RTI Data Reveals Low Migration Rates to Unified Pension Scheme
Recent data obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) request has exposed a stark divide among Central Government employees regarding the Unified Pension Scheme (UPS). As of October 22, 2025, only 97,094 out of 24,66,314 employees covered under the National Pension System (NPS) have opted to transition to the UPS, according to the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA). This figure highlights a significant reluctance among the workforce to embrace the new model, despite government assurances of improved benefits. The UPS, introduced as an alternative contributory pension framework, has faced resistance from employees who argue it fails to address their core concerns. The latest migration deadline, extended to November 30, 2025, has not swayed the majority, indicating a deep-seated preference for the existing system.
Employee Stance Contradicts Government Assurances
The government’s push for the UPS has been met with skepticism, particularly from veteran trade union leaders like C. Srikumar, who has consistently advocated for the restoration of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS). Srikumar emphasized that employees have clearly expressed unwillingness to migrate to the UPS, citing its perceived inadequacies. The All India Defence Employees Federation (AIDEF) has been a vocal critic, boycotting meetings to demand the reinstatement of the OPS. Employees argue that the UPS retains 90% of pension wealth without returning it to contributors, violating Supreme Court directives that classify pensions as deferred wages. This legal and ethical debate underscores the tension between government policy and employee rights.
Legal and Ethical Concerns Over Pension Structure
Central Government employees governed by the CCS (Conduct) Rules assert that their legal obligation to serve the public does not extend to accepting reduced pension benefits. They highlight systemic inequalities, questioning why non-contributory pensions are granted to elected representatives and armed forces but not to civilian staff. The exclusion of civilian employees from the NPS, despite their inclusion in the UPS, has further fueled discontent. Critics argue that the UPS’s structure contradicts constitutional principles, as it withholds pension funds without clear justification. These concerns have not been adequately addressed by the government, leaving employees feeling marginalized and betrayed.
Trade Union Criticisms of Government Employment Practices
C. Srikumar has also condemned the government’s adoption of corporate-style employment practices, such as outsourcing and contractual hiring, which he claims erode employee security and morale. These measures, he argues, reflect a failure to engage with trade unions and prioritize the welfare of public servants. Additionally, the privatization of services and the exclusion of Ordnance Factory employees from the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) have been labeled as attempts to evade responsibility. Srikumar’s call for the government to act as a model employer underscores the growing disconnect between policy makers and the workforce they are meant to serve.
Call for Revisiting Pension Reforms and Legal Frameworks
The ongoing resistance to the UPS highlights the urgent need for a reevaluation of pension reforms and their alignment with legal and ethical standards. Employees demand transparency in how pension wealth is managed and a restoration of the OPS to ensure their rights are upheld. As the government continues to face scrutiny, the debate over pension schemes remains a critical issue in public administration. The voices of trade unions and employees must be prioritized to foster trust and ensure equitable treatment for all government workers.
About the Author
