Dear Editor,
Several years ago, there was a period of time when the power company was GEC, and whatever salary and wage increases were announced during the reading of the National Budget, such increases were also enjoyed by the employees of GEC. After some time until the present, the two unions representing employees of GPL, formerly GEC, have been negotiating for increases in wages and salaries for those employees. In those earlier years, the power company was owned and operated by the government, hence the employees were described as public servants employed with a public utility company. The company was subsequently divested and ESBI arrived and operated it. However, the company remained a public utility company even though it was operated by foreign management personnel. After ESBI relinquished ownership of GPL, the government took control of it once more. When the government gave increases in wages and salaries to public servants, those increases are applicable and are enjoyed by retired employees of several government-controlled entities such as GPF, GDF, GPOC. In the case of the retired employees of GPL, no increases are added to the pensions they receive from GPL, and this to me is rather unfair given the fact that increases in pensions are given to retired employees of other government-controlled agencies. The pension given to you on retirement will be the same amount you will receive until death. This is described as pension for life.
Secondly, the monetary contributions from employers and employees to the superannuation scheme when it was introduced several years ago, were calculated based on the value of the Guyana dollar at that time. This meant that a pension at that time would have been quite reasonable and acceptable given the value of the dollar. Now that the Guyana dollar has been devalued considerably, calculating a pension using the formula, figures and percentages used in the initial stages of the scheme is not in keeping with purpose and mandate of the scheme. What I am suggesting is that whenever the Guyana dollar is devalued, the employee and employer contributions to the scheme should be increased accordingly, making the pension to be received acceptable. Please remember that pensioners have no union to represent their cause, so it is left to the relevant agency of the government to look into this matter.
Lastly, when an NIS contributor becomes eligible for a pension, his/her monthly pension is calculated using the figures of the contributions from the best three years of the last five years prior to being eligible for a pension. However, there is one problem here which is somewhat disadvantageous to the would-be pensioner. Let us assume that he was receiving a salary from which he was making maximum contributions to NIS until he reached the age of 54 years. Unluckily for him, he lost that job and then had to settle for a lower-paying job for the next six years and had been making the minimum contributions to the NIS. It therefore would mean that although he was contributing the maximum for all but five years, his monthly pension will not reflect the period when he was making maximum contributions. Remember to be eligible for a pension, a contributor must have made at least 750 contributions, whether these contributions were maximum or minimum contributions. One contribution is one. It has nothing to do with the quantum and the only time quantum plays an important role is the in last five years before the pensioner’s birthday. This needs to be addressed.
Yours faithfully,
Colin Gill
