Friday, April 28, 2017

UN pensions: Open letter and questions for the AFICS/NY President, April 28, 2017

Open letter and questions for the AFICS/NY President, John Dietz (Association of Former International Civil Servants)
28 April 2017
Dear Mr. Dietz,
Thank you for your email update to AFICS/NY members dated 26 April 2017 on “actions and activities …on issues of concern to us all” (see below).
The update comes several months after publication of reports of the Board of Auditors, Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), General Assembly resolution and an OIOS (UN Office of Internal Oversight Services) that detail serious problems related to both sides of the Fund. It also comes almost six months after your last substantive communication (President’s note of 14 November 2016).
As you know, this is the first time that many, if not most, AFICS/NY members are being made aware of the above reports and resolution, as so far none of these documents have been posted on the AFICS/NY website, or circulated by email to the membership.

While the update deals with issues of pension and health insurance, for which I thank you, my focus here is on pension issues.
According to the update, the AFICS/NY leadership’s “active advocacy” on pension focuses on “elimination of the backlog in pension benefit processing first identified in 2015” and on “ensuring continued maintenance of a conservative investment strategy for the Pension Fund's assets”.
In fact, according to the OIOS audit (2017/02 dated 13 February 2017) at least 10,000 beneficiaries (allowing for duplication of outstanding cases) continue to wait for payments, some for years, while the Fund CEO campaigns for renewal of his five-year contract.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

FAFICS: The Federation of Associations of Former International Civil Servants, Time for Change, 19 April 2017




Further to a question by a UN retiree on a FCUNS Facebook discussion thread, the topic of the need for change in the leadership of FAFICS was raised by Ian Richards, the CCISUA president.
Good idea, and one that some of us have been thinking about for quite some time. I'm not an expert on how the FAFICS system works, specifically the electoral process. Anyone who can clarify, please do.
As far as I can glean, the leaders of the various Association of Former International Civil Servants (AFICS) associations world-wide elect the members of the FAFICS council. So any change in the leadership of FAFICS has to begin with a conversation about AFICS. I can't speak about the other 58 or so AFICS associations world-wide. That there's no transparency or democracy in AFICS/NY has been only too obvious to some of us for some time.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

UN Pension Fund CEO campaigns while thousands suffer and wait in vain, 18 April 2017





 The April newsletter of the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund was circulated by email yesterday to participants and beneficiaries, the first direct email circulation in memory. The Fund's newsletters are normally posted on the UNJSPF website.  

But it’s CEO (Sergio Arvizu) campaign season for renewal of his five-year contract. So the newsletter is sent by email to participants and retirees, using contact information which Arvizu is reported to have steadfastly refused to share for the purpose of elections of participant representatives to the UN Staff Pension Committee. No doubt tens of thousands of glossy copies are on their way by regular mail.

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Ian Richards campaign statement: Vote for candidates who will protect our Pension Fund, 4 April 2017

PROTECT OUR FUND: VOTE FOR THE SLATE OF SIX CANDIDATES

ELECTIONS:  UN STAFF PENSION COMMITTEE HAPPENING NOW  (31 March to 10 April 2017), link to bios below
Contact Chair, Polling Officers, gheorghe@un.org for information








IAN RICHARDS' CAMPAIGN STATEMENT

Dear Colleague, 

The Board of the pension fund must represent your interests. Our fund must be kept safe and secure. 

You will have received an email from "Polling Officers, CCISUA - UN Staff Pension Committee Election - 2017" with the link to vote for members to the UN Staff Pension Committee, who are also members of the pension fund Board. 

It's important that you vote. I am a candidate. 

As a staff representative I pressured the fund to pay its retirees on time, successfully lobbied the General Assembly to keep the fund in the UN and helped expose misleading data being published by the fund on the UN intranet. 

However, the fund’s leaders have yet to be held accountable for their actions, staff continue to be paid later than is acceptable and the returns on the fund’s investments are below target with $3.4 billion recently lost in foreign exchange transactions. 

If elected I will:
· oppose moves to remove the fund, its staff and investments from the UN;
· hold the pension fund’s leaders accountable for the suffering caused to retirees through late payments and the fund’s poor financial performance;
· identify bottlenecks in benefits payments so that retirees are paid on the day of retirement;
· make sure the fund is prepared for difficult economic times ahead;
· ensure the Board holds regular townhalls with staff to understand your needs.

The online voting platform is easy to use and you can choose up to six candidates. The deadline for voting is Monday 10 April 9 a.m. EDT. 

Other candidates with similar views and objectives are:
· Egor Ovcharenko
· Michelle Rockcliffe
· Ibrahima Faye
· Katy Joseph Solozano
· Nebiyu Workineh

Thank you for taking the time to vote. Our pension fund needs your participation. 

Ian 

Brief Bio 

· Economist on investment issues at UNCTAD
· Treasurer and Vice-Treasurer of La Mutuelle, the Geneva savings and loans mutual, 2013 to present

· President of the Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA), 2014 to present

https://www.bigpulse.com/biopreview?code=1490062544H5DMknjaj6QrdpBJnr8c

Friday, March 31, 2017

The UN Pension Fund's Leaders Must Go, 31 March 2017





"This update on both the investment and secretariat sides of the fund follows an appeal to Secretary-General António Guterres to act to protect our fund and in the wake of an audit report by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services’ Internal Audit Division made public two weeks ago. . . "

READ MORE HERE: 

http://www.passblue.com/2017/03/30/the-un-pension-funds-leaders-must-go/

Friday, March 17, 2017

Shameful saga: UN Internal Audit report of the backlog in pension payments, 17 February 2017






The OIOS “Audit of management of delays in processing pension benefits in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund”, leaked in draft last December, is now publicly available (Report 2017/002, dated 13 February 2017) (see link below).
Even after having read the leaked draft last December, the finalized OIOS audit of the backlog can only be described as shocking in what it discloses about the Fund Secretariat/CEO’s gross mischaracterization of the causes and extent of the unprecedented backlog in pension payments which has caused untold suffering to new retirees, and survivors, including widows and orphans. (Read for example about one 'long outstanding' case as detailed in paras. 55 and 56 of the audit report -- see below this note).
Debunking the CEO’s claims
According to the audit, the backlog was not, as the CEO has claimed all along, caused by glitches in integrating the Fund’s IT system (IPAS) with the overall UN system (Umoja); nor was the backlog caused by sharp increases in the number of retirees or beneficiaries; or a lack of documentation provided by member organizations.
What actually happened was that the CEO failed to assess and mitigate risk factors in implementing IPAS, including blackout periods, “missing or erroneous functionalities in IPAS” (para. 19) and the system’s "failure to match contributions from the member organizations to participant accounts" (para. 20).
he CEO also maintained some posts vacant for more than a year, claiming a lack of specialized knowledge among external candidates and a lack of seniority among existing staff (para. 23); failed to follow up on missing documentation, a task included in the responsibility of the UN Staff Pension Committee of which he’s the Secretary.
As the backlog accumulated, the CEO then tried to deflect responsibility away from his own management failures and grossly underreported on the backlog’s extent (omitting thousands of unprocessed cases); and misreported on the level of client servicing, among other failures.
In debunking the CEO’s claims, the report shows in stark detail that there was no significant increase in the numbers of retirees and beneficiaries during the period under audit (table 1, page 1); nor was there a significant increase in the time needed for collecting relevant documentation (table 2, page 5).
Collection of relevant documentation
And contrary to the claims of the CEO, that the Fund was not responsible for collecting relevant document, the report notes that “while the ultimate responsibility for timely submission of documents lies with the member organizations”, “it is imperative for the Fund to proactively inform them of missing documents to facilitate the process). (Para. 45).
OIOS notes that follow-up on missing documentation is included in the tasks for which the Fund received funds totaling $21 million in the 2014-2015 biennium; and that the CEO also failed to address a sharp decline in processing performance vis a vis the 15-day benchmark, and major deficiencies in client servicing. The report notes in this regard that “no metrics were defined in the Fund’s strategic framework to measure and monitor the performance of the Fund in its role as the secretariat of the United Nations SPC [Staff Pension Committee]” para. 43.
The report notes in the Executive Summary that IPAS "[has] the capacity to generate follow up letters in 30, 90 and 270 days to pursue these cases but the fund was yet to use this functionality effectively and systematically.”
Misreporting on the extent of the backlog
Regarding misreporting on the extent of the backlog, the report notes (para. 52) that the so-called “Q-Gates” [reporting on the status of the backlog) “[was limited] to only cases relating to a portion of initial separation benefits [giving] the appearance the outstanding cases of other benefit types were less important.”
In fact so apparently unimportant to the CEO were several categories of cases, amounting to several thousands in total, that they were entirely absent from his reporting and the Department of Management's updates on the UN Intranet -- iSeek.
From figures contained in the audit, there were almost 6,000 unreported cases of various types, including more than 4,000 “recalculation and revision” cases. These are above and beyond the 11,128 cases with incomplete documentation that the Fund did not include in its reporting of “actionable cases.”
Of the 11,128 cases that the Fund reported on 7 July 2016 as having incomplete documentation OIOS states that of the 2,889 cases related to former staff members, 61 per cent of these cases were ready for processing with a complete set of documentation; 39 per cent required follow-up of documentation by the Fund. Of the balance of cases, 87 per cent of open files were ready for processing and 13 per cent required follow-up by the Fund (para. 44).
Decline in processing performance
In addition, there has been a “sharp decline in the actual percentage of cases completed within 15 business days, from 70 per cent in 2014 to 39 per cent in 2015 and 24 per cent in 2016 (up to 17 June 2016)” (para. 39, page 12).
CEO’s response
In his response, almost as lengthy as the actual audit, the CEO continues to hold to his positions that “there are no delays, there is no backlog”, client servicing is working effectively, and the Fund has no responsibility to follow up on missing documentation. In respect to OIOS’ findings that thousands of cases were left out of the backlog reporting, the CEO contends that it’s OIOS’ calculations that are inaccurate. In other words, if there was ever a problem, there’s certainly no problem now.
OIOS notes in the Executive Summary: “The UNJSPF Secretariat accepted all 11 recommendations and requested the closure of three recommendations since those issues would be covered in the end-to-end review being conducted. The fund requested closure of five other recommendations (including the two critical recommendations) on the grounds that the recommendations were “overtaken by events”, the “risk has been eliminated”, “there are no delays”, or “there is no backlog”."
OIOS notes that the CEO is still doubling down on the grossly understated backlog: "The Fund stated that as of end of December 2016, there were only “367 presumed actionable cases (cases for which the Fund has received the three separation documents to process the case)”."
Department of Management response
With respect to the response from the Department of Management, OIOS notes (para. 51): “DM stated that it has no way of verifying accuracy of the data provided by the fund, and that the onus is on the Fund to ensure that what they provide to United Nations management is accurate and complete”.
That response can only be viewed as tragic in terms of the thousands of cases which the CEO blithely left out of the backlog statistics and which one can safely take it remain largely unprocessed to this day, the human suffering represented by those cases, and concerns raised on numerous occasions by the staff unions and others.
Back to the drawing board
In fact, according to the report (executive summary), the Department of Management has accepted to “(i) request the UNJSPF Secretariat to provide complete information on all types of outstanding cases; and (ii) establish new “Q-Gates” in consultation with the UNJSPF Secretariat for all outstanding cases, as well as standard templates for consistent monitoring and reporting.
OIOS conclusion
OIOS concludes: “OIOS is of the view that these recommendations cannot be closed because the fund’s definition of “backlog” did not include all types of outstanding cases" (and goes on to list the thousands of unreported cases of all types). OIOS also notes the Fund's responsibility to follow up on incomplete documentation and that it was yet to fully address deficiencies in client servicing and processing deadlines.
One of the most troubling aspects of the audit and the CEO's response is the obvious attempt by the latter to abdicate responsibility and to insist that either the audit is wrong, or the issues are resolved and nothing more needs to be done. It's troubling too to contemplate that this unacceptable situation has been allowed to fester and grow; and that the shameful saga is still continuing.
More to come.
__________________________________________________________________
“Para. 55: OIOS selected the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the December Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) for further analysis of long outstanding cases:

Para. 56 (a). In one of the five death-in-service cases, a former staff member had died in 2006. The separation notification form was received in December 2007, followed by the separation personnel action form in September 2008 and the payment instruction in April 2013. Client Services contacted the surviving spouse through the MONUSCO human resources office in May 2016 to request the documents that were marked as “received” in IPAS. The former staff member had a surviving child who was 16 years old at the time of her death. The child was a designated beneficiary and was yet to receive benefits as of 31 August 2016.”
Access the report from the OIOS website here: (first report at top of page). If the link doesn't work go to the website of the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services, internal reports, and access report 2017/002 on page 2.