really corrupt officers, government cannot send good message to field functionaries.

What they preach they have to practice in toto. Policies, circulars, laws, rules all are framed keeping in ideals but unfortunately they are seldom adhered to honestly by all. A few corrupt officers vitiate the entire environment and help in growing of bad culture.

.

A bad mango can spoil hundred good mangoes kept in a basket but hundred good mangoes cannot convert a bad into good.

Strike is weapon given to all in democratic system to demand justice and to protest injustice. If it is used for bad purpose it can spoil the future of not only bank or the country but the very future of Democracy.

In Brief 

Is it provoked by Bank Management to tighten the screw of Ministry of Finance who have been issuing different guidelines on HR issues because MOF is trying to break the dirty nexus between bank union and top bank officials ?

Bank union leaders are threatening IR disturbance as their counterparts have disturbed Indian Airlines, BSNL and other public sector undertakings.

Are all staff supporting such meaningless, useless and ill-motivated protest day or strike from the core of their heart or they are shouting as people in a crowd cry on road ?After all who can stop this herd mentality of ban employees and how can an honest survey may be conducted to assess the real intention of striking employees. 

Trade Union Leaders say that they have decided to go on strike on August 22 and 23  to protect Trade Union Right and to stop unilateral imposition of guidelines on 
banks.

May I ask them to conclude

They aspire to protect Trade union rights for the benefit of union 
leaders or for members of trade unions?
It is a million dollar question which bank employees in general should try to ponder over and answer honestly to assess the utility of so called trade union rights which are desired to be protected by observing Protest Day today .

Past record of a decade or two especially the manner in which last Bipartite settlement was changed in the last minure substantiates the fact that Trade Union are in fact supporting all acts of  management  which helps curtailing the rights of bank employees and which helps in deterioration of service conditions etc 

I reiterate that bank employees must think seriously before it is too 
late. 

Bank unions plan protests on Monday

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/banking/article3436150.ece

MUMBAI, MAY 19: 

The United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU) has decided to observe May 21 as All India Protest Day.

The protest is against amendments proposed in the Banking Law, closure of rural branches, and the Government’s unilateral directions on human resources issues.

UFBU, which is an umbrella body of nine trade unions representing officers, clerical and sub-staff in the banking sector, is also planning to observe a two-day strike in July during the monsoon session of Parliament.

To mark the protest day, UFBU will hold mass demonstrations in all State Capitals and a mass rally before Parliament in Delhi.

According to the All-India Bank Employees’ Association, the passage of the Banking Law (Amendments) Bill would lead to more liberalisation and de-regulation, affecting both public and private sector banks.

“Increasing the voting rights is a step towards increasing the hold of the corporates and foreign capital over the affairs of the banks.

“The amendment to keep bank mergers outside the purview of the Competition Commission of India is nothing but an agenda to facilitate merger of banks,” said Mr CH Venkatachalam, General Secretary, AIBEA.

Referring to the Government’s administrative instructions to close down rural branches on the plea of viability and simultaneously expanding the scope of business correspondents and ultra small branches, the AIBEA said these are naked attempts to hand over rural banking to private agencies.

Further, the Government’s increasing trend of issuing unilateral guidelines on various HR issues affecting the service conditions of officers and employees was without any reference to the existing bilateral settlements or discussions with the unions/associations.

The association pointed out that there are various communications suggesting the implementation of the Khandelwal Committee Recommendations without any discussion with the unions/associations.

Are Public Sector Banks not aware of National Litigation Policy?   If yes, why do they not understand and follow the same in true spirit?

http://www.allbankingsolutions.com/Wage-Revision/Legal-Cases/Why-Banks-Not-adhering-NLP.htm

18/05/2012

The Secretary

Department of Financial Services

Ministry of Finance, Govt. Of India                                        

Jeevan Deep Building

10 Parliament Street,              

NEW DELHI - 110 001.

Dear Sir,

 Sub : Need for adherence by Heads of Govt. Depts. and  Public Sector Banks to

          the National  Litigation Policy of Govt of India.

I hope that you are well aware of the National Litigation Policy framed by Govt. of India in the year 2009.  The said policy is understood by a common person as follows:-

I (a) that the departmental heads of Govt. should never forget  the  basic principle that it is the responsibility of the State and instrumentalities of State to protect the rights of citizens and to respect their fundamental rights.

(b)  that the departmental heads of Govt. shall ensure that bad cases are not needlessly persevered with and they shall not develop a tendency to win such litigations at any cost.

(c)  that the departmental heads of Govt. must eschew and condemn the "Let the court decide" approach.

(d)  that the departmental heads of Govt. must give utmost priority to assist weaker sections and “senior citizens.”

(e)  that the departmental heads of Govt. must ensure that Govt.lawyers do not seek frequent adjounments.

(f)  that the departmental heads of Govt. shall ensure that in service matters “no appeal will be filed in cases where the matter pertains to cases of pension or retirement benefits” without  involving any principle and without setting any precedent or financial implications.  Appeals will not be filed in service matters to expose the cause of one section of employees against another.

                                         

(g)  that the departmental heads of Govt. will ensure that  appeals will not be filed in Supreme court unless the case involves a question of law.

II.  It is now learnt that the Heads of Public Sector Banks (which are declared by courts as instrumentalities of state under Article 12 of Constitution of India) are ignorant of the existence of above provisions of National Litigation Policy. Accordingly Public Sector Banks are liberally filing appeals in Service matters also till cases reach Supreme Court of India, unmindful of the fact that the respondents belong to weaker section, senior citizens where clear error of classification in contravention of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India is committed.  Another reason for such an approach by Public Sector Banks is that they are more often misguided by Indian Banks Association, which is devoid of any accountability, which has self assumed certain powers of controlling authority i.e. Govt.of India.

III. It is also learnt that Andhra Bank has decided to file an appeal against the judgment dated 22/03/2012 of Andhra Pradesh High Court in writ Petition No. 9069 of 2011 between Sreeram Ramamurthy versus Andhra Bank.  In this judgement the High court has clarified that all categories of employees i.e. those who were in service of banks prior to 29/09/1995 and continued in the service of the bank as on 27/04/2010 but retired after that date and prior to 27/04/2010 are eligible for one more option for pension.  The court has further held that officers who are compulsorily retired as a penalty are also eligible for pension scheme provided by have completed 20 years of service.Similarly Vijaya Bank, another Public Sector Bank, it is learnt, has decided to file an appeal against the judgment dated 18/04/2012 of High court of Karnataka in the writ Petition No. 24158/2011 between Narasimhappa versus Vijaya Bank.  In this judgment the High court has held that even resignees are eligible for pension option provided they have completed a minimum qualifying service of 20 years.

In next few days judgments are expected from several High Courts in about 300 to 400 writ petitions filed by VRs optees, who are all seniorcitizens challenging the arbitrary action of Banks” denying them second  option for joining pension scheme.  When those judgments are pronounced few more appeals  are likely to be filed by Public sector Banks unless the provisions of National Litigation Policy detailed above are brought to the notice of Heads of all public sector Banks immediately.

IV.  I therefore suggest that the Heads of Public Sector Banks may be furnished immediately with a copy of National Litigation Policy document and may be directed to avoid filing appeals in service matters relating to recipients of socially beneficial legislations, senior citizens and other weaker sections.  Govt. of India may also examine filing of appeals only in case where question of law is to be decided.

Please acknowledge receipt.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

         Sd/-

(Shri A. Premanand Pai)

S/o A Panduranga Pai

"ANJANA" Ist Cross

5th Main Road,V.P.Nagar

Udupi - 576 102, Karnataka.

Mobile No. 94490 49041.