Another Look At Contributory Pension Scheme

In a report from the National Pension Commission (PenCom), it was disclosed that only 26 states in Ni-
geria have implemented the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS), two decades after the Pension Reform Act (PRA) 2004 was passed. The report highlights the inconsistent espousal of the CPS across states, with some states partially adopting the scheme, others not yet participating, and some facing challenges in getting the bill approved in their state legislative assemblies.
In 2012, the Rivers State Government, under the leadership of former Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, embarked on a critical initiative by enforcing the Contributory Pension Scheme. This strategic move aimed to establish a sustainable pension system by requiring contributions from both the employer and the employee. The arrangement was designed to ensure that employees have a secured and reliable source of income post-retirement, fostering financial security and stability for the workforce.
Following the introduction of the plan, the government adopted a three-year transition that aimed to fully implement the scheme by 2015. During this transition period, the authorities focused on educating both employers and employees about the benefits and responsibilities of the CPS. This included workshops, seminars, and public awareness campaigns to ensure that all stakeholders were well-informed about the scheme.
The creation of the CPS represents an important milestone in the ongoing efforts to overhaul and enhance the state’s pension system, aiming to establish a more robust and secure retirement savings framework for its workforce. The primary objectives of the CPS are to effectively tackle the inherent shortcomings of the former pension system, including limited coverage, insufficient benefits, and financial uncertainty. This strategic framework is designed to ensure that employees receive sustainable and dependable retirement benefits.
However, to ensure fairness and protect the rights of all workers, it is imperative that the effective date of the contributory pension law be prospective, applying only to workers hired in or after 2012. This would allow those employed before 2012 to continue to benefit from the provisions of theDefined Benefit Scheme (DBS), while ensuring that new hirees are subject to the updated pension provisions.
Unfortunately, the pension programme has experienced several challenges. Despite monthly deductions being taken from civil servants’ salaries for their counterpart funding, the government has not fulfilled its obligation to contribute its share. This has impeded the advancement of the scheme and has left many civil servants without sufficient pension arrangements upon retirement.
As a result, the state pension law has undergone multiple revisions to address the issue of retiring civil servants who ordinarily should be covered by the contributory scheme. The amendments have aimed to accommodate these individuals within the DBS which provides a guaranteed level of pension, based on years of service and salary grade level.
The inability of the contributory pension scheme to gain traction has sparked worries about the long-term viability of the state pension system. The absence of government contributions has resulted in a funding shortfall that jeopardises the government’s capacity to fulfil its pension commitments to employees in the future.
Even if the CPS was created to address the perceived shortcomings and lack of sufficient funding of the DBS by combining funds from employers and employees’ contributions to pension funds custodians, retirees under the scheme have not experienced better outcomes than those who retired under the DBS. On the contrary, the execution of the CPS is different from what its advocates led employees to expect.
The complaints regarding the implementation of the CPS are varied and concerning. Retirees are underpaid despite years of dedicated service, with some having served for the mandatory 35 years. Corruption is rampant within the system, and many state governments and employers are not complying with the provisions of the Reform Act, 2014. Labour leaders in the country have criticised the scheme as being anti-workers and retirees welfare. The Association of Senior Civil Servants of Nigeria (ASCSN) has even called for the scheme to be scrapped, labelling it as a “huge fraud.”
Similarly, we urge the Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, to completely abolish the contributory pension scheme in the state, as it will not benefit civil servants. We are particularly concerned about the future of workers who will retire under this scheme, especially since the current legislation allowing for the Defined Benefit Scheme will be obsolete in June next year, when the contributory pension law will be effective.
Moreover, the state government is deducting and remitting workers’ contributions to the pension scheme, but failing to contribute their own counterpart funds as required by law. This action is a violation of the rights of contributors as outlined in section 4(1) of the Pension Reform Act 2014. According to this section, employers are mandated to contribute a minimum of 10 per cent of an employee’s monthly salary to their pension fund administrators. Employers are also required to deduct a minimum of eight per cent from the employee’s salary and remit it to the fund administrator.
A government that supports labour rights, like the current one, should not allow workers to suffer from a failed retirement scheme. Workers who are close to retirement age should not have to face unnecessary challenges. The failure of the scheme is evident from the number of agencies that have withdrawn from it. Therefore, it is important for the state leadership to revoke the legislation.
Unlike previous administrations that may have disregarded the experiences of workers in the state, the present government has consistently recognised and appreciated their contributions. The labour-friendly policies of this government have shown its dedication to the well-being of workers. However, the failed retirement scheme remains a critical issue that needs to be addressed.