By Michelle Rockcliffe, UN Staff Pension Committee Participants Representative.
The events of the last few weeks in decision-making in the UN Staff Pension Committee and the UN Staff Union/NY are proof that democracy is on life support given that it has been the United Nations which has touted and taught its benefits around the world.
What is more concerning is that when staff of the United Nations violate the UN Staff Rules in terms of the UN Charter, and Code of Ethics, which call for integrity, probity, impartiality, ethics and compliance with national laws pertaining to corruption, it appears that these staff may be given some sort of assurance that their jobs would remain safe and that there be no consequences, no disciplinary action, regardless of whether it is an ethical matter or whether fraud by the staff has been investigated, proven and even reported to the General Assembly.
CASE 1 – UNITED NATIONS STAFF PENSION COMMITTEE DECISIONS
The United Nation Staff Pension Committee is a tripartite group made up of elected representatives of the General Assembly (GA), the Secretary-General (SG)-appointed representatives and Participants’ Representatives (UNPRs) elected by the active staff of UN Secretariat, Funds and Programmes.
For example, at its 337th meeting on 27th May 2021 of the United Nation Staff Pension Committee – based on the suggestion of a GA representative - decided by consensus (there were no objections among the committee members themselves), that the UNSPC would support the Participants’ Representatives proposals from 2018 and 2019 and that the UNSPC should present to the 69th Session of the Pension Board the proposal for provisional payments to former participants or survivors who had not received their entitlement in 3 months after the due date.
To the dismay of the UN Participants’ Representatives when the delayed draft proposal was received from the Chair, an SG representative on 17 June, 3 working days before a deadline, instead of a “proposal to pay”, the proposal had been changed to a “feasibility study”. It should be noted that this was the third distinct time in 4 years that GA and SG representatives had reneged on the decision and allowed the Pension Administration to talk them out of payments due by saying it was “too much work”.
The final paper reneging on the decision was posted to the portal of the Pension Board on 29th June showing in effect that there was no consensus.
There is even concern among UNPRs that even when minutes are received for review sometimes months later, that decisions have been changed from time to time, especially when there has been disagreement about taking away disability benefits, from disabled orphans, or retirees who by definition of Article 33 remain disabled.
These acts are being committed at the highest levels of the organization – with impunity - and are the opposite of the fiduciary duty that is owed to beneficiaries of the UNJSPF.
CASE 2 – the UNITED NATION STAFF UNION in NEW YORK
Twice in the last two councils, 45th and 46th, we have seen blatant actions of individuals such as fraud in the case of the 2nd Vice President of the 45th Council and what appears to be ongoing collusion and possible fraud among the UNSU Executive Board, Chair, Polling Officers and Arbitration committee to overturn a vote, gerrymandering to increase by 1200 the number of votes by DSS, election rigging by holding unlawful meetings to change term limits during the election process.
It would appear that several officials in Mr. Guterres’ administration are playing a facilitating part in these matters.
It is still fresh in the minds of staff the standoff caused when the 2013 to 2017 Ban-Ki-Moon’s administration refused to provide the lists of staff members so that the UNSU could hold elections. This was “cleaned-up” just in time for Guterres’ first appointment. But now it seems as though his administration too sees the benefit of union-busting – right at a time with the President of the host country has given Unions back their rightful place in negotiation with respect to the welfare and the conditions of service of workers
This is mind-boggling, and even though these events seem to be a reflection of the world around us, isn’t the United Nations supposed to lead by example in these areas? What is Mr. Guterres and his administration going to do about this reputational and unethical mess?
No comments:
Post a Comment