Dear Editor
The letter ‘Headache to uplift pension book’ (KN Nov 7), told a very realistic situation at Christ Church last Friday, one of the locations for identified areas, for the 2023 pension books distribution exercise plus one off cash grant. I am told similar situations occurred at other locations in the City and elsewhere. I arrived at the location at about 11:30hrs and finally left after 14 30hrs, and left persons there who arrived before I did. Everything mentioned in the letter I endorse, including the preferential treatment meted out to persons, and I am convinced a simple process, (the process is simple), was made difficult and humongous by the persons managing and executing it.
For starters there should have been someone at the gate with the list (or computer, nowadays the technology is mobile) to check persons’ eligibility for that location and entitlement to the grant, and where to go, if that location was where they should be. Many persons waited hours only to be told they were at the wrong location. This could have and ought to have be avoided if a better system was in place.
On arrival one was given a number chit (myself and another person had the same number… a human error? Perhaps). Numbers were called and chits collected in batches of forty along with the 2022 books by the roving staff, working under pressure, but keeping their cool. Now this is where it gets difficult to understand. Instead of calling out the numbers, names were being called instead. So what was the purpose of the numbers? The numbers should have been matched to the collected books and called in numerical order. It was just pure damn nonsense (that line again) that while you are waiting patiently for hours other persons could come in, speak to someone at the table, and get through and be gone.
I fully agree the best process, which was smooth, unhindered and efficient was in 2021, for my area was located at the Parade Ground. So, in my view, it is not the process, but the management and execution which made the difference between the two years.
Some quick observations in closing:
• Persons calling names should be familiar with the pronunciations
• Those persons must speak fluently and project their voices to be heard. Calling names with the voice projected downward to the table does not help
• If persons calling names cannot be loud and fluent, then consideration should be given to the employment of a public address system or some voice enhancement system
• Consideration should have provided for some snacks, especially water. Some persons I am told was at the location ‘before bird wife wake’.
• There should be a separate desk/person(s) to deal with queries and emergencies, which was time consuming to the main desk, in order to ensure the process is moving
All in all the exercise could have been better executed. There was probably a system but it was not evident or poorly executed. Each year we do this… Better must be done (it was done before). Pensioners expect and deserve no less.
Sincerely,
Shamshun Mohamed