The problem with our so-called public servants is that they join the government hoping to make money out of it and to enjoy the perks and privileges that often go with the position. Thus, after every presidential election, supporters of the winning candidate jockey for so-called juicy positions, such as directorship in government-owned and controlled corporations. The government corporate board members bestow upon themselves flashy corporate cars, all expenses-paid foreign trips and, of course, huge bonuses outside of their already huge per diems and allowances.
Thus, it was not surprising, albeit revolting, to learn that the board members of the Social Security System and 19 other government corporations granted themselves bonuses amounting to at least P1 million for each one of them.
Paolo Salvosa, the spokesman of the Governance Commission for Government Owned or Controlled Corporations (GCG), justified the bonuses to executives of 20 government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCCs), including the SSS, because he said these government corporations hit at least 90 percent of their income target in 2012.
Among these corporations were the Development Bank of the Philippines (P10.56 million), Government Service Insurance System (P10.448 million), SSS (P9.392 million) and Land Bank of the Philippines (P7.854 million). At least nine other state firms have pending requests for bonuses, including the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office and Local Water Utilities Administration.
These officials look at themselves as corporate executives and stockholders rather than public servants and, therefore, find it proper that they take a big slice of so-called profits for themselves. Instead of putting the profits back to the coffers of the GOCCS so that they can better serve their members and the people, they first take their “share.”
Take the case of the SSS, which collects contributions and manages the pension fund of millions of private employees, overseas workers and self-employed individuals in the country. The SSS officials have been complaining that there may not be enough funds to ensure the payment of the members’ pension in the future unless it increases the members’ contribution.
And yet, Salvosa and SSS president Emilio de Quiros said its board members are being paid hefty bonuses because the agency met 90% of its target income for the year. If it regularly meets 90% of its annual target income, I see no reason why the SSS funds would not be enough to pay members’ pensions “for eternity,” as De Quiros likes to describe it.
But no, instead of acceding to the repeated pleas of members to increase their pensions, the SSS board insensitively announced that members’ contributions would be increased starting in January from 10.4 percent of the member’s salary to a whopping 11 percent. To those board members, the 0.6-percent difference is nothing but to millions of hard-pressed members, that amount would mean less food on the table.
It is the SSS board and officer’s duty to invest the members’ money wisely. With billions of pesos in members’ contribution coming in annually, there is no reason the pension fund would be depleted if the SSS board and officers make the right decisions on investments and spending.
If they were so good performance-wise to earn the hefty bonuses, how come they don’t have enough to pay the members’ pensions and how come members have been complaining of very slow processing of death, disability and retirement benefits. If you would visit the SSS offices in any given day, you would see hundreds of members lining up or waiting up for processing in the various stages of claiming benefits.
Despite its touted computerization, the processing and payment remain “snail-paced,” as the Commission on Audit described it.
The COA rejected the SSS justification of excellent performance for granting its board members hefty bonuses. In its 2012 annual report of the state-run firm, the COA noted serious performance issues against the SSS, including the “snail-paced payment of death, disability and retirement benefits.”
Instead of increasing the members’ contribution, the SSS should follow the COA admonition that the SSS management should swiftly take legal steps in collecting over P367 million in premiums and penalties from 139 delinquent corporations and employers that have been remiss in their responsibility under the SSS law. In 2011, the COA also expressed dissatisfaction over SSS performance when it assailed its officials for imposing on borrowers interest on loans that exceeded P788.8 million. Imagine an agency that should promote the welfare of its members charging huge interest on salary and emergency loans, among others? That’s frying the members with their own lard, so to speak.
My good friend and high school classmate Horacio Templo, who just recently retired as the SSS’ executive vice president and chief actuary, pointed out that pensions had remained stagnant since the last time SSS granted an increase in 2007. He also said that the new SSS management has been issuing policies detrimental to members.
Templo said in his weekly column at the Manila Standard:
“Millions of needy SSS members fail to pay 120 contributions by the time they reach age 65 for various reasons. But without knowing and understanding why, SSS issued Circular 2013-003 last April 1 to close off their membership. Disguised as guidelines, the circular coldly enumerated the instances when the right to continue contributing would be taken away.
“These members are being barred from continuing to contribute if they fail to apply to pay voluntarily by July 1 or decrease their approved monthly salary credit or miss a contribution. Those who will reach age 65 from hereon are allowed to contribute only if they have joined the SSS before age 55 and have paid at least 80 contributions.
“Once barred from contributing, the member’s refund would be paid. He would then be disqualified from receiving further social security benefits, except the funeral expense.
“SSS finds it financially expedient to return the numerous and insignificant amounts of contributions so it could technically erase from its obligations future pensions. But what would a needy elderly do with P8,400, the refund of his 100 monthly payments of P84?”
Bayan Muna Reps. Neri Colmenares and Carlos Isagani Zarate noted that while the SSS board was quick to reward themselves fat bonuses, it has continuously refused to back the increase in pension for its members under House Bill 175. The two solons chided the SSS board for rejecting the bill on the ground that “it does not have enough funds to do so” despite its own admission that retiree senior citizens’ pension is below poverty line.
The SSS board members should start thinking more about the interest of its millions of members instead of focusing on their bonuses, perks and privileges. After all, public servants are supposed to serve the people.
(valabelgas@aol.com)