The Vajpayee government has announced the increase in retirement age for the Armed Forces. But will this turn out to be the proverbial carrot, or the last straw that broke the camel's back is what the Chosen Ones are now wondering.Predictably enough, this decision works well for those who are already Lt Generals, or else were on the brink of retirement. But what of the common soldier in his mufti, or the ambitious young captain who looked forward to climbing the rungs of success slowly but surely? Wise Men say that the decision will lead to a tremendous stagnation and thence to a simmering resentment within the Forces.As it is, as opposed to other foreign armies, the Indian army man is much older in age. Further, his civilian counterpart is younger and also much more junior in terms of actual service; for instance, a Joint Secretary attains his rank with 14-16 years of service, and is equivalent to a Major General in the Army with paradoxically 32 (now increased to 34) years, which same has long been asore point and a major case of de-motivation within the Services.To continue, the Armed Forces, which forms roughly 55 per cent of Central government employee force, is the only organisation where different ranks have different ages, thus leading to a sharp pyramid at the top (among the civilian Central government employees, peon and officer alike retire at the age of 58 - now 60 - years).In the IAS, the moment an individual is cleared for promotion, an in situ appointment is created, whereby he can avail of pay and perks accordingly. It is well known that the pyramid-like structure of the army has caused many a worthy man to hang up his uniform due to the No Vacancy sign.The younger the man the better the soldier. The bulk of the Armed Forces retires at 48 anyway, which will now be amended to 50. Does it really help? It means that a man will be turned out a little later, when he is a little older, and it is much to late to repatriate him. It means that there will be older men commanding infantrybattalions. Soldiers overall will be physically less fit, with a reduction in reflexes.It is understood that the Army Chief has asked for an informal opinion poll from junior officers. Similarly, exercises are being conducted by the Air Force and the Navy. So far, three clear options to surmount the staggering stagnation problem have emerged, to wit: Across the Board, wherein everyone retires 2 years later so that the present hierarchical system remains; Tenure System, wherein Army Commanders and Director Generals have a tenure of not more than 3-4 years, to assist in movement of officers, and the Phased System, wherein the decision of increase in retirement age should be implemented gradually.An in-house study carried out by the College of Defence Management, Secunderabad, recommends the third option. An officer retiring in 1998 should get a 6-month extension; 1999 would be one year, and so on, so that in about 4 years, the 2-year tenet is absorbed and promotions are not held up earlier.A largecross section of officers are upset over the promotion block. This reporter spoke to a group of about 20 officers at the rank of Colonel, and roughly a hundred at the rank of Captain, selected at random. While the older officers favour the Phased method, the younger lot think the Tenure System might be best if worked out well and adhered to, as it gave more people scope to strive for the post of Top Dog.The JCO level, which is actually the cutting edge of the Army, is by and large apprehensive, what with the Stay or Leave option they have been given. However, it is almost certain that the bulk would prefer to stay on for the security of an additional two years pay packet.On the bright side, which is always there if one looks hard enough, is the fact that the country gets to benefit for a further two years from the training and money invested in a soldier. By far, the most sensible and practical suggestion of man management had come from a serving General, who opines that a later movement or deputationto civil service ministries such as Home, Defence, and Foreign might help.For one, it will affect lower cadre structures in the Armed Forces in a major and positive way, so that command is not blocked; secondly, it provides a service man with a different perspective of life, so that when he eventually does retire, he is not all at sea. He could even be absorbed into the IPS, BSF, CRPF, and TA which was happening earlier anyway.There is an infinite number of reported suicide/ depressive cases, once a man has been asked to leave the cocoon he sheltered in for almost 30-33 years of his life, and, having done so, finds himself unfit for anything else. Having served the nation to the best of his ability, he has not been left with enough time to better himself or the lot of his family. Insofar as that is concerned, the government has a responsibility to all its servant to provide work until the age of 60 years.
