Ian Carrington, Director of the NIS

On Sunday, September 3, 2017 the front page of the Sunday Sun carried an item in which the Director of the National Insurance Scheme (NIS) is reported to have said that workers took an inordinate amount of sick leave only to find on retirement that their pension payments had taken a hit. He is then quoted as having said:

I always encourage people not to take sick leave unless they are actually sick. It impacts on the amount of pension you will get later.

The following day I called the Nation to ascertain if anybody from NIS had called to correct those statements. Since no one has done so, I cannot sit idly by and allow such dangerous misinformation to go unchallenged. Not only is it incorrect; it is irresponsible and has potential for devastating consequences.

A person who is sick could believe this report and decide that he does not want to jeopardise his pension. As a result, he might go to work while being ill and become a danger to himself, his fellow workmen and the public. Just imagine a situation where the driver of a public service vehicle goes to work when he is sick because he does not want to lose out on part of his pension and crashes with a full load of passengers.

From my experience, having worked at NIS, I make bold as to say that a person’s pension would only be negatively impacted if he/she refused or neglected to submit claims for sickness, maternity or unemployment benefits.

Any person who is ill, for a period Monday to Saturday and submits a sickness claim, would be entitled to receive monetary compensation, in addition to a credited contribution. Credited contributions count towards a person’s pension entitlement, even though no actual money is paid into the NIS fund. Section 57.(1) and (2) of the National Insurance and Social Security (Benefit) Regulations, 1967 state:

57.(1) For every contribution week for the whole of which an insured person

(a) received, or would but for regulation 4(1) have received sickness benefit; or

(b) received maternity benefit; or

(c) received, or would but for regulation 46(1) have received, unemployment benefit

a contribution shall be credited to that person without actual payment thereof.

(2) A credited contribution shall, subject to the provisions of these Regulations, be valid for sickness, maternity, unemployment benefit and invalidity benefit and for old age contributory grant or pension and shall be equal to the value of the average weekly earnings on which the rate of sickness, unemployment or maternity benefit was based.

In order to qualify for an NIS pension, a person must have 500 contributions. If someone refused to submit their sickness claim, in the mistaken belief that his/her pension would be affected, that person would lose out on some money to tide him/her over a period when not in receipt of income. But worse yet, that person could fall short in the number of contributions needed to qualify for a pension, since no credits would be available to make up the shortfall.

Regulation 31of the NIS Benefit Regulations demonstrate why it is vital to submit sickness benefit claims and accumulate your credits. It provides that of the 500 contributions needed to qualify for a pension, only 150 must be actually paid; the remaining 350 could be credited contributions.

Some enlightened employers pay their workers the full salary and take the benefit when it is paid. If workers qualify for credits in these circumstance, both the employer and employee are entitled to a refund of the contributions paid. This appears to be a carefully guarded secret, the refund is not automatic, you must apply for it.

The National Insurance Fund is primarily intended to pay benefits to people who are insured under the NIS scheme. It is not intended to provide budgetary support to the Government. If they cannot manage this economy without relying on NIS funds, they are in the wrong jobs.

117 responses to “The Caswell Franklyn Column – National Insurance Director Misled the Public About Pensions”

  1. Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger Avatar
    Well Well @ Consequences Observing Blogger

    too many of these civil servants are wicked and malicious, ya can guarantee that these are the clowns with the slave/slave master mentalities and are a danger to the entire work force..

    labor laws mandate that you either use or lose accumulated sick days and vacation days.

    your pension should only be at risk if you abuse sick days to which you are not entitled.


  2. Caswell is a union leader and he has an interest in securing the maximum rights and benefits for workers.

    The rest of us should have broader interests and perspectives. As taxpayers, we should ask ourselves whether there are a significant number of workers who are abusing their sick leave privileges to the detriment of society.

    We cannot expect Caswell to be concerned about Barbados as a whole. That is our job. What are the statistics on sick leave? Are there suspicious trends that suggest worker fraud?


  3. The problem in Barbados is that most managers are reluctant to assign a poor performance rating to an employee when it is justified. They take the easy way out and continue to be burdened by a poor performing employee, with a poor attitude, who is unwilling to make an effort to improve. And this is not limited to a black, male or unionized employee.


  4. The first three commenters seem not to understand what I am saying, and that is simply that sick leave does not affect your NIS pension, contrary to what the Director is quoted as saying.


  5. The local managers in Barbados fraternize with the employeers and their habit. This is the very reason, why many companies bring in foreign managers to achieve some output.

    We do not need more welfare state in Barbados, but much less. The present economic climate is very hostile to any foreign investments. The wages must be dramatically reduced to equalise the low productivity and the value you get as an employer or investor. Especially the public sectors needs a lower and leaner salary scale like this: S1 = 90,000 BBD, S2 = 75,000 BBD, S3 = 50,000 BBD, S4 = 25,000 BBD. And now allowances anymore. Furthermore, we need a national provision outlawing any salary increase higher than 1% per year.


  6. @ Caswell
    Bushie REALLY hopes that you are wrong.

    The alternative is much to dire to contemplate. Cause if you are right, it means that the man who has been running this scheme for the past many years is either a blatant liar, or clueless about rather BASIC issues related to the scheme.

    If he does NOT understand such BASIC rules, please tell Bushie how he could have guided investment policies that resulted in them selling PROFITABLE investments like BL&P and investing millions in shiite schemes such as Four Seasons….

    Check again Caswell and PLEASE confirm that you made an error…and that Carrington know what he is doing…

    John apologised yesterday and has not lost much respect on BU..
    (of course he did not have any to lose in the first place… LOL …ha ha ha)

  7. Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger. Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger.

    your pension should only be at risk if you abuse sick days to which you are not entitled..

    Sometimes it is exhausting, but here goes, hopefully people who have not already put in their allotted 10 years required to receive pension later at a pensionable age……are not taking 2 and 300 days worth of sick days or sick leave…as was the case of a female recently who took years worth of sick leave….that, can put a pension at risk.

  8. millertheanunnaki Avatar

    @ Chad99999 September 10, 2017 at 7:42 AM
    “The rest of us should have broader interests and perspectives. As taxpayers, we should ask ourselves whether there are a significant number of workers who are abusing their sick leave privileges to the detriment of society.
    We cannot expect Caswell to be concerned about Barbados as a whole. That is our job. What are the statistics on sick leave? Are there suspicious trends that suggest worker fraud?”

    Chad, we know you like to consider yourself not only as a maverick of provocation but also as (to use a cricketing analogy) a ‘ripping’ fast bowler of intellectually comatose speed.
    But on this occasion you have stepped over the crease and must be ‘no-balled’ for your careless assertion that the workers are responsible for the deteriorating financial state of the NIS because of excessive bogus claims for imaginary sickness.

    Do you understand that a claim for sickness benefit cannot be successfully made unless attested by a medical doctor with a valid practicing certificate?

    Are you arguing, implicitly, that the medical profession is ‘collusively’ complicit in the fraudulent scheme against the NIS?

    Why are you aiming at the workers, the weakest point on the easy target of a dart board and not at the those employers/managers (including cash-strapped government agencies) who make deductions from employees’ pay packets but blatantly refuse to pay over those contributions for credit to the ‘powerless’ employees’ accounts with the NIS?

    Isn’t that a form of managerial organized fraud with the knowledgeable intent of depriving the genuinely sick workers of their statutory entitlements?

    What about the same senior managers who receive or pay themselves many benefits (both in cash and in kind) and deliberately evade the declaration and payment of the legally required income taxes? Isn’t that also a form of fraud committed against the taxpayers and a “detriment” to the wider society?

    Answer that one Chad or forever hold thy constipated and uninformed anti-worker mouth from running like a real sick ‘half-nigger’ backside after ingesting a pig’s dose of Epsom salts.


  9. Bushie

    I don’t need to double check; I’m absolutely correct.

    The problem is that Carrington started at National Insurance at the top and probably didn’t think that he should familiarise himself with the basics. Now an opportunity comes along for him to speak to an audience and he tells them what he knows- Nothing.

    Sent from my iPad


  10. Well Well

    Under the NIS scheme, you can take 312 days in a year for any one illness. If you know the rules, you can take, let’s say 300 days, go back to work and after some period, you can take another 300 days without affecting your pension entitlement. You will get 52 credits for that 312 days that would allow you to qualify for a pension.

    Don’t ask. I did not say what period because I do not want to teach people how to abuse the scheme.

    Sent from my iPad

  11. Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger. Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger.

    Lol…..Caswell, they may want to adjust that scam.


  12. What scam? If you are sick you are sick .In 40 years of working i claimed sick leave twice


  13. mother sally that is very admirable but how many people did you make ill when you went in and really should have stayed home. I dont know how many times over the years I have had to send people home for having the flu or a bad cold putting everyone else at risk. We even had one guy come in with fleas and had gave it to a couple of other people.


  14. Caswell,

    Thank you for the clarification. I had heard a business manager spout this a couple of years back and could not believe it.

    There is no ideological reason why sick days should affect one’s pension.

    If that were the legislation, it needs amendment. However, you have noted the provisions that refute this.

    Thank you.

    I am serious,

    Caswell for Senator, instead of rubber stamps.


  15. @Crusoe

    In an enlightened society the media would have demanded a clarification from the Director of the NIS by now but it is Sunday.


  16. Caswell, what is the significance of “…week for the whole of…” in
    “57.(1) For every contribution WEEK FOR THE WHOLE OF which an insured person…”
    versus something like
    “57.(1) For every contribution PERIOD OR PART THEREOF FOR which an insured person…”?


  17. Bushie

    You really know this man Carrington!

    He’s the type of man who will go along with the powers that be, to keep a cushie pick.

    Not a man to resign, as a matter of principle, because the political elites, economic elite tell he to do shiite!

    The fact is that if the solvency of the NIS could even be brought into question we as a country are at a great loss.


  18. David,

    Indeed. But ‘don’t rock the boat’ appears to be the mantra for some.

  19. Bernard Codrington. Avatar
    Bernard Codrington.

    Most arguments hang on the premise on which a statement is made. If one believes that Barbadians are basically honest the inference that can be made by the phrase “actually sick” would not arise. ” Sick” needs no qualification nor modification. In any case the application for sick leave is accompanied by a doctor’s certificate and is granted only when so certified.
    Doubting the integrity of workers and members of the medical profession cause more harm than good to the pension scheme. Sick workers spread illnesses in the work place that cause reduced productivity and higher charges to the pension and health benefit schemes.


  20. @Bernard

    Do you recall a few years ago the police force was on sick out, hundreds of them? They all presented sick noes signed by doctors.

  21. Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger. Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences Observing Blogger.

    “If you know the rules, you can take, let’s say 300 days, go back to work and after some period, you can take another 300 days without affecting your pension entitlement. ”

    Mothersally…that scam need amending.

    People get sick, but they can get even sicker if there is wiggle room for abuse.


  22. Alien

    For NIS purposes a week is the period Monday to Saturday. If you claim sickness benefit for that period, you will get a credit. On the other hand, if you were sick for a week starting any other day of the week, you would not get a credit.

    Sent from my iPad


  23. David

    You ever heard of being sick and tired, well those policemen were afflicted in that way. If they had gone to work in that condition, snapped and beat a suspect there would have been a hue and cry. In those circumstances, it would have been best to report sick. Mentally ill does not mean that you have to go to Black Rock. A little time away from work would be just what the doctor ordered.


  24. Bernard

    This is Barbados and everybody has a ‘friend’.

    Everybody thinks they owe somebody a favour.

    Everybody knows somebody everywhere, especially amongst the elites.

    Things are never as straight forward as you would like to presume.


  25. Caswell,
    After reading your article posted on BU today, and the Nation’s front page article of September 3, 2017, I believe that the calculation of insurable earnings is the core of the problem.

    You correctly stated that an insured person must have at least 500 contributions in order to be ELIGIBLE (my emphasis) to receive an old age pension. At least 150 of these contributions must be actually PAID, and the rest can be CREDITED.

    However, the Nation’s article highlighted the Director of NIS focusing his attention, not on eligibility for the old age pension, but on the AMOUNT (my emphasis) that an insured person would receive after they have satisfied the eligibility requirement which you outlined.

    “I always encourage people not to take sick leave unless they are actually sick. It impacts on the amount of pension you will get later,” Carrington told hundreds of delegates attending yesterday’s final day of the Barbados Workers’ Union annual conference held at its Solidarity House headquarters.

    Now, let us take a close look at what determines the AMOUNT of old age NIS pension a retired person will receive.

    As you know, there are 3 bases on which an old age NIS benefit can be calculated.

    NIS pension reform was carried out in 2003, so the bases are determined based on those who were age 56 or older at December 31, 2002 (OLD BASIS), those who were younger than age 47 at December 31, 2002 (NEW BASIS), and those whose ages range between 47 and 56 at December 31, 2002 (50% OLD BASIS + 50% NEW BASIS).

    The old basis calculates the old age pension to be 40% of Average Insurable Earnings + 1% of total insurable earnings on which contributions were based, after the insured had satisfied the eligibility requirements.
    (Please note that in the good old days this “old basis” was being abused. A person could decide not to contribute to the NIS until they reach age 55. At age 55 they could contribute for 10 years, and then start receiving an NIS pension of 40% of their average insurable earnings at age 65.)

    The new basis takes into account all contributions PAID (my emphasis) over the working life of the insured, and annual average earnings based on the best 5 years. The final formula is 2% per year x average insurable earnings, for the 1st 20 years, plus 1.25% for each year in excess of 20 years.

    All bases provide for a maximum benefit of 60% of average insurable earnings.

    Clearly, the only way that the payment of sickness benefits can reduce the amount of an insured’s old age pension is if it negatively affects his or her actual insurable earnings. Implicitly, the Director of NIS seems to be saying that once you take sick leave, you will receive no or reduced insurable earnings for that period. Put differently, it appears that receiving sickness benefits will enable you to receive “CREDITED” contributions to help you satisfy old age pension eligibility requirements, but it will not enable you to receive PAID contributions which are needed if you want to retire with a higher monthly old age NIS pension.

    Conclusively, paid contributions, and the insurable earnings on which those paid contributions were based, hold the key to determine the amount of the NIS old age benefit.


  26. David, I am told that the paid BSTU press release on page 26A of today’s Sunday Sun relates to the child of a senior union official. Do you know if this is correct?


  27. Walter

    Credited contributions enable you to qualify for the basic pension and they are also used to calculate any additional pension. Please check your sources; they have misled you.

    Sent from my iPad


  28. What if he is?


  29. Do you usually see all of this union effort when a temporary position is not renewed?


  30. The children of union leaders have rights too. Maybe, the reason he is being victimised is that he is the child of a union leader.

    Guest don’t start being nasty. Deal with the merits of his case. I believe if he weren’t a child of a union leader, the union would have been more forceful but it seems that the union anticipated people like you and held back.


  31. The merits are a temporary position is a temporary position.


  32. If I viewed the teaching profession as having so many shortcomings that ever so often the union has to disrupt school operations, I would discourage relatives that think about starting a profession as a teacher, not fight with all of my energy to get them into it.


  33. Agreed Caswell, the focus must be on the merits. In Barbados we like to personalize everything.


  34. Here are “merits” in general that unions should address –

    destroying the futures of children by not correcting SBAs
    destroying the futures of children from families that cannot afford after-school lessons
    using schools’ premises for paid lessons, while not covering the work during school hours
    not properly teaching children and then not registering the children for cxc exams
    teaching children for a full school life and then the children cannot read
    using children as women and men for personal gratification


  35. Yours is a simplification of the SBA issue.


  36. From what the Chairman has said sick leave has a marginal potential to effect NIS pensions, given all the other variables.


  37. Caswell Franklyn September 10, 2017 at 5:07 PM #
    “Walter

    Credited contributions enable you to qualify for the basic pension and they are also used to calculate any additional pension. Please check your sources; they have misled you”

    Caswell,
    I have not taken a position on this issue as yet. I was simply trying to see what arguments could be advanced to make sense of what the Director of NIS was saying.

    On the NIS website dealing with old age pension benefits, you will read:

    “New Basis Pension Calculation

    The pension is calculated based on contributions PAID (my emphasis) over the insured’s work life, and the annual average insurable earnings over the best five years.”

    In the NIS regulations which you quoted, you will read:

    (1) Subject to paragraphs (1D) and (2), the annual rate of pension shall be, (a) 40 per cent of the average annual insurable earnings supplemented by one per cent of total insurable earnings on which contributions were based subsequent to the first 500 contributions paid or credited; (b) 2 per cent of the average annual insurable earnings in respect of every 50 contributions PAID AND CREDITED, and a proportionate percentage in respect of less than 50 contributions for the first 1 000 contributions, and thereafter, …1.25 per cent of average annual insurable earnings in respect of every 50 contributions PAID AND CREDITED, and a proportionate percentage in respect of less than 50 contributions after the first 1 000 contributions;
    (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the average annual insurable earnings for the purposes of regulation 32 shall be the sum of the insurable earnings on which contributions were based during the best 5 contribution years of the last 15 contribution years of the insured person (or such lesser number as represents the total number of contribution years), divided by 5.

    Under pension reform, you will see the following example of a calculation for pension under the old basis:
    Example:
    During the contribution life of an insured person, he earned a wage of $250 per week. He had 1200 contributions PAID OR CREDITED on his behalf of which the first 500 provide a basic pension of $5200 per annum.
    Computation –
    1. Number of contributions in excess of 500 = 700
    2. Value of contributions in excess of 500 = 700x$250 = $175,000
    3. Supplemental annual pension = 1% of $175,000 = $1,750
    4. Basic Annual Pension = $5,200
    5. Total annual pension = $6,950
    6. Total weekly pension = $6,950 divided by 52 = $133.65

    I am not a lawyer, but when it comes to satisfying the eligibility requirements, you will note that the regulations say “paid or credited”. However, with respect to the calculation of the amount of benefit, the regulations say “paid and credited”. Could this innocent looking phrase make the difference?
    However, the example above talks about “paid or credited”.

    I don’t know what administrative practice is being employed at the NIS when it comes to this issue. What I do know, is that for an important pronouncement such as this, the Director of NIS ought to have given an example of a calculation to show the hit on the pension of an insured who took plenty sick leave, and the Nation ought to have printed it.


  38. I think Caswell’s curve ball in his final paragraph is a truth that needs to be told to the Hon Freundel Stuart,the Hon Chris Sinckler and Mr Carrington of NIS.The NIS is a Pension Scheme designed to benefit contributors.It is not to be used as a substitute for failing to properly manage the local economy and the courts of Barbados should be approached by CTUSAB and the Employers Confederation of Barbados to defend the rights of employees and employers who are innocent of this great offence.


  39. Correcting SBAs is not a complicated matter. If teachers were focused on doing the best for their students, an SBA would be routine work already covered and not viewed as additional work. A country cannot afford to pay for less than value, especially when no one wants to pay taxes, nsrl and whatever other tax there is. Would some teachers accept the same level of effort they give in the classroom from a maid working in their home?


  40. @lawson September 10, 2017 at 12:28 PM “mother sally that is very admirable but how many people did you make ill when you went in and really should have stayed home.”

    True.

    I confess: Once I went in with a really, really bad flu. It was probably one of those flu’s that come with a number NP36Z or something so. I made the whole office sick. About 8 people had to take 2 weeks sick leave each.

    I never did it again.


  41. @Guest September 10, 2017 at 5:33 PM “The merits are a temporary position is a temporary position.”

    So you are not bothered by the fact that this temporary position was treated differently from other temporary positions?

    Has your sense of justice deserted you?


  42. @Walter Blackman September 10, 2017 at 6:52 PM “for an important pronouncement such as this, the Director of NIS ought to have given an example of a calculation to show the hit on the pension of an insured who took plenty sick leave, and the Nation ought to have printed it.”

    Agreed. Because now I am confused.

    Let us say that both A and B were born on June 30, 1951. They both went to work on their 18th birthday, June 30, 1969 at the same place and received equal wages throughout their working lives.

    The will both retire on December 31, 2017 when they turn 66 1/2

    A has never taken any sick leave.

    B has taken 2 weeks sick leave for each of the 48 years he was employed and for good measure will take one week sick leave next week, for a total of 96 weeks sick leave.

    Will their pensions be the same amount?

    Can Caswell, Mr. Carrington or Walter or the Nation answer this hypothetical question?


  43. Can you imagine an employer having to rehire every temporary employee each time one was rehired?


  44. What?


  45. If the authorities are refusing to rehire the temp simply because the temp’s mommy or daddy is a big shot unionist, then the authorities are in the wrong, and if they don’t watch it the teachers will withdraw their labour, and we the parents/taxpayers/electorate will be pissed, and we will remember you unkindly in the pooling booth.

    Our children have been on vacation for 10 weeks now. It is time that they should be back in school. We don’t want political yardies playing the mass with our children’s educations.


  46. Simple Simon

    The pensions would be the same, unless B did not make a sickness benefit claim. If B made a sickness claim, he would be entitled to a credit for each week and that credit would be recorded as though a contribution had been paid.

    Sent from my iPad


  47. The unions want to act like adults and be treated like children. They want to strike and be paid by the employer rather than use the strike fund. They want to neglect the children and draw the children’s parents’ tax as salary. They want to not cover the work in the classroom and use the schools’ premises to give paid lessons. Be an adult or a child but not an adult and a child.


  48. So wait… angela is a ‘Guest’ now?
    Shiite … bad enough that AC morphed in to angela Skeete…
    Now this…


  49. Do unions host workshops for their members on work ethic, performance, …? Do unions terminate the membership of members that have no interest in providing honest work?


  50. “Simple Simon September 10, 2017 at 9:48 PM # – If the authorities are refusing to rehire the temp simply because the temp’s mommy or daddy is a big shot unionist,…”

    Should the employer rehire the temp because the temp’s mommy or daddy is a big shot unionist?

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading