Friday, September 9, 2016
Common Cause Appeal of UN National Staff retirees to the UN Almighty Tribunal
IN GOD WE TRUST
Given the UN Internal Justice System geared MAINLY to seek complainant with the existing rules, procedures, and practices (not behaviours) there seems no one machinery responsible to ensure that the UN/HRD policies are in themselves not ultra vires or contrary to the stated principles of the UN Charter and UN Charter of Human Rights (aka Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
So, basically, we have a UN preaching robot of sacred human rights principles for the world, but not committed to implement them in its own management practices and ensure life of human dignity of their own staff and retirees. Especially, retirees of UN national staff are just ignored as untouchables!
Here is a Common Cause Appeal (analogous to Public Interest Litigation)
explaining the hardships faced by the UN retirees, especially UN national staff retirees of 80s and 90s, There pensions seem frozen at the old rates with little concern of the outrageously high and rising living costs, and costs of geriatric care there is no institutional arrangement similar to ICSC for international and HQ staff, to study the socio-economic conditions of the UN national staff retirees.
We would be grateful for guidance how to strategise our genuine concern to be addressed by the UN top Hierarchical Bureaucracy.
3.
This is especially true in the case
of retirees in the 80s and 90s, with low UN salary levels and low exchange rate
during that period. Hence, even their
current pension frozen/remained in at
USD level on retirement, only to take advantage of the highly devalued INR over
period of time, but never adjusted to the real COL adjustments - real increases
at household levels - for India for decades. (See below what our sample surveys
revealed about their financial hardship.)
4.
Despite UNGA mandates to the
International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) to monitor the pension standards
for ALL staff, it is evident that they either
deliberately ignored/abandoned the monitoring the standard of living costs
for older local staff retirees in countries like India, with a retiree
population over thousands spread across the country. Thanks to such long time
lackadaisical attitude, most of these retirees became silent “inheritors of inequity and social injustice”.
TRIBUNAL |
V.Muthuswami (on behalf of fellow UN retirees
In India)
|
||
v.
|
||
Secretary-General
of the United Nations
|
||
Human Rights invocation in favour of UN Retirees
– UDHR Articles 1 and 25 to rescind denial of ASHI, seen as discriminatory against some of the
retirees
|
UNAT case number: To be assigned (COMMON CAUSE APPEAL)
Judge: Any one
valuing Human Dignity
Registry: CHITRA GUPT OF VEDIC TIMES
Filing party:
Applicant or
Respondent (if other, specify) Same (V.Muthuswami, UN Retiree # 63374 and UID
000015842).
Date of submission: 23 August 2016
Counsel for Applicant:
If self-represented,
please state so. Self (thru email (vmuthuswami1937@gmail.com) or
thru teleconference + 91 98410-26998)**
Counsel for Respondent:
If unknown, leave blank. Wait for new UNSG - a women of great compassion
Note: ** If the UN
– at 70+
is willing to assign a suitably
qualified counsel for the applicant(s), we would be glad to consider.
I.
UDHR Articles relevant to
this case:
Article 1 of UDHR.
All human beings are born free and
equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and
should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 25 of UDHR.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection. |
II.
Salient points of
the case
This Common
Cause Appeal on behalf of UN Retiree colleagues in India (both international
and national), afflicted by non-ASHI participation, is based on the
fundamentals of UDHR, and on the humanitarian
principles, inter alia stated above. The
points mentioned below highlights the suffering of these colleagues:
- Unfortunately, due to inadequate and, not
infrequently, unprofessional support from some of the UN agency HDRs
outfits, several retirees did not (were not able to) enrol into the After
Service Health Insurance (ASHI), within the stipulated enrollment period.
In my estimate, there could be easily several hundreds
of UN
retirees not covered by UN provided
After Service Health Insurance (ASHI) in India alone, facing hardships silently and without any
other help.
- As these retirees grow older, they
realized their folly of missing out of the UN supported Medical/Health
insurance. Also, in the absence of another reliable nationally affordable medical
insurance facilities, their hardship (physical, emotional and financial)
grew exponentially unmatched by UN pension payouts. This situation is exasperated by ever
increasing health/medical costs in the context of no state supported
social safety net, sensitive and with even minimum quality assurance.
5. The true state of govt provided
medical services in India is pathetic for reasons of various forms of
mismanagement. The government hospitals even in big cities are filthy,
unhygienic and routinely inhumane in all departments. These entities are often quoted in the media for doctors/nurses/other medical support staff, found to possess insufficient qualifications,
training and experience in the area of competence! Another known fact is the widespread of
corrupt practices from entry as out/in-patient upto mortuary departments. Therefore,
the so called medical/health security net for ordinary citizens is still in the
dream state and is far from any reality.
6. Medical services/nursing care in the
big cities’ private hospitals are considered on par or better than average
world standards, and superior or less expensive in some areas of specialization
against world standards. However, the actual medical cost for hospitalization
and medical care is expensive and not affordable for national staff retirees,
be they in the National Professional or GS category. See the average medical
cost for some of the hospital intervention treatments in India (see below para
7):
7. Average monthly pension of Indian
national staff ( NPO and GS) retired between years 1980 – 2000 ranges from less
than USD 500 upto approx USD 1600. When
they seek medical help they need to pay the prevailing fees/charges, it may
well be several times of their monthly
pension.
Cost Comparisons 2015 (current rates in India said to
vary upwards by 20% upward) – source: http://www.indiacancersurgerysite.com/india-price-comparison.html
The Comparative Costs between India and
other developed countries like US, UK, and Singapore - Approximate Figures In
US Dollars.
US
|
UK
(Private)
|
SINGAPORE
|
INDIA
|
|
Bone Marrow Transplant
|
upto 200,000
|
upto 200,000
|
-
|
upto
25,000 |
Bypass Surgery
|
35,000
|
25,000
|
-
|
6,000
|
Breast Lump Removal
|
-
|
3,200
|
1,000
|
700
|
Haemorrhoidectomy
|
-
|
3,800
|
1,500
|
1000
|
Knee Joint Replacement
|
-
|
15,000
|
7,000
|
5,000
|
Lasik Surgery
|
4,000
|
2,800
|
1,600
|
700
|
No Stitch Cataract Surgery
|
4,500
|
2,600
|
-
|
700
|
In-vitro fertilisation (IVF)
cycle
|
15,000
|
-
|
-
|
1,800
|
Hernia Correction
|
2,800
|
2,700
|
2,500
|
1,000
|
Dental Implants
|
3500
|
2800
|
1600
|
800
|
- In a few cases of national staff retired in 80s, and known to this applicant, their pension shrunk in value vis a vis national inflation and steep rise in living costs. Again, due to lack or sub-standard quality national medical facilities and compelled to seek expensive private medical service, they face a situation of double trouble.
For example, a NOD retired in early
80s (now in 90+ age group) receives pension lower than a lowest clerical staff
of the Indian Govt service right now in 2016. Again, in the absence of UN
Medical Insurance coverage, his pension gets eaten significantly up in seeking
sub-standard public or expensive private (maybe with no quality assurance) medical
help, that might prove insufficient to the actual medical condition.
9. Given the accepted global threshold
norm for medical expenses being 10 % of any annual gross income (AGI), our
sample surveys and inquiries among fellow UN retirees in India, showed the
following findings:
(a) In the case of a P4 retired staff (84), - UID 000003640 – R/49582 - retired from one of the most
hardship duty stations in Africa (1991), now residing in south India, he
was not covered by any health insurance
for reasons of lack of proper
pre-retirement briefing and uncaring HRD support from NYHQ or just bureaucratic
bungling.
** His medical expenses during the last 12
months cycle (for self and living spouse) amounted to 20+ per cent of his
annual pension.
**Please see the Annex 1 giving the personal
account of the retiree as to how he was not given (or lost) the opportunity to
join/enroll into the ASHI.
(b) National staff member (NOC/D) retired
in 1985 – UID 000009847 & R/32653 - (now aged 92), - not covered by UN Medical Insurance Plan (MIP) for national/local staff - was
obliged to spend between 25-35 per cent of his annual pension. As mentioned earlier, this staff was not
covered by MIP due to lack or inadequate HRD counselling on retirement explaining
his entitlements provided by the organisation to the retiring staff. Most
medical expenses have been for chronic conditions, outside of hospital care.
(c) National staff member retired (NOB/C
level) - now 82, living with spouse - fortunately covered under the MIP, spent over
10-15% of AGI, in the last 12 months, even after CIGNA reimbursement. (UID of the retiree with-held on request).
(d) National staff member retired (NOB/C)
- now 78, living with spouse – again covered by the MIP, incurred something in
the range of 12-15% of his AGI, after
CIGNA reimbursement. This staff
member and spouse are considered as most healthy in this sample survey. (UID of the retiree with-held upon request).
(e) National staff members in the GS 6/7
and below levels, are deliberately segregated by retirement period 1980-1990 , 1991-1995, later
than 1995, for this survey purpose, because of salary increases that occurred in mid-90s, were
considered at that time to be market equivalent. Following hardships are observed:
** those who retired in 80s, still
alive with continuing medical attention, even with MIP cover, are obliged to
spend almost 35-50 percent of AGI on medical care, and had to depend on
extensive support from children and extended family members (willingly or otherwise).
** the range of expenses (with MIP
reimbursement) indicate expenses on the so called non allowable vitamins and
diet supplements, prescribed by doctors, and universally proven to be important
part of treatment regime. Again, these allowable and non-allowable costs vary
between retirees in different UN agencies in the same country!
** a sizable number of retirees/surviving spouses in the 80s group,
despite MIP coverage, are not familiar with the claim procedures and hence often
unable to seek reprieve. No help/guidance is available from the Pensioners
Associations or the UN country/agencies offices, though some of theses agencies having several zonal
offices in the state capitals.
** those national staff retired
after 1995 appear marginally better off,
with MIP coverage, because of the significant increases in the salary
levels in the period of 1995-2000.
(f) Indian Govt salaries to the Class IV
employees – equivalent to UN messengers/drivers – are upped now with a final
take home net pay of
INR 40-55 K per month, (USD 620 – 850) + other medical
and social security entitlements; whereas Class III to I employees (equivalent
to UN senior GS and upto middle professional level) ranges between INR 120K to
240K (USD 1,850 – 3,700) + other medical, housing and social security entitlements.
(g) As the market medical costs and cost
of living move with the government pay scales, life style changes, our national
staff retirees in the NPO and GS face different kinds and levels of additional challenges
in living a dignified life.
(h) Those retired in 80s (period of low
inflation plus very low USD vs INR exchange rate), and advised to remain in
dollar track, receive a pension totally distorted because they are denied of
Indian COL (not just inflation) year on year adjustments, nor the factors of
increases in the UN local salary levels,
over subsequent local salary surveys for those levels, in which these former staff-victims retired.
(i) In fact, they face a double whammy situation:
they are unable to keep the cost of living and standard of living on the one
hand, but they are obliged to pay rising medical costs for minimum health care,
at the current market rates.
Example: the national professional of NOD retiree of
1985 (see (b) above), now receives a monthly pension of
less than INR 60 K (UDS 920) per month, which is now equivalent to
Indian Government Class IV or similar – messenger/driver/other semi-skilled
occupational groups.
III.
Our Appeal as below:
APPEAL SUMMARY
My appeal
is in the name of natural justice and based on the human dignity and rights
promised in the UDHR. I believe that the UN has the unflinching responsibility
of good custodian of these principles
and to abide by its own declaration/promises of rights to older persons. That
is, UN should remain a model of good governance for the
member states.
2. If the existing staff members are allowed to join
the medical/health insurance thru annual campaigns, this facility must be extended to those retirees as well, who, due to inadequate HRD
counselling, were not enrolled for ASHI and are now facing undue hardships in
the face of shrinking value of pension.
3. In other words, there should be open period or at
least annual campaign period for ASHI enrolment even for the
retirees/beneficiaries.
4. ASHI should not be treated as a privileged
entitlement, subject to the discretionary and arbitrary powers of the UN Bureaucracy, but an earned
right of human dignity promised by the UN for all its staff, local or
international .
5. MIP deductions and rules governing reimbursements
for the serving national staff and the national staff retirees should be
uniform for all the UN agencies in the same country/duty station. “UN Delivering As One” rule must
apply.
6. Action by ICSC (International Civil Servaice
Commission)
Similar
to national Pay Commissions in most democratic countries, the ICSC should be asked to
study/review/survey the older UN national
staff pensions, living
conditions of such pensioners, and
recommend revisions in the face of
current standards for a decent and dignified living for older persons.
7. Given the
precedent of Indian Supreme Court judgement in Common Cause Writ Petition #
3958-61 of 1983 and the judgement thereon on 09 December 1986 and in the
various subsequent related judgements between
1995 & 2000, to restore full pension after 15 years of commuted/reduced pension,
as the initial lump sum payment was considered as the advance recovered fully
with substantial interest rates in the following 12-14 year period. (Details
of the common cause writ petition is available on the website of the Indian
Supreme Court – Judgement Information System using the writ petition # and
date.)
8. The court saw
the monthly pension as deferred salary and allowances based on years of
service given after voluntary/mandatory retirement to provide a social
security net in the old age. It is
particularly an important social security in the context of increasing
longevity and rising cost of geriatric care.
Annex 2 to this appeal petition includes one of the typical Indian
Govt. Order of 12 July 2000, showing their continuing implementation
modalities of the judgement among various cadres of civil and armed forces
services.
ICSC MUST NOT AID THE UN TO CREATE A NEW CLASS OF ‘INHERITORS OF INEQUITY AND SOCIAL
INJUSTICE’ BY THE SAME ORGANISATION WHO ARE ENTRUSTED TO PRESERVE, PROMOTE
AND PROTECT HUMAN DIGNITY EVERYWHERE.
9. Action for UN Country Office Representatives:
Despite frequent public statements by UNSG of
organisation’s commitment toward
retirees, the support available from the UN Resident Coordinator or UN
Country Rep office has been just rudimentary limited to trivial matters such
as use of pouch service, use of
canteen space for meetings etc.
UNIVERSAL APPEAL
13. Similarly the UN country offices,
where available, to be asked to keep a living contact with the UN retirees in
their country(ies) of responsibility and be receptive to their needs in
changing socio-economic situation.
|
Documents in
support of our submission:
LIST OF supporting documents. However, these will be provided when requested thru email to interested supporters and well wishers:
|
||
Annex number
|
Title (include
nature of communication, author and addressee)
|
Date (dd/mm/yyyy)
|
-
|
UDHR, ESPECIALLY ART # 1 AND 25
|
10 December 1948
|
-
|
UN principles for supporting
convention for older persons
|
On going
|
1
|
A NOTE on
“Untold story of UN Bureaucratic Lapse” that resulted in an international
staff not being enrolled into ASHI.
|
16 Aug 2016
|
--
(Indian govt infn)
|
http://www.indiahealthcaretourism.com/average_cost_of_treatment.php
|
See webpage and make copy (2014
cost est)
|
2.
|
Indian Government Official
Memorandum of 12 July 2000 restoring full pension after 15 years of
reduced/commuted pension
|
12 July 2000
|
IV.
Signature and Certification:
Signature and
certification
|
I hereby certify that to the best of my
knowledge the information provided in this submission is true, accurate and complete and that all copies
submitted to the Dispute
Tribunal are true copies of the original documents.
V.Muthuswami, UN Retiree, Chennai, south
India Date: 23 August 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)