UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND: Yet another State institution dismally failing to execute its mandate.

As previously communicated, NEASA has increasingly been receiving complaints that employers, employees and third-party administrators are experiencing disastrous, or non-existing service and assistance when dealing with the UIF.

Consequently, NEASA conducted a survey amongst the public in order to determine whether there truly is a problem which needs addressing, what the possible issues may be, the extent thereof and the frequency with which they are experienced.

The results from said survey paint a grim picture regarding the functionality, or lack thereof, of this government institution.

The participants in the survey were categorised either as employees, employers or third-party administrators.

The majority of the participants interacted and communicated with the Fund telephonically or via email, as it is often not practically possible for people to tend to the offices in person. According to the survey, their experience with the Fund was generally dismal; in every category, the majority of the participants confirmed that their experience with the Fund was either ‘horrible’ or ‘frustrating’.

More than 70% of claims submitted by employees, employers and third-parties, were unsuccessful. In all of the categories the majority of claims, if successful, took longer than a year to be addressed and/or completed.

The UIF constantly urges anyone who needs to interact with the Fund to do so via their online administrative system, Ufiling; however, this system in itself is proving to cause more difficulties, issues and problems for the stakeholders than its apparent intention to ease the interaction.

Numerous reasons were listed for the failure of requests and claims, yet only two are acceptable, namely that the applicant did not meet the legislative requirements for a claim for benefits, or that the employer has not contributed to the Fund as it should have.

The remainder of the reasons for failure is indicative of the absolutely poor to non-existent service by the UIF, the inexcusably lacklustre attitude of its employees and the complete lack of control by the Fund’s management. These reasons included, among others:

Certain third-party administrators indicated that absolutely none of their claims and/or requests are being processed due to the UIF’s unwillingness to deal with third-party administrators. In some cases, the UIF refused the powers of attorney from the third-parties and in other cases, the UIF merely abstained from any interaction with them.

Clearly, this institution is failing miserably in fulfilling its obligations and performing its services. Like all the other government institutions in South Africa, the UIF seems to only exist in order to unjustly fill state coffers with funds from the public, unable to execute its mandate and inflate the already overburdened public sector wage bill.

Whether the Fund’s management has the ability to address the ghastly state of affairs of this institution, is highly doubtful, but their clear indifference to this issue is what is most discouraging. 

If there is no appetite on the part of the incumbent management to effect change, it is time for a ‘changing of the guard’. Government is called upon to appoint qualified, motivated individuals to turn the institution around, or alternatively, hand it over to the private sector.

For a person to lose his/her means of income, for whatever reason, and then experience the utter discouragement of being without income and deprived of assistance, despite having contributed to what one imagined to be a lifeline in desperate times of need, is completely unacceptable.

Rona Bekker is a Senior Policy Advisor at the National Employers’ Association of South Africa (NEASA).

 

For more information: