Minimal Participation in Unified Pension Scheme Despite Extended Deadline
As of July 20, 2025, only 30,989 Central Government employees have opted for the Unified Pension Scheme (UPS), representing a mere 1.35% participation rate among the 2.3 million employees enrolled in the National Pension System (NPS). This low uptake has prompted the government to extend the opt-in deadline from June 30 to September 30, 2025. Despite repeated assurances about the scheme’s benefits, the majority of eligible staff remain with NPS, citing its flexibility and tax advantages. The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) confirmed that it does not track department-wise or cadre-specific data, complicating efforts to assess the scheme’s reception across different sectors. This lack of granular transparency has raised concerns about the effectiveness of the policy shift aimed at balancing fiscal responsibility with employee security.
Employee Preferences and Institutional Concerns
Central Government employees have expressed reluctance to adopt UPS, with many favoring the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) for its defined-benefit structure. S. B. Yadav, Secretary General of the Confederation of Central Government Employees & Workers, highlighted that employees prefer the non-contributory, statutory nature of OPS over the hybrid model of UPS. Additionally, the exclusion of autonomous institutions like the National Capital Territory of Delhi from the UPS framework has sparked debates about equity in pension reforms. Critics argue that the scheme’s design fails to address the diverse needs of public sector workers, particularly those in specialized roles. The absence of clear communication about the transition’s benefits has further fueled skepticism among employees.
Comparative Analysis of Pension Schemes
The UPS was conceived as a middle ground between NPS and OPS, combining employee contributions with guaranteed pension payouts. Under the new scheme, retirees would receive 50% of their average basic pay, with a minimum floor of ₹10,000 per month, and the inclusion of inflation-indexing to preserve purchasing power. However, these measures have not swayed the majority of employees, who remain loyal to NPS’s flexibility or OPS’s predictability. The contrast between the two systems underscores the challenge of aligning pension reforms with employee expectations. While the government aims to modernize the system, the low adoption rate suggests that the transition may face significant resistance without additional incentives or clearer communication.
Challenges in Data Transparency and Implementation
The PFRDA’s admission of limited data tracking has raised questions about the feasibility of monitoring UPS’s progress. Without state-wise or department-wise metrics, it is difficult to identify which sectors are adopting the scheme or where the barriers lie. This lack of transparency complicates efforts to refine the policy or address specific concerns. For instance, All-India Services officers like IAS, IPS, and IFS cadres are not separately tracked, making it hard to assess their unique needs. The absence of detailed reporting could hinder the government’s ability to adjust the scheme effectively, potentially leading to prolonged resistance from employees and stakeholders.
Uncertain Future for Unified Pension Scheme
With just two months remaining until the final deadline, the fate of UPS remains uncertain. The low participation rate has sparked debates about whether the scheme will gain traction or become another failed policy experiment. Critics argue that the government’s approach overlooks the deep-rooted trust employees have in existing systems like NPS and OPS. The lack of a clear roadmap for implementation and the absence of incentives for adoption have further exacerbated the issue. As the deadline approaches, the government faces mounting pressure to address these concerns or risk prolonging the transition’s challenges. The outcome of this policy shift could have long-term implications for public sector pension reforms in India.
About the Author
