OPPOSING some of the proposed pension reforms as unfair and demoralizing to government employees, the Establishment Division (ED) has proposed increasing the retirement age by two years to 62 to contain pension liabilities. The ED, which is the custodian of the employees’ career path, has strongly opposed the change in pension conditions that seek to work out retirement benefits on the basis of a 36-month average of salaries instead of only last drawn salary.
Pension reforms have been proposed as part of an understanding with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and in line with the recommendations of the Pay and Pension Commission in view of surging expenditure on this account, which the federal and provincial governments claim they are finding it difficult to incur. It is good that instead of introducing unilateral measures, the government has started inter-ministerial consultations for major pension reforms including reduced benefits in commutation and regular payments for existing pensioners and the beginning of a contributory pension scheme for future employees. The Establishment Division has rightly pointed out that the calculation of pension on the average pensionable emoluments from the last 36 months (as against 12 months now) will place them at a disadvantage vis-à-vis others due to the lower average value. Similarly, penalty on those seeking early retirement would be unjust as there might be genuine causes to opt for premature retirement. The points raised by the ED and some other aspects highlighted by other ministries and departments need to be given due consideration before a final decision is taken by the relevant forum. However, the proposal to increase the age of superannuation from the existing 60 to 62 is misplaced as there would be no worthwhile saving but the decision would deprive unemployed youth of potential job opportunities.
