Low Uptake of Unified Pension Scheme Sparks Debate
Despite its introduction as a potential alternative to the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) and National Pension System (NPS), the Unified Pension Scheme (UPS) has seen minimal adoption among central government employees. Only approximately 1% of the 2.7 million central government staff have opted for the UPS, citing concerns over its benefits compared to existing schemes. Analysts like Saikat Neogi highlight that employees are hesitant due to factors such as the 25-year service requirement, limited early retirement benefits, and unclear definitions of family eligibility for pensions. The UPS mandates a 10% employee contribution and 18.5% government contribution, with guaranteed pensions indexed to inflation. However, the perceived trade-offs, including the irreversible nature of the switch, have deterred widespread participation.
Government Efforts to Enhance UPS Appeal
In an attempt to address employee concerns, the Centre has introduced several measures to make the UPS more attractive. These include extending tax benefits from the NPS to the UPS, allowing tax-free withdrawal of 60% of the corpus at superannuation. Additionally, the government has incorporated OPS benefits for deceased employees and extended the deadline for switching from NPS to UPS. A one-time switch facility from UPS to NPS has also been introduced, though it is restricted for employees facing removal or compulsory retirement. These adjustments aim to alleviate anxieties over financial implications and long-term benefits, though their effectiveness remains under scrutiny.
Fiscal Implications and Pension Sustainability
The UPS is structured to minimize fiscal strain on government finances, with estimated additional costs of Rs 8,500 crore in FY26. However, long-term sustainability is bolstered by the fact that pension capital from deceased employees and retirees will not revert to their heirs, thereby augmenting government resources. This model avoids the need for frequent budgetary allocations for pension payouts, as basic pensions will not be adjusted with each Pay Commission award. Experts argue that such a design ensures financial prudence while addressing the growing pension liability for a large workforce.
State-Level Pension Reforms and Contrasts
While the UPS focuses on central government employees, state-level pension reforms have seen varied approaches. Most states have adopted the NPS, but several, including Punjab, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Himachal Pradesh, have reverted to the OPS. This shift reflects differing priorities and challenges in balancing fiscal responsibility with employee welfare. The OPS, despite its historical significance, faces criticism for its unsustainable long-term costs, prompting states to seek alternative models. The contrast between state and central pension policies highlights the complexity of reforming a system that impacts millions.
Global Pension Models and Lessons for India
India’s pension reforms are part of a global trend toward balancing employee benefits with fiscal sustainability. The UPS draws inspiration from international models that emphasize defined contribution schemes and private sector involvement. However, the success of such models depends on factors like employee trust, transparency, and economic stability. As India navigates these reforms, the challenge lies in designing a system that meets both current and future financial obligations while ensuring fairness and security for retirees.
About the Author
