Sometimes I am amazed, or rather appalled, by what some companies can get up to, both in the treatment of their staff as well as their customers and then they bleat when trade unions and the government react with tough demands.
Let me give you a case in point from a batch of correspondence I received recently. The correspondence affects an employee of a small insurance company. Unfortunately I cannot name the company, because judging by the way this particular company has behaved, someone could well lose a job. However, there is a lesson in this correspondence for other people who may find themselves in a similar predicament.
Employee X joined the small insurance company some time ago in a relatively junior position. At the time he did not understand things like retirement funds.
After a number of years service with the company, Employee X was thinking about moving on in the world and enquired how much he would get from his retirement fund a defined benefit pension fund.
He was told that he would receive what he had contributed plus two percent. Quite rightly he was annoyed and felt that he had been ripped off. He started to ask questions about the situation and whether he could not switch to a defined contribution fund, as then he would be more likely to receive his contributions, the company's contributions as well as the growth on the investments.
He also started asking questions about his actuarial reserve in the fund. He rightly made quite a nuisance of himself.
The reply in effect was get lost, you have no right to question anything and if you continue to question the position without going through the right channels you will be disciplined.
This reply came from no less than the chief actuary of the company.
Well, Mr Chief Actuary, I have news for you. Employee X can and should take you and your company to the cleaners.
In case you have not heard, Mr Chief Actuary, there is now a law called the Labour Relations Act as well as a dramatically amended Pensions Funds Act, which gives Employee X the power to deal with such exploitation.
I told one of the country's top pension lawyers, Peter Strasheim, about Employee X's experience. He agreed that not only was this appalling but that it was an unfair labour practice. He said Employee X should challenge Mr Chief Actuary again and get himself fired as he (Strasheim) would be prepared to handle the resulting case for free. He confidently predicted the result would be significant compensation for Employee X, which would more than cover the poor withdrawal benefits offered.
Strasheim says that employers can no longer use retirement funds as their own personal domain. What employers did not seem to realise was that bad and exploitative practices in a retirement fund are also covered by the Labour Relations Act.
So Employee X, if you were inclined, you could now use that well-known line: "Mr Chief Actuary, make my day!"