UN Pension Fund: More rule-breaking in the strange saga of the Fund Secretariat leadership?

Update, Monday, December 30, 2019

Message on FCUNS Facebook page from Ian Richards, President, Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations of the United Nations System

"I brought your article to the SG’s attention. Following the intervention the Acting CEO will now be leaving on 31 December. Ms McClean will become the new chief on 1 January and will, as proposed, be able to appoint an OiC to deputise until she is fully on board (and we wish her a swift recovery). So a good start to 2020!"

December 29, 2019

In the latest twist of the strange saga of the Fund Secretariat’s leadership, the much-awaited incoming head, Rosemarie McClean of Canada, former Chief Operating Officer of the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, was reportedly injured last Thursday by a speeding car that jumped the curb.

According to information received, she suffered a broken leg and collarbone and will not be able to take up her new functions this week, on 2 January 2020.

https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/sga1899.doc.htm

Now reportedly the Secretary-General is being urged to appoint for a fourth term the fund’s controversial interim head and former nuclear negotiator at the IAEA since retired, Janice Dunn Lee, while keeping the Board in the dark and despite the fact that there’s no provision for such a move in Fund rules and regulations.

Fund regulations provide for a five-year term for the CEO and DCEO, with a single reappointment. There’s no provision for temporary appointments to these positions.

Yet, Lee has so far had three temporary appointments as Acting CEO with reportedly, a fourth being contemplated, outside Fund rules and regulations. It would appear that she is in no rush to leave her job nor give up her ASG salary in exchange for her former pension.

UN Pension Fund - the challenge of holding FAFICS accountable, 11 December 2019

Linda Saputelli: “Direct elections would in fact impoverish the contribution which retirees are currently able to make to UNJSPB governance processes.” 

Questions: What contribution? How does one “impoverish”  a non-existent consultative process?

FAFICS (the Federation of Associations of Former International Civil Servants) is the purported representative of UN retirees on pension and other matters.

But, the findings of the comprehensive governance audit by the UN internal auditors (UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, OIOS, A/73/341) beg the question that many UN retirees have been asking for years: Who does FAFICS actually represent?

https://undocs.org/A/73/341

Just as important, what does the FAFICS leadership want? They’re UN retirees too. Shouldn’t we all want the same thing – a healthy and sustainable Fund? But it’s never been clear what they want, besides the obvious – power.

We, the active and retired UN staff, members and owners of the Fund, pay for the participation of FAFICS representatives in pension matters.

Yet the FAFICS leadership has not merely shown time and again a lack of interest in our views. It’s tried consistently to silence and discredit opposing voices: UN retirees and the UN Participant Representatives to the Pension Board, who represent 85,000 active UN staff.

How can a non-transparent, undemocratic, and unrepresentative organization be held accountable for its actions?

How can UN retirees, and active staff (after all, we share the same interests) get FAFICS to release its vice-like grip on our pension system?

Who does FAFICS represent?

As the audit notes, FAFICS, which was created in 1971 and has 61 member associations worldwide, and represents about a quarter of the total number of UN beneficiaries.

This means that roughly three-quarters --more than 50,000 --  UN retirees and their dependents are not members of FAFICS, and many have never heard of the organization.

UN Pension Board report - Views of the UN Participant Represenatives (Excerpt: A/74/331)

UN Pension Board Report: Report of the Governance Working Group (excerpt: A/74/331)

FAFICS note to the Pension Board 2018 - Representation of retirees on the Pension Board

UN Pension Board - busted by the Fifth Committee, 3 Dec. 2019

UN PENSION FUND

SOME 5TH COMMITTEE HIGHLIGHTS (links to the statements are below. You're encourageed to read them in their entirety).

The Board Chair of our $67 billion dollar Fund states that "the Fund is in sound and solid footing, contrary to the propaganda mounted by its detractors over the past 4 to 5 years". Who are these "detractors"? Do they include, to his mind, UN oversight bodies that have uncovered serious deficiencies and pushed for essential reforms to ensure our Fund's sustainability? Are the findings of OIOS governance audit report A/73/341 and the related GA resolution A/RES/73/274 mere "propaganda"? Among the essential reforms, he bemoans as "complex and delicate" the key issue of the imbalance in Board composition (thus apparently unsolvable).

The Group of 77 apparently doesn't believe it's all mere "propaganda". It busts the Board for defying GA resolution directives (by including FAFICS representatives) on the composition of its Governance Working Group, and hopefully will reject their foot-dragging excuses about important reforms.

The 5th Committee is also not buying the “no backlog” mantra. Its members also want more information on the independence of the Board Secretary, staffing for the Fund, sustainable investing, and the Group of 77 flags the likely volatility of financial markets and rising geopolitical risks around the world and the imperative for investments to “meet the stated criteria of safety, profitability, liquidity and convertibility”. The US "encourage[s] the continued focus on strengthening the Office's operational risk control framework".