Dear Editor,
The National Insurance Scheme (NIS) is in the news; and, God forbid, it is there for all the wrong reasons. The NIS, as we know it, is a contributory pension scheme in which both the employer and the employee make monetary contributions which, in the end, would see benefits accruing to the contributors when they have reached the age of retirement. This is a commendable and well-thought-out scheme that, when run to its truest principles, would bring forth admirable results.
I vividly recall the beginning stages of the scheme, when from high and low it garnered many negative comments. There was even a campaign on for civil disobedience, persons wanting to have refunded any deductions made from their paychecks. Some labelled the scheme as sinful; that is, reading it backward: SIN.
You must understand the reason for that stout resistance: because this scheme meant the lessening of one’s earnings, which in human terms is a definite no-no for anyone. So, having said that, let us carefully examine the finer details of an NIS Scheme:
(a) First of all, if there were no contributions from an employee, there can be no collection of benefits, point blank! Yes, you were working for twenty or thirty years with no contributions to the scheme, hence nothing could have been attributed to your account by way of pension funds.
(b) Self-employed persons such as market vendors, taxi operators, cottage industries as well as contractors themselves must make their contributions, failing which they cannot now come again to claim.
(c) Some workers’ contributions go way back to the inception of the scheme – a time when we only had business done in hard copies. This was a tedious system that saw the insidious institution of many acts of corruption and skullduggery being carried out. Some of these issues are being investigated as we speak. Hard copies are still being used as a backup, because even the best of computerised systems fail. In it all, the NIS is still the only viable option available.
(d) Some workers were told that their contributions were not up-to-date, or were lacking from the minimum contribution standpoint. But even in such circumstances, an amicable arrangement would be worked out with the scheme after that person would have reached retirement age.
(e) Then there is the perennial problem of employers who did not make contributions on behalf of their employees, or whose employees claim made deductions from their paychecks but there is no record of those deductions being remitted to the NIS.
The situation worsens when you realize that some of those institutions or private contractors have gone out of business. In such circumstances, I call on the Government to have designated lawyers to look into the interests of the pensioner. To have a poor, defenseless pensioner seek out the services of a paid attorney is adding salt to the wound. So, I call on the scheme’s directors to explore the idea of having a lawyer or desk set up to address such issues.
(f) Then there is the issue of beneficiaries illegally collecting monies on behalf of their deceased loved ones when those loved ones were not actually dead. This is an issue that, from time to time, comes up when unscrupulous persons desecrate the scheme with their dishonest tactics. On this note, I call on the Government to be ever vigilant in making payouts to beneficiaries of the dead, and ensure that every ‘T’ has been crossed and all the dots have been fulfilled.
(g) Lastly, I call on all employees to approach the NIS to ensure that their contributions are up-to-date. Do not take the employers’ word for it, go seek out clarification of your contributions. It is the workers’ binding duty to seek out their benefits as well as get a hard copy printout of it. Do not wait until your twilight years to ascertain this fact, it might be too late then. It is your right to know how you stand.
Respectfully,
Neil Adams
