Ludhiana: State teachers' union submits charter of demands to dist officials
Led by the state teachers' union, the memorandum raises strong concerns over long-standing issues that have remained unresolved, despite repeated assurances. The union demanded that salaries of all employees be released by the first of every month without delay. Pending dues such as GPF advances, leave encashment, and other financial benefits should be cleared immediately.
Another key demand is the generalisation of favourable court decisions across similar teacher recruitment cases, ensuring uniform relief for all affected teachers. The union also urged the state government to revoke rejected transfer requests and to stop unwarranted political interference in the formation and functioning of school management committees.
The memorandum also appeals for the restoration of academic dignity by ending non-teaching duties imposed on teachers—especially tasks assigned on Sundays and holidays, such as data form submissions and document collections. Teachers insisted that all cadres, including ETT, C&V, master cadre, lecturers, principals, BPEOs, and assistant directors, receive timely promotions and vacant posts be filled on priority.
The union also highlighted the need to address the staffing crisis. It demanded filling of vacant posts for clerks, data entry operators, and support staff, especially at block and district offices. Additionally, 59 contractual employees and 29 dismissed headmasters working under Samagra Shiksha should be made permanent and reinstated immediately.
Teachers from Model Schools, Meritorious Schools, and Adarsh Schools, including those under NSQF, demanded inclusion under regular pay scales. A special transfer window was also requested for teachers promoted to lecturer posts or working outside their preferred districts.
Importantly, the union urged the reinstatement of 1904 abolished posts of head teachers and subject-specific positions like drawing teachers and work education instructors in middle schools.
On the financial front, the union demanded the restoration of the Old Pension Scheme, withdrawal of pay cuts under central scales, reinstatement of the higher grade pay introduced in 2011, and restoration of all withheld allowances. They also called for the implementation of the 7th Pay Commission's final report with 2.59 fitment factor from January 2016 and the immediate release of 125% pending dearness allowance.
Another major point was the demand for periodic pay revisions every five years as recommended by the Kothari Commission. Families of teachers who lost their lives due to COVID-19 should receive ₹50 lakh ex-gratia and assured government jobs for dependents.
'The 8886 teachers should receive complete salary and allowances from April 2018, and recent central scale notifications issued after July 17, 2020, should be withdrawn. Teachers recruited under advertisement numbers for ETT (180 posts), master cadre (3582 posts), and DPE (837 posts) must be brought under uniform pay scales, revoking dual salary structures,' said Jagjit Singh Mann, district president of the union.
The union warned that if these demands are not met soon, the teaching community across Punjab will intensify its protest.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Alarm over falling birth rates in the US is misplaced
Pronatalism – the belief that low birth rates are a problem that must be reversed – is having a moment in the US. As birth rates decline in the US and throughout the world, voices from Silicon Valley to the White House are raising concerns about what they say could be the calamitous effects of steep population decline on the economy. The Trump administration has said it is seeking ideas on how to encourage Americans to have more children as the US experiences its lowest total fertility rate in history, down about 25% since 2007. As demographers who study fertility, family behaviors and childbearing intentions, we can say with certainty that population decline is not imminent, inevitable or necessarily catastrophic. The population collapse narrative hinges on three key misunderstandings. First, it misrepresents what standard fertility measures tell us about childbearing and makes unrealistic assumptions that fertility rates will follow predictable patterns far into the future. Second, it overstates the impact of low birth rates on future population growth and size. Third, it ignores the role of economic policies and labour market shifts in assessing the impacts of low birth rates. Fertility fluctuations Demographers generally gauge births in a population with a measure called the total fertility rate. The total fertility rate for a given year is an estimate of the average number of children that women would have in their lifetime if they experienced current birth rates throughout their childbearing years. Fertility rates are not fixed – in fact, they have changed considerably over the past century. In the US, the total fertility rate rose from about 2 births per woman in the 1930s to a high of 3.7 births per woman around 1960. The rate then dipped below 2 births per woman in the late 1970s and 1980s before returning to 2 births in the 1990s and early 2000s. Since the Great Recession that lasted from late 2007 until mid-2009, the U.S. total fertility rate has declined almost every year, with the exception of very small post-Covid-19 pandemic increases in 2021 and 2022. In 2024, it hit a record low, falling to 1.6. This drop is primarily driven by declines in births to people in their teens and early 20s – births that are often unintended. But while the total fertility rate offers a snapshot of the fertility landscape, it is not a perfect indicator of how many children a woman will eventually have if fertility patterns are in flux – for example, if people are delaying having children. Picture a 20-year-old woman today, in 2025. The total fertility rate assumes she will have the same birth rate as today's 40-year-olds when she reaches 40. That's not likely to be the case, because birth rates 20 years from now for 40-year-olds will almost certainly be higher than they are today, as more births occur at older ages and more people are able to overcome infertility through medically assisted reproduction. A more nuanced picture of childbearing These problems with the total fertility rate are why demographers also measure how many total births women have had by the end of their reproductive years. In contrast to the total fertility rate, the average number of children ever born to women ages 40 to 44 has remained fairly stable over time, hovering around two. Americans continue to express favorable views toward childbearing. Ideal family size remains at two or more children, and 9 in 10 adults either have, or would like to have, children. However, many Americans are unable to reach their childbearing goals. This seems to be related to the high cost of raising children and growing uncertainty about the future. In other words, it doesn't seem to be the case that birth rates are low because people are uninterested in having children; rather, it's because they don't feel it's feasible for them to become parents or to have as many children as they would like. Prediction challenges Standard demographic projections do not support the idea that population size is set to shrink dramatically. One billion people lived on Earth 250 years ago. Today there are over 8 billion, and by 2100 the United Nations predicts there will be over 10 billion. That's 2 billion more, not fewer, people in the foreseeable future. Admittedly, that projection is plus or minus 4 billion. But this range highlights another key point: Population projections get more uncertain the further into the future they extend. Predicting the population level five years from now is far more reliable than 50 years from now – and beyond 100 years, forget about it. Most population scientists avoid making such long-term projections, for the simple reason that they are usually wrong. That's because fertility and mortality rates change over time in unpredictable ways. The US population size is also not declining. Currently, despite fertility below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman, there are still more births than deaths. The US population is expected to grow by 22.6 million by 2050 and by 27.5 million by 2100, with immigration playing an important role. Low fertility and an economic crisis A common rationale for concern about low fertility is that it leads to a host of economic and labour market problems. Specifically, pronatalists argue that there will be too few workers to sustain the economy and too many older people for those workers to support. However, that is not necessarily true – and even if it were, increasing birth rates wouldn't fix the problem. As fertility rates fall, the age structure of the population shifts. But a higher proportion of older adults does not necessarily mean the proportion of workers to nonworkers falls. For one thing, the proportion of children under age 18 in the population also declines, so the number of working-age adults – usually defined as ages 18 to 64 – often changes relatively little. And as older adults stay healthier and more active, a growing number of them are contributing to the economy. Labour force participation among Americans ages 65 to 74 increased from 21.4% in 2003 to 26.9% in 2023 — and is expected to increase to 30.4% by 2033. Modest changes in the average age of retirement or in how Social Security is funded would further reduce strains on support programs for older adults. What's more, pronatalists' core argument that a higher birth rate would increase the size of the labour force overlooks some short-term consequences. More babies means more dependents, at least until those children become old enough to enter the labour force. Children not only require expensive services such as education, but also reduce labour force participation, particularly for women. As fertility rates have fallen, women's labour force participation rates have risen dramatically – from 34% in 1950 to 58% in 2024. Pronatalist policies that discourage women's employment are at odds with concerns about a diminishing number of workers. Research shows that economic policies and labour market conditions, not demographic age structures, play the most important role in determining economic growth in advanced economies. And with rapidly changing technologies like automation and artificial intelligence, it is unclear what demand there will be for workers in the future. Moreover, immigration is a powerful – and immediate – tool for addressing labour market needs and concerns over the proportion of workers. Overall, there's no evidence for Elon Musk's assertion that 'humanity is dying'. While the changes in population structure that accompany low birth rates are real, in our view the impact of these changes has been dramatically overstated. Strong investments in education and sensible economic policies can help countries successfully adapt to a new demographic reality. Leslie Root.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Trump tariff move unlikely to derail Tamil Nadu's industrial ambitions: Industries Minister Rajaa
CHENNAI: Tamil Nadu is prepared to absorb the impact of new US tariffs, State Industries Minister Dr TRB Rajaa said on Thursday, after US President Donald Trump announced a 25% duty on goods imported from India, escalating trade tensions between the two countries. Speaking on the sidelines of the second edition of Passenger Vehicle Expo, Rajaa said India's most industrialised state had already laid contingency plans to shield key sectors such as manufacturing, textiles, and footwear from sudden trade shocks. 'We've seen the Covid impact, we've seen global disruptions,' he said. 'If there's one state that's resilient enough to weather this, it's Tamil Nadu.' Rajaa said he was 'unhappy' with Trump's rhetoric. 'As an Indian, and as a representative of Tamil Nadu, I found the language disturbing. But we will stand by the Union government and hope the Prime Minister and his Cabinet respond with wisdom, balancing the interests of our farmers, the primary sector, and industry.' He also warned against overinterpreting the tariff move based on a single post. 'This is diplomacy in trade between two of the world's largest economies,' he said. 'It's unfortunate the US President chose such a platform for such a major announcement. But I trust Prime Minister Narendra Modi will respond in the appropriate format.'
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Rahul & Tejashwi like UP's failed 2 boys: BJP
Patna: NDA partners BJP and JD(U) on Thursday hit back at the INDIA bloc's announcement that Congress MP Rahul Gandhi and RJD leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav will jointly campaign in Bihar against the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls being conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in the state. Reacting to the announcement, BJP state president Dilip Jaiswal said, "Rahul and Tejashwi will meet the same fate in Bihar as the 'two boys' did in Uttar Pradesh." Jaiswal was referring to the earlier failed alliance between Rahul Gandhi and Samajwadi Party's Akhilesh Yadav in that state. He added, "The Nitish Kumar-led govt has drawn such a long line of development in Bihar that no opposition alliance can do anything against us. " Jan Suraaj Party founder Prashant Kishor also took aim at the opposition while speaking in Muzaffarpur. Referring to Rahul's proposed tour of Bihar, he said, "They try to fool people for votes. During Covid, people of Bihar walked home from Delhi and Mumbai. What did these opposition leaders do for them then?" Criticising both Rahul and Tejashwi, JD(U) spokesman Arvind Nishad said, "They have diminished the dignity of the leader of opposition at the Centre and in the state, respectively." Rahul currently serves as leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha while Tejashwi holds the post in the Bihar legislative assembly. Deputy CM Vijay Kumar Sinha said, "They are running away from the truth. The ECI has given a month's time for raising objections. But instead of using that democratic provision, they are going on a yatra." Sinha's remarks provoked sharp criticism from both the RJD and Congress. AICC media panellist Premchand Mishra said, "The BJP leader's statement only reveals how frightened they are of Rahul ahead of the elections." RJD spokesman Rishi Mishra added, "It is unfortunate for the state that we have a deputy CM like Sinha, who never speaks about the work of his department and only engages in divisive politics."
