A Punjab & Sind Bank officers’ federation reportedly wrote to the bank’s Chief General Manager (Human Resource Development) on 4 November 2026, raising complaints about extended working hours, leave decisions, staff reimbursements and administrative practices in the Noida region. The issues are union allegations and demands, not established findings against bank officials.
What did the federation submit?
A report published by Hellobanker on 4 November 2026 describes a written representation by the All India Punjab & Sind Bank Officers’ Federation (Code-91) addressed to the bank’s Chief General Manager, Human Resource Development. The communication focuses on working conditions in the Noida region. Submission of a representation is a news development in itself, but it is not a finding by an inquiry, a court judgment or a notified change to service rules.
The published report was examined for this article. We have not independently inspected a signed copy of the representation or an official bank response. Accordingly, allegations are attributed to the federation throughout and should not be read as independently verified misconduct by any regional officer.
Working hours and video-conference concerns
The federation alleges that regional video conferences are sometimes held late in the evening or during employees’ lunch time. It says that such meetings may require officers to remain at branches beyond ordinary hours. It further claims that end-of-day (EoD) processing is delayed or reversed, leaving staff unable to finish closing work on time. The federation says late travel from some branches creates additional safety worries.
The available evidence does not establish how often these practices occurred, who issued each instruction or whether a specific applicable written service rule was breached. A complaint affecting particular employees should not be presented as proof that every bank branch in the Noida region follows the same practice.
Leave, compensatory off and travel allowances
According to the report, the federation also alleges rejection of urgent or medical leave applications, non-grant of compensatory leave for certain holiday duties, and delays or rejection in travel allowance and daily/halting allowance claims. Eligibility for those benefits depends on the employee category, approval, applicable rules and the circumstances of each claim. The letter does not establish a bank-wide change to entitlements or prove that any particular claim was unlawfully denied.
The federation separately questioned lengthy local postings and repeated transfers within Delhi-NCR. Neither the relevant personnel records nor a response from employees or officials criticised in the representation was available for independent inspection. These statements therefore remain unresolved allegations.
What action has the federation requested?
- An independent review by senior human-resources officials of the reported Noida-region working conditions.
- Instructions against routine video conferences after normal operations or during lunch periods.
- Fair decisions on genuine emergency leave, and timely processing of eligible compensatory leave and TA/DA reimbursement claims.
- A review of regional-office postings and practical schedules to address older operational backlogs.
- Safeguards for staff safety, predictable working hours and dignified workplace treatment.
These are demands addressed to management. We have not verified their approval, the appointment of a fact-finding committee, disciplinary action or a fresh binding circular. The official management position on the 4 November representation was not established.
What this means for bank employees
For officers and staff, the immediate significance is that a representative body has reportedly placed concerns about working time and benefits before senior HR authorities. A union representation does not by itself alter leave eligibility, transfer orders, allowances or compensatory-off rules. Employees still need to rely on valid bank instructions and actual decisions by competent authorities.
Accurate reporting also requires a distinction between raising an operational grievance and proving personal misconduct. A fair review would examine written instructions, meeting schedules, branch logs, leave and reimbursement records, applicable rules and responses of all concerned parties.
What remains to be established?
Receipt or acknowledgement of the representation by the bank, the bank’s response, any formal inquiry, the accuracy of individual complaints and any resulting staff relief remain unconfirmed in the inspected reporting. A future authoritative bank notice or documented follow-up may justify a new report; it would be wrong to infer a resolution now.
Sources and References
Please consult the cited sources and check the exact applicability of any legal or employment change. Corrections are welcomed.
Join the discussion