Friday, October 14, 2016

PayBack Must for Armed Forces

SOURCE:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/payback-must-for-armed-forces/309132.



             Pay Back Must for Armed Forces 

                                    By


                                                     Dinesh Kumar






At the very core of all anomalies and grievances of the Armed Forces is that they are finding their extant status and parity vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts being systematically downgraded by every successive Central Pay Commission






                                                   LIP SERVICE

Forces deserve the best: Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar inaugurates a defence exhibition at Vashi, Navi Mumbai. PTI



The Seventh Central Pay Commission (CPC) award has been the cause for serious disquiet within the Armed Forces ever since it was submitted to the government last November. The situation recently came to head with the three Service Chiefs unprecedentedly asking the Union government to withhold the implementation of the CPC for the Armed Forces until pending anomalies are resolved. Following Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's response asking the Service Chiefs to implement the new salary structure while assuring them that their grievances could be looked into later, the Services have backed off and agreed to the implementation of the current pay commission. But going by recent events, there never is a "later". 

Acting in unison
 
Although every pay commission award has evoked discontent within the Armed Forces, the difference this time was that the three Service Chiefs had acted in unison. Such an unprecedented step reflects the extent of resentment and discount within the otherwise apolitical Armed Forces that remains unquestionably subservient to civilian control. This development does not auger well and it is imperative that the government take notice and not leave it unresolved as it has with anomalies pertaining to the Sixth CPC.

In recent years, the Services have become more vocal than usual in expressing their disappointment with issues related to pay, allowances and pensions. Only a few months ago, the three Service Chiefs took the unusual step of writing (in vain) a joint letter to first the Defence Minister and then the Prime Minister expressing dissatisfaction with the Seventh CPC. In March, a tri-Service Pay and Allowances Review Committee delivered a detailed presentation before an Empowered Committee comprising 13 Secretaries. But the effort failed to cut ice even though the Air Force Chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, who was present at the meeting, specifically stated that there exists "discontentment among the rank and file". Taking note of the growing disquiet within the Armed Forces, the then Defence Minister AK Antony in June 2012 wrote to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, informing him of the growing discontentment among both serving and retired defence service personnel due to fixation of pay and pensions by the Sixth CPC. "My apprehension is that unless we take some corrective action, the issue may take a bad turn", he is reported to have warned. A Committee of Secretaries formed to look into the six core anomalies arising from the Sixth CPC passed the buck saying that it needed to be resolved by an expert committee which is yet to be instituted. 

Four specific anomalies
 
This time the Armed Forces want four specific anomalies to be corrected. One, that there should be a common pay matrix for the three Services and civilian employees. In contrast to 24 pay levels as per the latest CPC, there are 40 pay levels for the civilians. The implication is that the pay of all Service officers will stagnate after 31 years of service which will result in their earning a pension Rs 20,000 less than their civilian counterparts. Bureaucrats give the excuse that a common pay matrix is not feasible because the Armed Forces have a higher number of ranks. 

The second demand pertains to reciprocity of allowances. While all compensatory field and other allowances applicable to the Armed Forces also apply to the central armed police forces (CAPF), the allowances entitled to the latter have not been extended to the Armed Forces. For example, a soldier deployed for disaster management will not be paid any extra allowance whereas a National Disaster Response Force personnel who be paid Rs 6,000 per deployment and a CAPF constable Rs 17,000. A third demand pertains to payment of other allowances such as, for example, technical allowance while a fourth demand relates to disability pension being made applicable on a percentage basis as it is to civilians. 

At the very core of all these anomalies and grievances of the Armed Forces is that they are finding their extant status and parity vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts being systematically downgraded by every successive CPC. From first figuring below the IAS and then the IPS, the Services now find themselves being equated and in some respects inferior to the CAPF such as the CRPF and BSF on pay and allowances. Despite their large numerical strength, the Armed Forces do not find representation on the Central Pay Commissions. Nor do they find representation on the Committees of Secretaries that get constituted to examine anomalies. Indeed the Services harbour the grudge that they are always treated as the "other". 


Cost to government
 
The Armed Forces consider themselves as constituting "the cheapest gun fodder" since they incur the least lifetime cost to the government; as incurring the "lowest induction cost" since unlike their civilian counterparts they are not paid during their training period; have the "lowest retention cost" as they retire earlier than their civilian counterparts and hence draw salaries less than the latter; have the "lowest advancement cost" since relatively low numbers are promoted to the higher rank in view of the steep pyramid rank structure in the Services (only one per cent officers become Lieutenant Generals); and command the "lowest pension cost" because their pensions are fixed at just 50 per cent of the last pay drawn. 

Theorists of Civil-Military relations argue that in a democracy "civilians have a right to be wrong". But then because they have the right to be wrong, civilians must also bear greater responsibility and accountability. The security of a nation is not the exclusive preserve of the Armed Forces. The civilian government is ultimately responsible. Perhaps the government can take a cue from Kautilya"s Arthashastra, that mentions "not being given due honours" at the very top of its list of 28 calamities that can adversely affect the efficient functioning of an army.  A country that does not look after its Armed Forces - the instrument of last resort - does so at its own peril.


 





























































 

No comments:

Post a Comment