INFORMATION IS POWER: WHY MORE UN RETIREES NEED TO BE INFORMED ABOUT PENSION ISSUES AND WHY EACH OF US NEEDS TO DO OUR PART (including engaging our local retiree associations and reaching out to other retirees)
This post is in response to some of the comments on the discussion thread on my post of the summary of the recent UN Pension Briefing by UN Participant Representatives to the Pension Board, who represent active UN staff and also advocate for the interests of UN retirees. It's an important topic and one that's worth considering. Specifically, for the sake of the continued health of our Fund, we need the reforms in General Assembly resolution A/73/274 to be implemented. Pushback is intense from the Pension Board, which includes some key members of the UN Administration, the Fund Secretariat management, and FAFICS, the UN retiree representative body, on many of the major reforms contained in the resolution, including on direct election by retirees of our Pension Board representatives, and necessary adjustments to the composition of the Board.
Why do many UN retirees remain uninformed about issues concerning our Fund? OIOS governance audit A/73/341 states in para. 22 that "[FAFICS represents only 18,500 beneficiaries (approximately 25 per cent) of a total beneficiary population of 74,788 as at 31 December 2016". (Note that of the 74,788 beneficiary population, about 54,000 are retirees and some 20,000 are their dependents). The president of FAFICS, Marco Breschi, is on record as stating in this connection, "that In my mind [retiree non-members of FAFICS] are simply people who feel adequately protected by our action and don't feel the need to go the extra step to register with their local AFICS /FAFICS"!! (His response to Lowell Flanders dated 19 October 2019). It's certainly a peculiar perspective, and one that's emblematic of FAFICS' approach to the issue of political representation!
If we consider retirees only and not their dependents, the approx. one-third (18,500) of UN retirees world-wide who are members of FAFICS, are minimally, if at all, more informed than the almost two-thirds (approx. 36,000 plus) of retirees who are not FAFICS members. FAFICS has worked strenuously to keep vital information from its members, including from the leadership of its 60 plus associations around the world. With a very few exceptions (there are one or two) there’s no indication that the leadership of most of these associations are abreast of the issues, or that they’re making any effort to keep their members informed.
Most heads of local retiree associations do not respond to emails about pension issues. The former president of the FAO retiree association, Alan Prien, stood out for his verbally abusive responses. Many are sadly uninformed or misinformed. I posted here a couple weeks ago a quote from a March 2018 letter from the president of AFICS Canada to his constituents discrediting and dismissing concerns about documented mismanagement in the Fund, quote: "In light of the AFICS’ position and our own research, we wish to assure you that all these rumours and allegations concerning the management of operations and investments are, in our opinion, exaggerated".
On the other hand, as noted in para. 27 of the OIOS governance audit: "In a letter of February 2018, the outgoing president of a retiree association affiliated with FAFICS indicated to members of that association that the leadership of FAFICS “should be strongly reminded by its members that its task is to protect, defend and advance the rights of all United Nations retirees, not those of the Chief Executive Officer …” (That was the outgoing president of Australia AFICS and raises the question of why she waited until she was on her way out the door to speak).
Most heads of local retiree associations do not respond to emails about pension issues. The former president of the FAO retiree association, Alan Prien, stood out for his verbally abusive responses. Many are sadly uninformed or misinformed. I posted here a couple weeks ago a quote from a March 2018 letter from the president of AFICS Canada to his constituents discrediting and dismissing concerns about documented mismanagement in the Fund, quote: "In light of the AFICS’ position and our own research, we wish to assure you that all these rumours and allegations concerning the management of operations and investments are, in our opinion, exaggerated".
On the other hand, as noted in para. 27 of the OIOS governance audit: "In a letter of February 2018, the outgoing president of a retiree association affiliated with FAFICS indicated to members of that association that the leadership of FAFICS “should be strongly reminded by its members that its task is to protect, defend and advance the rights of all United Nations retirees, not those of the Chief Executive Officer …” (That was the outgoing president of Australia AFICS and raises the question of why she waited until she was on her way out the door to speak).
We should therefore not be surprised that many if not most FAFICS members may be in the dark about the vital issues that have concerned Fund members for the past five or so years. A visit to the FAFICS website will demonstrate that the OIOS governance audit, previous OIOS audits, GA resolutions, and Board of Auditor reports, and other important related documentation, are nowhere to be found. The same is the case with the AFICS/NY website, and the Pension Fund website. All of these websites post only documentation that supports their own biased and limited perspective of the issues related to the Fund. The current AFICS/NY president (since 2016) John Dietz, to his credit, has tried to bring more transparency into AFICS/NY’s activities by including more objective information in his updates to members.
At the same time, efforts by retiree groups to reach as many AFICS/NY members as possible are stymied because AFICS/NY has not issued an updated membership directory since 2013 and at least half of the email addresses listed in the old directory are obsolete. The previous AFICS/NY leadership was vocal about its disapproval of information in its directory being used to contact its members regarding pension issues. It's also a fact that many older retirees are not online, and don't use email or social media, which poses even more obstacles to information-sharing. (Traffic on the pension blog is around 3,000 persons per month, and more likely than not, repeated visits by the same active staff and retirees).
Plus the FAFICS representatives to the Pension Board have so far shown no similar tendencies toward greater transparency or participatory democracy in their activities. There’s every indication that they’ve been fully supportive of the Pension Board in rejecting the findings of the governance audit and pushing back against implementation of the major reforms in the latest GA resolution.
Those who want to maintain the status quo for their own self-interests thrive on misinformation and disinformation, and deliberate withholding of information from others.
The fact that many UN retirees around the world may be in the dark about the issues that have besetting our Fund for the past five years is important because information is power, and positive change occurs when people affected push for it.
We owe much gratitude to UN Participant Representatives to the Pension Board, who represent active UN staff, for breaching the gap left by our retiree representative, and for their tireless advocacy on behalf of UN retirees as well. They've consistently shown, courage, commitment and dedication.
Those of us who are FAFICS members have a responsibility to do what we can to hold our retiree representatives accountable. We face an uphill battle when a majority of FAFICS members are not informed and thus not engaged, and when the FAFICS leadership strictly controls the information received by its worldwide associations.
The four FAFICS representatives and two alternates to the Pension Board do not have voting rights, but the Board rarely votes anyway, and it's been clear for some time that the considerable influence they wield over Board decisions and activities helped to expose our Fund to risks that should never have occurred. (Under FAFICS rules of procedure, the FAFICS president is ex-officio head of the delegation to the Pension Board, the head of the FAFICS Standing Committee on Pension is also an ex-officio member of the delegation, as are four other members nominated by the FAFICS president "in consultation" with the FAFICS Bureau.) As with all FAFICS activities, individual AFICS associations appear to have little or no say in how these decisions are made. According to the latest Pension Board report of the Sixty-fifth session held in 2018, the FAFICS representatives were: L. Saputelli, W. Sach, M. Breschi, G. Schramek, M. Sebti (Alternate), A. Gomez (Alternate) (report A/73/9).
Collaboration between the former CEO and FAFICS was so intense that the OIOS governance audit in para. 27 notes in regard to a communication to FAFICS associations from the former FAFICS president Linda Saputelli: "The Fund secretariat circulated that letter electronically to all registered beneficiaries, including the vast majority who were not members of FAFICS. The circulation of such a letter by the staff of the Chief Executive Officer gave the appearance of collusion between FAFICS and the Fund secretariat to challenge the authority of the Secretary-General and the General Assembly in governance matters of the Fund...".
Hopefully the FAFICS leadership will heed voices that are encouraging them to work with the UN participant representatives on issues of common interest and understanding that impact both serving staff and retirees, i.e, implementation of the reforms in the GA resolution.
Collaboration between the former CEO and FAFICS was so intense that the OIOS governance audit in para. 27 notes in regard to a communication to FAFICS associations from the former FAFICS president Linda Saputelli: "The Fund secretariat circulated that letter electronically to all registered beneficiaries, including the vast majority who were not members of FAFICS. The circulation of such a letter by the staff of the Chief Executive Officer gave the appearance of collusion between FAFICS and the Fund secretariat to challenge the authority of the Secretary-General and the General Assembly in governance matters of the Fund...".
Hopefully the FAFICS leadership will heed voices that are encouraging them to work with the UN participant representatives on issues of common interest and understanding that impact both serving staff and retirees, i.e, implementation of the reforms in the GA resolution.
Each of us, as retirees, has a responsibility to engage our local retiree associations where they exist (become a member, call them, visit their office, urge them to wake up) and reach out to as many retirees as possible to ensure that they become informed and engaged in the issues that impact our common, vital interests, i.e., the continued health of our Fund.
No comments:
Post a Comment