IAF tries hard to curb discontent in its ranks
George Iype in New Delhi
The Indian Air Force is facing unprecedented turbulence after new pay-scales for its fighter pilots and technical staff were announced recently.
Wide disparity in the pay-scales of fighter pilots and their colleagues in the engineering wing forced the wives of many IAF engineers to demonstrate on the streets outside the IAF Technical College at Jalahalli station in Bangalore earlier this week.
While the protests have forced Air Chief Marshal S K Sareen to set up a committee to study the newly-structured pay-scales, IAF insiders say the real issues in the current turmoil go much beyond disparities in remuneration: they are about the lop-sided policies of the IAF brass.
The high-level committee headed by Air Marshal T R Janakiraman, comprising senior officers from the technical, non-technical and flying wings of the IAF, will submit its report within six weeks.
The committee members will visit the air bases which were most affected by the protests -- which are unique in the IAF's history -- to listen to the
grievances of the technical personnel, mainly engineers, system maintenance staff and airmen.
The engineering staff allege that while the new pay structure provides them allowances ranging from Rs 226 to Rs 750 every month,
it has given their counterparts in the flying wing monthly allowances ranging from Rs 7,000 for transport and helicopter pilots to Rs 9,000 for fighter pilots.
An IAF engineer based in New Delhi told Rediff On The NeT, on condition of anonymity, that the anomaly in the wage structure has been caused
by the policies followed by Air Chief Marshal Sareen, himself a fighter pilot, during his tenure.
According to him, the Fifth Pay Commission had only recommended a salary hike of Rs 2,000 for fighter pilots over and above the wages for the IAF's technical crew.
"But Air Headquarters, under directions from Air Chief Marshal Sareen, decided to increase the pay of fighter pilots by Rs 7,000, ignoring the pittance that we receive," the IAF engineer complained.
The technical personnel argue that without the support of the ground staff, the fighter pilots would be grounded. Hence, they say, there is no point in differentiating in remuneration between the IAF's two wings.
Officials at Air Headquarters and the defence ministry justify the enhanced flying allowance to fighter pilots on the basis of the risks involved.
A ministry spokesperson said there is a difference between the risk-based allowance (given to fighter pilots) and
qualification pay (as demanded by the technical officers).
"The two risks are not comparable as the risk-based allowance is based on the actual physical risk to which
fighter pilots are exposed to on a daily basis, and not on the qualification of the personnel involved," he said.
"Flying fighter planes involves considerable risks as does flying helicopter and transport aircraft, especially in high
altitudes and hazardous areas. The mortality rate of pilots is 80 per cent of all fatalities in the IAF, the average age
at the time of fatality being a little over 32 years," the ministry spokesman added.
While the debate on the pay scales continues, IAF sources say there are other issues involved in the current turmoil.
They point out to a study by the Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences, which is highly critical of
the IAF brass. 'The top brass of the Air Force needs to have a vision -- mission building, the survival and growth
of the organisation as a whole,' the study said.
The DIAPS study, authored by Dr S N Srivastava and P M Gopinathan, said the engineering and technical officers
in the IAF are not 'treated well,' and they are 'the favourite whipping boys' of the IAF brass.
Noting that most of the IAF policies are made by and for fighter pilots, the study stated that the air force's 'policy makers have
to realise that the genesis of safety in the air has its moorings in ground maintenance.'
'There is a strong need to change the traditional attitude of ''I operate and you only maintain" in the IAF,' concludes the study.
Experts say it is time the IAF sorted out these problems before it adversely affects combat preparedness.
Tell us what you think of this report
|
