{Matrix Figures Updated}
At the present moment, there is no sign of any movement on implementation of 7 CPC recommendations regarding pensions of armed forces veterans. {Edit: The 7 CPC recommendations were subsequently implemented using a inter-CPC formula based "notional pay" method instead of using increments, which too did not attempt to normalise fixation of "notional pay" based on qualifying service.}
If and when some orders are issued, these are likely to be only for fixing pensions by multiplying either VI CPC or OROP pensions by 2.57. Multiplying VI CPC pensions by 2.57 is likely to yield January 2016 pensions nearly equal to or less than OROP combined with the January 2016 DR.
In a scenario like that, with OROP anomalies still not sorted out, it may be hoping for the impossible to expect rationalization of the good old 20 years Major and 26 Years Lt Col pension anomalies.
Enough has been posted about that. Here is a brief summing up, as a kind of "impossible to realize wish-list", in the form of two "equations":
PL11;i(8--->20) = PL12A;i(1--->13) for older ( pre Dec 2004) Maj pensioners.
PL11;i(21--->28) = PL12A;i(14--->20) = PL13;i(12--->18) for older ( pre Dec 2004) Maj and Lt Col pensioners with PCs.
|
P ---> Pension corresponding to a specific increment-stage cum matrix-level combination.
L ---> 7 CPC Matrix Level.
i ---->7 CPC Matrix index number increment stage for level.
As an example, the first equation states pension calculated for level 11 increment stage 9 should equal the one for Level 12A index increment stage 2, but won't.
Pensions corresponding to appropriate cells can be calculated based on the pay in the matrix as follows and then checked for the requisite but eternally elusive parity as per equations above (even though implementation of 7 CPC pay fixation is reportedly being held in abeyance, the of principles of pension parity, as illustrated in the following tables, would still be valid regardless of any enhancements in pay levels that might come about):
{Update: With recent, May 2017, amendments to IOR (multiplication factors), the figures displayed in different “levels”may changed and will be are now updated in a subsequent this blog-post. as and when amended Matrix is made available. The suggested manner of parities for pre 2016 retirees in time bound ranks still remains relevant}
{Update: With recent, May 2017, amendments to IOR (multiplication factors), the figures displayed in different “levels”
Pay
Band à
|
15600-39100
|
37400-67000
|
|
Grade
Pay -à
|
6600
|
8000
|
8800
|
Level
–>
|
11
|
12A
|
13
|
1
|
69400
|
121200
|
130600
|
2
|
71500
|
124800
|
134500
|
3
|
73600
|
128500
|
138500
|
4
|
75800
|
132400
|
142700
|
5
|
78100
|
136400
|
147000
|
6
|
80400
|
140500
|
151400
|
7
|
82800
|
144700
|
155900
|
8
|
85300
|
149000
|
160600
|
9
|
87900
|
153500
|
165400
|
10
|
90500
|
158100
|
170400
|
11
|
93200
|
162800
|
175500
|
12
|
96000
|
167700
|
180800
|
13
|
98900
|
172700
|
186200
|
14
|
101900
|
177900
|
191800
|
15
|
105000
|
183200
|
197600
|
16
|
108200
|
188700
|
203500
|
17
|
111400
|
194400
|
209600
|
18
|
114700
|
200200
|
215900
|
19
|
118100
|
206200
|
|
20
|
121600
|
212400
|
|
125200
|
|||
129000
|
|||
132900
|
|||
136900
|
Even though such charts have been prepared and shared in dozens of other formats, based on the above considerations a rough indicator of the manner in which 7 CPC pensions need to be calculated is as follows:
Pay Band
|
15600-39100
|
37400-67000
|
|||||
Grade Pay
|
6600
|
8000
|
8700
|
||||
Entry Pay (EP)
|
25980
|
45400
|
48900
|
||||
Level
|
11
|
12A
|
13
|
||||
Qualifying Service
|
Increment
Stage | Increment Stage | Increment Stage | ||||
6
|
1
|
69400
|
|||||
7
|
2
|
71500
|
|||||
8
|
3
|
73600
|
|||||
9
|
4
|
75800
|
|||||
10
|
5
|
78100
|
|||||
11
|
6
|
80400
|
|||||
12
|
7
|
82800
|
|||||
13
|
8
|
1
|
121200 ✓
|
||||
14
|
9
|
2
|
124800
|
||||
15
|
10
|
3
|
128500
|
1
|
130600
|
||
16
|
11
|
4
|
132400
|
2
|
134500
|
||
17
|
12
|
5
|
136400
|
3
|
138500
|
||
18
|
13
|
6
|
140500
|
4
|
142700
|
||
19
|
14
|
7
|
144700
|
5
|
147000
|
||
20
|
15
|
8
|
149000
|
6
|
151400
|
||
21
|
16
|
9
|
153500
|
7
|
155900
|
||
22
|
17
|
10
|
158100
|
8
|
160600
|
||
23
|
18
|
11
|
162800
|
9
|
165400
|
||
24
|
19
|
12
|
167700
|
10
|
170400
|
||
25
|
20
|
13
|
172700
|
11
|
175500
|
||
26
|
21
|
14
|
12
|
180800
|
|||
27
|
22
|
15
|
13
|
186200
|
|||
28
|
23
|
16
|
14
|
191800
|
|||
29
|
24
|
17
|
15
|
197600
|
|||
30
|
18
|
16
|
203500
|
||||
31
|
19
|
17
|
209600✓
|
||||
32
|
20
|
18
|
215900
|
||||
33
|
19
|
The index numbers shown in the second table appear to be correctly related to qualifying service, but what is shown as "Increments In Level" in the table in the previous post, referred and linked to in this blog-post, are in fact index numbers and are being shown to match with qualifying service one year after the level should actually start.
ReplyDelete