Prof. M. Giridhar, a colleague in the Department of Chemical Engineering, writes in to point out an error in my earlier post. The specific correction is about the Chadha Committee recommendation that the number of years that'll make one eligible for full pension be reduced to twenty.
Here's his e-mail:
In your blog, you mention, "Chadha committee has asked that it be reduced to 20 years (from the current X years; at IISc, I believe X = 28)."
It is not 28 but 33. If you join IISc with a Ph.D, it is reduced to 28. However, if you joined IISc as a staff/scientist (as many did at some time) and you did PhD along the way, it is 33 years. The recommendation to reduce the period to 20 years is not an output of the committee. It was recommended by the [Sixth Pay Commission] for all staff and it is generally to be accepted.
The recommendation to reduce the period to 20 years is not an output of the committee. It was recommended by the sixth pay comm for all staff and it is generally to be accepted. Yes, good people are likely to leave but it is better for good (but frustrated) people to leave the system than work with medicore people and not get recognized.
The other recommendations are not likely to be accepted in toto. For example, professors of eminence will get the same pay as VC. That is not likely to happen.
Further, your article gives an impression (see the comments on your article) that [an IISc professor] will get the same pay as [a professor at, say, the Bangalore University]. It is not [correct]. The highest pay a Bangalore Univ professpr can get is the associate professor scale of IISc.
The 1500 Rs per month that is proposed is also not new. It is an extension of Rs. 4000 per year we [at IISc] get every year.
I asked Giridhar if the recommendation about 20 years was accepted by the Central Government for its employees, and he said yes. He also pointed to pages 363-365 of the Sixth Pay Commission Report (caution: it's a pdf, and it's over 650 pages1) for an analysis of this recommendation.