IBA Wage Revision Latest News at AIBEA Revision Talks (update)

After the April 21 AIBEA Wage Revision Talks, another talk was scheduled today, the April 27th, 2010 where another meeting will be held with the UFBU with a view of signing the final settlement.

So far there has been no update from the AIBEA regarding the final result. We are closely watching the AIBEA official website for updates and we will post here as soon as we have something.

Accoring the AIBEA official website, the final settlement will be signed today and an update will be posted on the official website’s “News and Events” section. You can visit the section here.

Please watch this space for the updates. We will be back soon with the news.

UPDATE: The 9th bipartite settlement has been signed. Complete report here.

Get Updates by eMail: Submit eMail Here

Comments/Queries

( 33 Comments so far )

• joginder khurana
  
  Apr 30, 2010 at 09:31:am

  shamless act on the part of iba and ubfu
• Ravi Kumar
  
  May 01, 2010 at 02:07:am

  wage revision after wage revision Bank staff salaries could successfully brought down comparatively less than state/central govt/PSU. What an achievement. When our leaders realise struggles only brought glory and achievements to the community in good olden days not surrender to IBA. God only can come to the help of Bank staff.
• RAVI A C
  
  May 02, 2010 at 10:17:am

  if the cpf optee switched over to pension option by forcebly surrender 2.8 time pf pay as of 1 11 2007, if for name sake , all agreed , is this the loss to the persons affected, and if the government can bear the loss of hard earned money/man hours spend for servicing the society in banking by these persons , the loss has to be bourne by the government only as of agrl.debt relief – pl view this comment and raise the forcebly fetch the pf as loss of ,man hours spend ….
• RAVI A C
  
  May 02, 2010 at 10:48:am

  if the cpf optee switched over to pension option by forcebly surrender 2.8 time pf pay as of 1 11 2007, if for name sake , all agreed , is this the LOSS TO THE PERSONS AFFECTED , and if the government can bear the loss of hard earned money/man hours spend for servicing the society in banking by these persons , THE LOSS HAS TO BE BOURNE BY THE GOVERNMENT AS OF DEBT RELIEF – pl view this comment and raise the forcebly fetch the pf as loss of man hours spend ….
• girish parikh
  
  May 03, 2010 at 01:52:pm

  pl,tell me,what will be my basic pension?i was retired from bank^s service on 01/01/2008.
  how it will be calculate?after fixing my basic pension,what will be DA?
  pl,reply.
• arvind rastogi, bareilly
  
  May 04, 2010 at 09:13:pm

  congrates to c.h.venkatchalam for a settlement (2nd pension option) .its a milestone in the settlement history.AIBEA vision is above all 8 unions, who failed to achieve in past for 2nd option .
  i hope pf optees will not repeat their mistake (not for opting pension in 1993 and 1995) this time.Why pf optees calculating “2.8 ” it is added “1.2 ” more only.(1.6earlier +1.2 due to court decision=2.8).IN FACT PENSION IS A SECURITY OF LONG LIFE.

  ” JO BIBI KO SUCH ME KARTE PYAR, WO KARENGE PENSION KO SWEEKAR,
  JINKI BIBI KE HO 2-4 YAAR , WO NA KARE PENSION KO SWEEKAR ”
  OPT PENSION FORGET TENSION.
  PENSION IS FOR UR LOVING WIFE, SHE WILL HAVE A RESPECTFUL LIFE AFTER UR
  ALVIDA FROM THIS “GREEDY WORLD”.
• snehasis routh
  
  May 05, 2010 at 09:46:pm

  now UFBU leaders can’t deny their responsibility by just passing to other union.All UFBU
  Leaders are answerable to present young employee’s of banking industries. 9th BP settlement
  only for pension holder and retired employee’s. these leaders should quit.
• B PRATAP MUMBAI
  
  May 06, 2010 at 05:28:pm

  THOSE WHO ARE RETIRED AFTER 1ST NOVEMBER 2007 SHOUD PAY 2.8 TIMES OF NOVEMBER PAY AS IN CASE OF EXISTIG EMPLOYEES/OFFICERS AND THEY SHOULD REFUND ONLY BANKS CONTRIBUTION ALONGWITH INTERST RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT WHILE OPTING FOR PENSION.SUCH EMPLOYEES /OFFICERS ARE LESS IN NUMBERS..THEY WERE IN THE SERVTCE AS ON EFFECTIVE DATE OF WAGE REVISION.WHY THEY SHOUD PAY 1.56 TIMES OF BANKS CONTRIBUTION PLUS INT.RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.
• jay jeet
  
  May 08, 2010 at 06:04:pm

  BIG ANOMLY IN THE BASIS OF PENSION LOAD SHARING
  AN EMPLOYEE RETIRED ON 10 YRS OR 4 YRS AGO HAS TO PAY 156% OF BANK`S CONT, TO EPF AND ALSO AN EMPLOYEE RETIRED ON 31.03.10 COMES UNDER THE SAME CLOUSE ( A HUGE AMT HAS TO BE RETURNED AS 156% OF BANK PF )
  WHILE AN EMPLOYEE ( JOINDED ON 1ST APRIL,) RETIRED ON 30.04.10 HAS TO PAY 2.8 TIMES OF REVISED PAY OF NOV.2007
  CAN ANY ONE CLARIFY THE POSITION
• A K CHAMOLI
  
  May 09, 2010 at 07:48:am

  The wage revision settlement came with a great shock that PF option is at a cost of 2.8 months salary. It is not only appalling that the cost increased from 1.6 to 2.8 times but the volte face in the stand taken by our so called union / association leaders. The settlement is clear divide between existing pension optees & PF optees. The leaders have forgotten one thing that the initial struggle for pension in the banks (ist option) was fought together by those who opted for pension and those who did not. PF optees also made sacrifices on account of wage cut for strikes and more importantly the load of pension offer , adjusted in subsequent wage revisions , was shared by both the groups. PF optees did not demand better & separate settlement for them. In the instant case also union leaders have been maintaining the same line that the burden due to option of PF will be equally shared by both. Then , how sudden change ? Had it not been fit to take the members in to confidence as to what makes them to sign the agreement in the present form ? In any case it has already been delayed , some more delay could have been tolerated by the members. The stories of fear of suit filing by a group against the load sharing / settlement is for children. It is a gross injustice to a section of employees. Wage Revision also is not at all attractive , then what is the achievement in which our great leaders are taking pride. Even now, it is imperative that the matter should be taken up with Govt. for sharing cost burden of PF optees. Otherwise it will be a blot in the history of wage revisions / settlements and further erode the member’s faith in unions/ associations.
• K.Vijayappan
  
  May 10, 2010 at 01:45:pm

  The Leaders have neglected the feelings of Retired Staff. Even if the demand for option of pension is achived ,It seems that they should not opt for Pension,and so the huge penality is imposed here.
• K.Vijayappan
  
  May 10, 2010 at 01:05:pm

  By the 9th Bipartite Settlement , the entire Bank Staff have been Cheated by both Leaders as well as IBA.
  K. Vijayappan.
• V S ANUP KUMAR
  
  Sep 15, 2010 at 01:36:am

  I have taken vrs on 25-06-2008 from Karnataka bank opted for pension in 1995 but till today i have not received the commutation and revised pension for want of clarification from iba kindly let me know whether the same will be settled or not?