Two sides of social security fund coin
30th August 2009
Email
Print
Comments
The story of a humble peasant in
Arusha Region’s Karatu District is replicated somewhat by the agonising
experience of many members of the National Social Security Fund (NSSF).
The long deceased peasant, whose story is
recounted through a son who wishes to remain anonymous, surrendered
much of his earnings from the sale of wheat to a wealthy farmer for safe
custody.
He withdrew small sums periodically from
the informal banker – a close friend --who, on the surface, was
trustworthy because proper records were kept and the informal client
didn’t lose a single cent.
Beneath the surface, however, the
“banker” who didn’t charge his informal client any service charges, was
profiting from the latter’s savings, which he re-invested in his farming
business.
The son, now in his late 50s, explains
sorrowfully: “Our father’s friend had been wealthy, alright, but our
father’s savings made him wealthier and faster, through re-investment in
his wheat farms.”
He says his late father, who had not had
the benefit of advanced schooling and exposure to commercial tricks, had
no idea that if he had invested money that he had entrusted to his
friend into his own farms, he would have elevated his economic fortunes
considerably.
The son lamented that by the time the
children had become sufficiently grown-up, they discovered the trickery
and sounded off their father, he had already been on the verge of
retirement.
“He ceased to use the friend as a banker,
but there was no legal basis on which he could press him for interest
on the savings that boosted his economic fortunes,” he lamented further.
Nearly 500,000 private sector employees
contribute to the NSSF, which was established by an Act of Parliament in
1997 to replace the National Provident Fund (NPF).
Unlike the Karatu peasant whose
association with his friend was based purely on mutual trust, an NSSF
member is protected by legal provisions under which one’s savings are
protected, and an employer tops up a percentage of one’s contributions
slashed from monthly salaries.
The contributor, furthermore, enjoys some
interest and a number of statutory long-term pension benefits upon
retirement, invalidity or death, allowing the member’s survivors to
enjoy the contributions.
There are also short-term benefits for
the fund’s members in the form of funeral grants, benefits for
maternity, employment injury or occupational diseases and health
insurance.
But while some members appreciate the
Fund’s benefits, they feel they are latter-day versions of the Karatu
peasant, and want adjustments made to make them more beneficial clients
of NSSF.
They are proposing that the Parliamentary
Act should be amended to incorporate a clause that allows them to
borrow from their contributions in order to solve pressing financial
problems.
A middle-aged man who identified himself
by one name, Yakubu, said he is often tempted to retire prematurely in
order to reap benefits from his current NSSF contributions, rather than
await presumably bigger benefits when he clocks 60 years.
Under the current arrangement, a member
who attains that age and has made contributions for an unbroken chain
of 15 years (a total of 160 months) gets a lump-sum, plus a monthly
pension until he/she dies.
He recounts that two years ago, he bought
a two-acre piece of land at Kifuru village in Dar es Salaam Region’s
Kinondoni District for a total of Sh700,000 – at the rate of Sh350,000
each.
The man who lives at the Tabata suburb,
explains that during regular visits to Kifuru, he has established that
the value of land there has shot to Sh2,500,000 per acre, meaning that
his farm is now worth Sh5million.
“If I had wanted to buy the piece of
land now, I wouldn’t easily raise it through savings from my modest
salary. As a last resort, I would take a Sh5million bank loan whose
repayment figure could be as high as Sh7million.”
He poses and proceeds: “If I were allowed
to withdraw the amount from my NSSF savings currently standing at
Sh15million, I would be much happier because I would be spared the
indignity of being a debtor and incurring a loss in the form of high
bank interest rates.”
He then engages in a bit of arithmetical
speculation: “If I cease to be an NSSF member today and invest
Sh10million in land at Kifuru or elsewhere, and given the hot cake
nature of the property, I most probably would resell it for something
like Sh30million in two-to-three years’ time.”
While expressing sympathy for the
members’ concerns, the Fund’s authorities say that the corporate
organisation could collapse within a short period if it engaged in the
business of extending loans to the members, or letting them withdraw
parts of their savings.
The alternative, they say, would be for
NSSF to plunge itself into the banking industry, which would, among
other conditions, entail charging commercial interest rates.
The NSSF Director of Operations,
Crescentius Magori, said in an interview: “Once we get involved in
banking operations, we cannot avoid commercial interest rates in order
for the Fund to survive.
Otherwise, we will be insolvent and consequently unable to pay security benefits to our members.”
According to Magori, there are around 1,600 employers, with whom it is impracticable to meet as one group at once.
He explained, however, that plans are
afoot to conduct zonal meetings at which smaller groups of members would
meet and discuss issues of interest.
There is also the question of compromise
on some of the members who might secure such loans as it is feared that
once the loans are misused, they will suffer most when they are not in
employment as they would not have much money in their accounts to look
after their security.
The Director of Planning, Investments and
Policy of NSSF, Yakub Kitula, echoed Magori’s position on the question
of extending loans to the Fund’s members, stressing that in order to
ensure that the organisation is always solvent, and thus being able at
any given time to settle the benefits of its members, it has to invest
in sustainable economic projects instead.
Kidula said: “Keeping members’ money
without reinvesting it in sustaining projects will likely leave the Fund
ending up without the money to serve our members,” adding that
companies or corporations can borrow from the Fund because they are
required to pay with commercial interest rates.
The prospect of loaning the money to
members will dry the organisation of the needy cash when needed by its
members, and according to the law, the relation between the organisation
and the member is clear: the member’s contributions are kept safely by
the Fund which will in turn disburse the benefits accordingly.
NSSF is a compulsory scheme which covers
all employees in the private sector, including non-governmental
organisations and other groups in the informal sector.
These are embassies based in Tanzania
employing Tanzanians, associations and organised groups in the informal
sector, government and parastatal employees who are on operational
services and temporary employees.
“A member who has just retired from
employment but does not meet the qualifying conditions for monthly
pension benefits will be entitled to a special lump-sum payment. This
will be calculated on the basis of an insured person's monthly
contribution at the time the lump-sum becomes payable times the number
of months of contribution (contribution credits),” so says the NSSF
policy.
But 57-year-old Hamisi Chikawe and
65-year-old Valerian Paul, retired members of the NSSF for about 20
years, both putting up residence at Kibaha Mailimoja Shuleni, want the
Fund shaped anew, so that its members, as critical and most important
shareholders, should enjoy the accrued benefits from the organisation’s
investments.
“I have already been paid my dues, which,
in the first place, I suspect were not up to the market value. But
fresh consideration of this issue, I believe, is of paramount importance
as it is the members’ money that is invested in the projects that are
highly paying, though not reflected in the final members’ benefits,”
remarked Chikawe.
Paul echoes the sentiments, uncertain on
whether the Fund’s projects eventually lift the lives of the people
employed by social security body.
Paul adds: “You may not need more proof other than casting a glance at their lifestyles.
The Fund’s objectives are very good, but
for the sake of fairness, those managing the institution and the members
who pump money into it should share the proceeds accrued from the
investments more-or-less equitably.”
SOURCE:
GUARDIAN ON SUNDAY
No comments:
Post a Comment