Some of those who voted YES said:
• Yes I support NIDA’s demand for extending age superannuation from 60 to 62. As this will fill the gaps for shortage of medics in the state and retain experience doctors for better health care of the general public. One should also keep in mind that by agreeing to their demand, the government is doing service to its people and not harming anyone or blocking anyone’s entry into government service.
• YES I support the medical doctors. Majority of them retire from service not from length of service (35 years) but from age as they join government service very late comparing to other Technical field. Example, the length of course for MBBS is 5-6 years whereas the other allied technical course completes within 4 years. And if all the other states in India have implemented why not in Nagaland
• 100 per cent support for NIDA superannuation. When there is facts and figures showing shortage of doctors what is there to think about for so long? The recent pandemic where medical profession was made to work overtime and under a lot of duress - have they forgotten so soon??
• Why should we Nagas always twist things with so many opinions when it’s a simple case of a gift especially for the doctors of the country an Easter Sunday... a gift of life that is given to us. How I wish that our people will not be so short-sighted for short term gains. How I wish our people will learn to support one another when something is right.
• Yes, I strongly support NIDA’s claim. All the other states in India have granted that special superannuation for doctors. So why such big issue for such a small matter?
• Doctor’s entry into service is late so length of service should be increased to serve and benefit the public.
• Nagaland is the only state in India without a medical college. The number of Naga medical graduates passing out from other states is dismally low. We have the lowest doctor to patient ratio at 1:4000. I support NIDA’s demand for extending the superannuation of age from 60 to 62 yrs as our state needs more doctors who can give service.
• Unless the State Government promises to start employing more doctors, NIDA’s demand for superannuation of age to 62 years is probably the only way to retain the services of doctors. So I support their demand.
• I support NIDA’s demand for increasing the superannuation age as Nagaland has too few doctors compared to even our nearest neighbours and by increasing their length of service we may continue to avail their services which unlike other services, is life saving.
• Agreed YES because its Prime Minister Modiji promised to the doctors for their courageous sacrifices and other state had already implemented why the delays in Nagaland always
• Yes, I support the superannuation issue of NIDA from 60 to 62 years. Firstly, it is a present from the PM himself, who gifted it after assessing the shortage of medicos in government service. And it is common knowledge that Nagaland has the least number of doctors in service. Even if the superannuation issue is refused by the government, the manpower shortage issue won’t be solved by it. And practically, almost all the new graduates will be going for specialization after joining service, so a gap of 3-5 years will still be there. Increase in superannuation age will actually be an attraction for those who have completed specialization and be joining the service late, since they will have the comfort of working a couple of years extra, which is actually beneficial for our people. That’s just a single point based on practical aspect, out of many points.
• 1) Acute shortage of doctors in Nagaland 2) In line with PM announcement and implementation done in all states of India except Nagaland state.
• The NIDA has every right to demand superannuation and deserve it. It was a package announced by the PM and other states have all implemented it.
• I support government age of our doctors in Nagaland as it has been implemented in most states in India. Same privilege should be given to our state doctors also.
• It is their rights.
• Retain experienced doctors.
• I support superannuation of doctors since we have shortage of specialist doctors in our state.
• I support NIDA’s demand. Reason being that, that is the least we as public can do for their sacrifice during the 2 years they battled the covid-19 pandemic. Maybe that is the best way to say thanks for all that they have done. Why is the government trying to take action against them? Aren’t we an ungrateful lot?
• Their demand seems valid as the Prime Minister announced and 26 states implemented, why Naga doctors should not get the benefit. NSF should have opposed move in neighboring states like Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam where they have huge presence. The Government should give valid reasons for not implementing it instead of taking the NSF side as status quo.
• Medical doctors generally enter government service in their late 20s or early 30 only, because of their duration of studies and also NPSC recruitment for doctors does not happen every year unlike other services.
• It will benefit the people in general and with the two upcoming medical colleges we will need more experience doctors, at the same time it will make the medical system more robust.
• Why should Nagaland as a state have a lesser age of retirement as compared to the other states when it has already been implemented in other states of India?
• When the Prime minister has given his permission and the rest of the states across the country has implemented this act in no way should our state take away this right from the doctors.
• Government should approve NIDA demand. Prime Minster Modi has approved it. All other states of India has implemented the age of doctors retirement to 65, under guidance of Prime minister. The doctors have sacrifice their life saving our life for the pandemic COVID-19 where all common people were sitting at home and some were criticising rather than helping them. This time we all should come forward and stand together to support the doctor’s demand.
• I fully support the NIDA demand to enhance the superannuation age of medical doctors from 60 to 62 years. It was announced by our PM few years ago to enhanced the retiring age of medical doctors only in India to 65 years or so due to dearth of qualified doctors more so less number of experienced medical professionals in clinical settings as most of them are retiring at 60years of age. so far as a positive response to PM announcement 25 states in India have implemented the superannuation issue and raised the retiring age of medical doctors in their respective states some to 62, 65, 70 etc. I think NIDA is not asking too much from our state government.
• Shortage of specialist doctors, all non specialist doctors who join early will retire due to 35years length of service but specialists are difficult to study and usually join 4 to 5 years later.
• It will help vacancy issue
• MBBS takes 6 years to graduate whereas ARTS student takes only 3 years to graduate and are eligible to compete for NPSC and gets selected for EAC and DSPs and moreover those NCS and NPS gets IPS and IAS confirmation in their long years of service. Doctor’s entry into service is delayed by atleast 2 to 3 years minimum and hardly any doctor gets to serve for 35 years as they retire because of age and hardly by length of service. To produce one doctor government has to spent lots of time and money as we don’t have any medical college yet. Sad to say only state in India that does not have a medical college i.e. Nagaland. GOD bless Nagaland
• Most of the other states in India, including our neighbours, have increased superannuation age for doctors, in line with Prime Minister’s policy to tide over the shortage of trained doctors. We being one of the only states without a medical college and with plans of 2 medical colleges coming up, we need to retained senior experienced doctors as well as recruit new doctors.
• Every other state understood and went ahead. Want to hear what the government’s reason is for the refusal.
• It has been adopted in 26 states, which the Prime Minister of India announced in 26th May 2016. The Government is making a mockery of itself by taking NSF along where the Government has to take the decision. On top of it why did NSF which has presence in other states like Manipur, Arunachal, Assam not oppose when it was implemented there. I guess it’s jealously why Naga doctors can’t benefit. If the Government is opposed to the move it should justify and give valid reasons instead of taking side with NSF.
• I support the superannuation age of medical doctors in the state taking into consideration the need of more doctors (both new and experienced doctors) for the new upcoming medical colleges and new formed districts in the state.
• At the outset it was a gift announced by our PM Narendra Modi in 2016 solely for all the medical doctors in India. The main reason being major chunk of highly qualified and experienced doctors retiring prematurely at 60years when they are at the zenith of their professional career. So to benefit patients to get the best professionals care our PM increased the retirement age to 65 but like I said only for Medical Doctors. 25states in India has already implemented it, thereby increasing the retiring age of doctors in their respective states thus far. NIDA are not asking something new on their own or impossible issue but rather requesting our government to follow suit what 25 states in India has already implemented for their doctors as a sign of gratitude to doctors for sacrificing the last 2 years risking their own life fighting 24x7 during COVID pandemic thus saving thousands of lives of our people.
• Yes, they deserved because our society demand more experienced doctors. Unlike other professions, doctor’s profession requires experience as we have witnessed in this pandemic period. Give them 62 years to serve our people.
• Doctors willing to serve public longer should be welcomed
• I support superannuation age of our doctors in Nagaland as it has been implemented in most states in India. Same privilege should be given to our state doctors also.
• Reason is when all other states have increased the superannuation age, why is Nagaland attracting negative attention by refusing the demands of its doctors?
Some of those who voted NO said:
• They have been is service for almost 30 years and they want to extend it for another 2 years. Why? To improve health condition of the state? I doubt. The health care facilities of the state are in worse state when compared to the rest of the nation. Increasing the retirement age is not going to help; they are aged now, frail and weak. They couldn’t do anything to improve the health care over the last 30 years, adding another 2 years will be wastage of the state government’s exchequer. Every year around 40-50 doctors pass out but the state government hardly recruit them into the government services. Hardly 10-15 doctors are recruited through NPSC once in 2-3 years as medical officers. There is no recruitment for specialist doctors. So instead of increasing the retirement age, the government should recruit more of fresh and enthusiastic young doctors.
• I do not support NIDA demand regarding age Superannuation demand. Since there are lot of medical doctors who are graduate and unemployed in our state.
• It will create precedence for other services also. Moreover it will create more unemployment in medical fraternity.
• No. Don’t support at all. There are many reasons. But will mention only one here: give others a chance too. I mean a government doctors job is not only the only hope for the aspiring and future doctors in the making, but those in service after having done their due course/part of their profession. Let others in too.
• If they really want to serve people, serve voluntary even after retirement
• Rampant age tampering is prevalent
• Employees should not force the employer to fulfill their demands. Doctors demand what they want, as simple as that, but the government has to study the feasibility from all the four corners including for future generations. Doctors in Central Health Service have been enhanced to 65 years, doesn’t mean that all state government must follow this rule. There are lots of differences between Central government employees and state government. So, being doctor must maintain the status quo at any cost. They are the employee of the state government to serve the people. Doctors but not so doctorate employees.
• Those who studied Medicine or any Technical streams under the state sponsorship should not dictate the State government. Their studies were funded by public money. For medics they take non practice allowance and run their own clinics and work in private hospitals and those working in administrative positions never sent medicines and equipments to the people meant for, and few dedicated suffer and get blamed equally.
• Selfish demand backed by some senior doctors who wants to hold the administrative position to continue corruption. The proposal by Modi and central government is to let senior experience doctors who have reached the retiring age to continue serving as doctors in clinics and hospitals /or become faculty/professors in medical college. Nothing was mentioned about holding administrative post. If the NIDA wants to continue serving in remote areas as doctors or teach in the newly establish medical college, I fully support the extending of superannuation of age. But if it is solely for continuation of administrative post, all Nagas should oppose to this selfish demand. Bottom line - I doubt whether those senior doctors who are holding administrative post will even know how to do medical work or even administer medicines to patients. I also believe some students unions are being used/misguided by senior doctors to promote their selfish interest.
• More vacancy and recruitment should be carried out for any shortage
• They can serve in their own private capacity if they really want to continue providing service to the people. It is time they made way and give opportunity to the younger generation.
• As my personal view I don’t support their demand. Most doctors in Nagaland the work in both private and government this creates lack in government medical department. Look at the government hospitals, doctor don’t go at their posting place they mostly focus on personal private hospital. So it’s injustice their demand, they must focus in one area Private or government.
• Youngsters are waiting for job vacancy.
• 1. Many government employed doctor neglect their duty and do not want to go and serve people when they are posted/transfer in some remote place/small town.
2. Some government doctor even practice in private clinics/hospitals which is illegal. There are many good doctors who really dedicate their life to serve people, but some are driven away by cash and corrupt practices. These are some reasons why many common people are reluctant to support them.
• Given the financial situation of the state government, No. Given the poor work ethics of most of the doctors (they are even absent in district hospitals), No.
• Isn’t 60 years just enough to retire? Why extra time? Just give way for younger doctors.
• No, superannuation extended is not a solution, more post should be created regarding the shortage of doctors in Nagaland by the government.
• No, they just want to eat more money! here Im broke and still not begging for money though I need money too
• 60 years of age or 35 years of service is enough for our Naga society, please give chance to younger generation with latest and modern technology. Doctors no offence please
• No. No need to be so greed for money. 60 years is enough to earn for future. They should think and give chance to their next.
• If it’s a yes, who knows what else its outcome be. Next nurses, police, teachers, etc fighting for extension. So, it’s a no.
• If their objective behind the demand is shortage of doctors in the state then I suggest more attention should be given to creating medical colleges in the state and more recruitment of doctors through NPSC should be conducted instead of superannuation of age. So in my opinion NO.
• 60 years is quite enough and ideal age for retirement. If they want to serve more after the retirement, there’s always a way out. Even if they try to hide themselves from work after retirement, general public (patients) will always run after them because patient’s trust for Doctors is something we cannot define but one has to meet his Doctor by any means.
• 60 years or 35 years of service is enough. Extension will only benefit them and not even a single being. We can define them as being selfish and nothing less. Extending their service won’t solve the demand in shortage of doctors.
• Was 30-35 years of service not enough?
• There’s absolutely no logic in extending the superannuation age of Doctors. Infact no department should follow even such a suit. To be able to serve till the age of 60 is more than adequate and sufficient. On times when there’s ample of young qualified candidates, to aske for age superannuation especially at this juncture is nothing but selfishness. On contrary, the Government should instead focus on strengthening more medical staff which is the need of the hour.
• Almost all doctors have private practice from 2 pm. Greedy bunch from my view.
• Not only medical department but entire department. Service should count the length of year from the date of appointment and the length of years should be 30 years. 30 years of service is more than enough. We should think for the upcoming generation. Don’t be so greedy
Some of those who voted OTHERS said:
• No and yes if they are willing to serve the people without salary.
• Extend if they really care but without pay. This extension will never benefit a single being except those narcissist doctors.
