The other day I met a fighter pilot pushing 80, a little hard of hearing but with his memory sharp. He was reminiscing about his early days in the air force. He and his friend went to Tambaram to join the air force, but on different dates. Although one of them was to be a pilot and the other an airman neither knew what the differences between the two jobs were. This was in 1948. The focus then was on getting a government job. Decades later, not much seems to have changed. Even today, most entrants see defence as a government job. The military seems to be the tail-end of choices for candidates who have exhausted all other opportunities. The air force today needs people with potential high skills and management traits. Nearly everyone who joins the air force gets to know about the required skills only after signing up. When a candidate signs for a “Permanent Commission” he is signing off his civil liberty for the rest of his working life. The recent Delhi High Court ruling on the case of three air force pilots who wanted an honourable discharge after serving for a decade or so has exposed the malady. Is the verdict, advising them against it, meant to be a message to others who want to leave? Permanent Commission, viewed in this context, sounds ominous. The decisions on how and where to employ an officer and when to discharge him rests solely with the government and the president. Rarely does anyone in the air force, while in service and until about to retire, talk about a second career — it is like discussing life after death. Fresh entrants in the private sector have a fairly good idea about their work and emoluments. On an average, such people change jobs every 3-5 years. In 2002-03, the air force commissioned a survey across the country on what young people think about a career in the IAF. The findings were interesting. First, the majority felt that the public is not aware of the job description and the skills required. Second, they felt that the potential for career growth after 8-10 years of service was not inspiring. Third, there was disquiet about not being able to exercise choice at the place of work; the hard living conditions and military discipline were also issues. The pay, however, was not that serious a matter.The terms and conditions of military service should change with the times, based on the job market and public sentiment. There has been no change in the Permanent Commission for at least 60 years. I have not found any democracy in the world that has “Permanent-ly Commissioned” officers with an unspecified minimum period of engagement. The Royal Air Force defines the minimum period of engagement as 6-12 years. In the US Air Force, commissioned officers can apply for retirement after 10 years of service. Interestingly, they advertise that skills learnt in the military improve their job prospects after they leave it. Much effort is made to train military personnel to make them acceptable in civil sectors. This approach attracts quality manpower. In India, military qualifications are useless for civil jobs.The recent court verdict gives one the feeling that the air force wants to discourage its personnel from quitting. This goes against the fundamental rights from a citizen’s point of view. The government should not expect a person to sign up “for life” in the military. It is quite reasonable to assume that if an officer performs satisfactorily for a 10-year period he has given enough to the air force in return for the skills he has acquired. It is not a cost audit on how much the government spends and how much an employee contributes. If a pilot has saved an aircraft, or crashes due to pilot error, all the accounting would come to nought. It is perhaps the right time to examine the terms and conditions of service and to exploit the skill-sets available in a manner that would stop military men from running to the courts. The time is also right for re-examining personnel requirement. Modern air forces have a shortfall of at least 30 per cent in manpower. Indian industries and skill-sets can effectively support military aviation in all areas other than operations. It should be feasible to create private ventures, combining the skills of ex-servicemen with the industrial skills and investments that can undertake all support activities such as the maintenance of aircraft, infrastructure and civil assets and training. It is not too difficult to make a beginning, knowing well that the intentions are good and the action would benefit all concerned.The writer is a retired Air Chief Marshal express@expressindia.com
