AFICS to members: We're vindicated: MOU on hold: no meeting -- maybe later! (9 July 2015)

ASSOCIATION OF FORMER INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANTS

Room DC1-580, United Nations, New York, NY 10017

Tel. (212) 963-2943 Fax. (212) 963-5702 e-mail. afics@un.org

www.un.org/other/afics

NEW YORK

Honorary Members

Martti Ahtisaari

Kofi A. Annan

Ban Ki-moon

Aung San Suu Kyi

Boutros Boutros-Ghali

Javier Perez de Cuellar

9 July 2015

Dear Loraine,

We note the evident frustration in your letter of 7 July 2015, with its unfair criticism of the elected

leadership of AFICS/NY. Your disappointment at not being able to have exactly the kind of

AFICS/NY meeting you desire at short notice is matched by ours at your insistence on distorting and

mischaracterizing verifiable information about pension matters. I will not refute the allegations in your latest letter. I prefer to adopt here a more positive tone in the hope that you will reciprocate by

replacing at least a part of the acrimony with a measure of understanding.

About a week ago we learned that the MoU would likely not be signed before the Pension Board meets next week and we have since been awaiting official confirmation. We understand that the USG for Management will post a message to this effect on iSeek tomorrow.

AFICS/NY is pleased that high level UN officials have decided to settle the issue by not moving ahead now on their own proposals. It vindicates our position which is that the MoU did not require the involvement of retirees and should be left to those directly responsible to resolve.

So, while we had indeed initiated making arrangements for an extraordinary meeting of an AFICS/NY Assembly, we consider in light of the above information that the element of urgency to organize it has been removed. AFICS/NY can now plan a meeting that is properly prepared and not rushed, one that would permit the maximum participation of members with enough lead time to encourage attendance that is representative of the membership at large.

Sincerely,

[signed] Linda Saputelli

President

Anatomy, Analysis and Action! by Geoffrey Baldwin (9 July 2015)

Pension Matters: Anatomy, Analysis and Action  (AFICS: please take note)

The recent AFICS letter (2 July 2015) asserts that all questions put to the AFICS Annual General Meeting were answered.  That is mistaken;  mine on the ultimate jurisdiction governing the pension fund was not.  From conversations, after the AGM it seems that Legal Counsel on stage warned the protagonists not to answer it.  One wonders why not?

The following observations are for comment and correction by those with expertise in the field.
•    The Pension Fund does not exist, as is known, in national jurisdictions.  It has the form, but not the substance.
•    All staff are employees of the United Nations Organisation, or affiliated organisations such as FAO, ILO etc.  Their contracts of employment with the UN are signed by the SG or his staff under authority delegated from the UN.
•    The rules of the pension fund are incorporated in each and every staff contract.  The benefits arising are contractual commitments by the UN to each staff member.
•    The pension fund is the vehicle whereby the UN has chosen to meet its obligations to staff.  It has a sole trustee, the SG, who has the fiduciary duty of a trustee to protect the financial interests of the owners of the fund.  The owners are the participants and beneficiaries, art 18.
•    All payments to beneficiaries are deferred emoluments earned while in service, they are not current income.
•    The SG has a second role, as chief executive officer of the UN.  It is his duty to administer the management of the staff, including paying their salaries.  The cost of so doing is borne by the budget of the UN.  Payments to beneficiaries are, or should be, in the same case, but under Art 15 they are not.  The work is delegated to the Pension Board and its staff, who are, or should be, UN staff members.  The organisation of that work is an administrative matter which may affect serving staff, but should not be of concern to beneficiaries.

The FICSA President evolves: No new MOU; and strictly limit hedge funds. Bravo, Mr. El-Tabari (8 July 2015)

It used to be when public officials changed their minds on an issue they were called ‘flip-floppers’. No one wants to be called a flip flopper. Better to double down on whatever misguided belief you’ve been hauling around since forever rather than risk that dreaded term attached to your name (see ref. below). 

Thankfully, nowadays public officials feel free to change their minds without fear. Changing one’s mind is now called ‘evolving’ and not only is it not a bad thing – it’s a very good thing! It’s a sign of a nimble mind, flexibility, willingness to see other perspectives, to self-reflect  -- courage, even.

Congratulations to the FICSA President, Diab El-Tabari, for changing his mind . . . um, ‘evolving’ on important matters affecting the UN Pension Fund.

On 20 May 2015 (posted below), Mr. El-Tabari wrote about the 8 May 2015 petition addressed to the Secretary-General asking him to oppose proposed changes that could breach the system of checks and balances necessary for the health of the Fund (see link to petition on this blog, and sign the petition if you haven't already done so).

Mr. El-Tabari took the petition to task for, he said, “describing wrong doings by the CEO of the [Pension Fund]. . . breaches in promotion or in favouritism in recruitment. . . misuse of funds. . ."  There was one problem, however: the petition contained no such allegations whatsoever.  No doubt the CEO (Chief Executive Office of the Fund Secretariat), who had been spared the ordeal of having allegations against him aired in the petition, was at least relieved to know that FICSA considered him “honest until proven otherwise.”

Concerned AFICS members, wishing to set the record straight about the petition, not to mention offer an assist to Mr. El-Tabari, quickly wrote to the FICSA President (letter of 20 May, posted below) suggesting he please re-read the petition. In his own letter to Mr. El-Tabari, the CCISUA President went a bit further, suggesting that Mr. El-Tabari might actually wish to retract his letter.  Mr. El-Tabari apparently did not wish to do so.

Gilding the lily: We're NOT reassured! (7 July 2015)

Gilding the lily

‘Gild the lily’: “To cover with or as if with a thin layer of gold;

to give an often deceptively attractive or improved appearance to.” 

It wasn’t a pretty spectacle to begin with. For much of the Pension Fund controversy over the past year and a half, the AFICS leadership has been either MIA (missing in action), or reactive: “Internet definition: acting in response to a situation rather than creating or controlling it”.

The very first peep heard from the AFICS leadership was on 29 May 2014 in reaction to a UNOG petition in May 2014 calling on the Secretary-General to oppose threats to the system of checks and balances in place in the Fund. 

The AFICS President posted a note on the AFICS website dated 29 May 2014 framing the controversy in terms of “misconceptions regarding certain potential risks to the safety of retiree benefits.”

Lo and behold: What the President termed simple “misconceptions” turned out to be in fact real threats to the system of checks and balances that has kept the Fund healthy for the past 65 years when other pension funds have failed.

Message to AFICS President and Governing Board: Please honor your statutes! (7 July 2015)

7 July 2015

Letter to the NY/AFICS President and Governing Board

Subject: Pension Fund matters: Request for extraordinary meeting under AFICS By-laws

Dear Linda,

We refer to your letter of 2 July 2015 that responds to the request of 82 AFICS members for an extraordinary meeting under the AFICS By-Laws.  In your response to that request, you state that “the By-Laws do not impose a specific time-frame in this regard.” It should be self-evident that a meeting delayed is in fact a meeting denied. It is therefore clear that the AFICS/NY leadership is in violation of the statutes of the Association.  As you are well aware, the statute does not require that the reason for holding an extraordinary meeting be specified. It only states that a meeting shall be convened when requested by at least 50 of its members. 

Simply put, this represents a failure on the part of the AFICS leadership to meet its responsibilities to the AFICS membership. And, despite your claim to represent that membership, it is a membership that you, regrettably, have never consulted regarding their views on this critically important issue.

AFICS to Members: We'll Convene a Meeting – Whenever! (2 July 2015)

ASSOCIATION OF FORMER INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANTS

Room DC1-580, United Nations, New York, NY 10017

Tel. (212) 963-2943 Fax. (212) 963-5702 e-mail. afics@un.org

www.un.org/other/afics

NEW YORK

Honorary Members

Martti Ahtisaari

Kofi A. Annan

Ban Ki-moon

Aung San Suu Kyi

Boutros Boutros-Ghali

Javier Perez deCuellar

2 July 2015

Dear Loraine, Lowell and Curling,

As promised, I have followed up as soon I could on contacting members of the AFICS/NY Governing Board for their views on your letter of 24 June 2015. 

Here are the points that we feel need to be stressed. 

First, the AFICS/NY Governing Board is well aware of its obligation under the By-Laws to convene an extraordinary meeting of the Assembly when requested in writing by at least fifty members, but also notes that the By-Laws do not impose a specific time-frame in this regard. We explained the circumstances both in our meeting of 17 June and in my letter of 25 June. These have not changed.

Second, as a Governing Board elected by the membership we take our responsibilities very seriously and will continue to do so. With regard to your concern that some positions taken by the Governing Board may not reflect the views of the entire membership, we emphasize that it is important to consider that the Governing Board legitimately represents all members of the Association in matters of interest to the retiree community.

AFICS: Decoy or "critical practical constraints" - request for meeting on Pension Fund matters (1 July 2015)

You will recall the  commitment made by the AFICS leadership at our meeting with the President and some Governing Board members on 17 June 2015 (see our Notes below). Subsequently, in her 23 June 2015 letter, the President noted that the Board was not convinced of the need for a meeting.

We replied on 24 June 2015 reaffirming our own view that despite the leadership's doubts, such a meeting is urgently needed to allow AFICS members an opportunity to voice their concerns and to ensure alignment between our views and the position the AFICS leadership intends to take to the Pension Board meeting scheduled for the week of 20 July 2015.