VOL. 67, NO. 3 - AAFI-AFICS, Geneva - UNOG

followed this question closely. He could not understand why enough pressure had not been put on the
successive Secretaries-General who have the power to resolve the problem of retirees’ representation,
despite the resistance of some Member States. 55,000 retirees and beneficiaries represented a lobbying
force. It had to be recognized that retirees’ associations had failed to make enough effort. He considered it
essential that retirees’ representatives have full rights on the UNJSPB and suggested that retirees be militant
about a question which was of fundamental importance to them.
4.15 Mr Claude Mercier concurred with the two previous speakers that retirees should press for voting
status at the Pension Board. Waiting for the number of beneficiaries to equal that of participants would mean
that many current retirees would have passed away by then. If AAFI-AFICS’ paying US$ 1 less in its
contribution to FAFICS as a symbolic gesture would be a good signal, he would support this proposal as a
means of conveying the Association’s dissatisfaction with FAFICS’ handling of pension matters. He
encouraged other Associations to write to apply pressure on the Pension Board. He felt only firm and
continuous pressure could be effective and urged prompt action as he considered that too much time had
been allowed to pass.
4.16 Mr Jean-Michel Servais said that he failed to understand why the criticized sentence in paragraph 14
of the Annual Report should cause any problem. Difficulties could and did occur. In fact, there were service
companies and institutions which carried out customer satisfaction surveys specifically to identify possible
problems.
4.17 Mr Juan Mateu underlined that FAFICS had fought for a long time for consultative status with the
Pension Board. Currently it had four representatives and two alternates who participated in discussions in
the Board. As Treasurer of FAFICS, he could testify to the heavy burden which the costs of participating in
the Board represented for the FAFICS budget; hence the Board's recent decision to finance the costs of
participation of two FAFICS representatives had been very welcome. He further noted that the Secretary of
the Pension Fund had estimated that the costs of organizing elections for retirees to the Board could cost up
to US$ 150,000 per election.
4.18 A participant stated that he had been shocked to be called a ‘customer’ by the Geneva office of the
UNJSPF. He had found that term quite inappropriate and had written to the Geneva office of the UNJSPF to
that effect. The reply he had received from the Chief of the office was a confirmation of this phraseology. He
would appreciate the matter being followed up by the Association.
4.19 Dr Samy Kossovsky felt that there was a consensus at the General Assembly that the Pension Fund
had been set up to serve retirees. There was a tripartite system at the Pension Board (11 seats for each
group -governments, administrations and participants). It seemed that participants did not want to lose seats
for the benefit of retirees. He remarked that in a sense administrations were emanations of Member States
and wondered whether there was not some confusion there. He wondered why retirees should be denied full
representation at the Pension Board. Retirees should insist that they should have the same rights at the
Pension Board as all other members, including the voting right. The holding of direct elections would seem to
imply that FAFICS was not representative. He considered that FAFICS was representative of retirees, if
perhaps somewhat lacking in drive.
4.20 Mr Anvar suggested opening a web site in order to collect as many signatures as possible of the
55,000 retirees as a petition to request direct representation of retirees on the Pension Board. He recalled
that there were no pensioners when the Statutes of the Pension Fund were written. Rules were not engraved
in stone. This proposal was supported by two participants, one stating that in a recent article the UN
Secretary-General had declared that the UN should be proactive and results-oriented, and the second
reminding the Assembly that not all members of the Association had access to Internet and suggesting to
circulate a paper petition for signature by the members of the Association and to send the petition to FAFICS
or directly to the Pension Board: a paper petition would constitute a tangible proof of support.
4.21 The AAFI-AFICS Chairman, Mr Chevron, said that he well understood the wish - expressed by a
number of participants in the Assembly - to see voting rights granted to the representatives of the retirees in
the Pension Board and that this objective had frequently been recalled in meetings of the Committee. He
undertook, as a delegate of AAFI-AFICS in the FAFICS Council to raise this matter again at the next session
of the Council (July 2008) and to urge that the issue be brought before the Pension Board, whenever
possible, in order that it not be lost from view.
34