By Clement Marumoagae
There are employees who started working and contributing to retirement savings before 1996 in South Africa. Some of these employees were contributing members of retirement funds established by the Apartheid government or those established by the former Bantustans (the so-called TBVC states: Transkei, Bophutatswana, Venda and Ciskei) when they gained independence. When South Africa became a democratic country, the government wanted to standardize the provision of retirement benefits by establishing the main retirement fund that was designed to provide retirement benefits to employees employed by the government. This led to the appointed a Task Team on Restructuring of Pensions, which recommended the amalgamation of the public sector retirement funds established by the apartheid government and those established for the TBVC states into a new retirement fund. The democratic government implemented this recommendation through the promulgation of the Government Employees Pension Law (Proclamation 21 of 1996) which established the Government Employees Pension Fund.
Among others, the GEP Law makes it clear that it is aimed at providing retirement benefits to Government employees and their beneficiaries. These employees include those who were employed by the Apartheid government and the Bantustans, who were members of discontinued retirement funds which were joined to form the GEPF. These employees had already accumulated retirement benefits before they were incorporated into the GEPF. The GEPF inherited all the assets and liabilities of the discontinued funds, which meant that these members could now claim their benefits when they became due directly from the GEPF. One of the major challenges of this process was poor record keeping. In practice, former members of discontinued retirement funds who were incorporated into the GEPF appear to struggle to receive all the benefits that they accumulated before the establishment of the GEPF, particularly when they are unable to prove the period of their contribution before 1996.
The onus appears to be on these members to provide proof of their employment and record of contributions. It does not appear as if the GEPF adequately collected contribution information of these members from the discontinued funds to ensure that they receive what is due to them. This leads to some of these members losing out on their entitled accumulated retirement benefits merely because an objective proof of their membership and contribution payment cannot be readily ascertainable. There have been few High Court cases where this issue has arisen, which clearly indicate that this is a practical challenge that some of the GEPF member who exit this fund are experiencing. Where their pensionable service is incorrectly calculated and being paid less benefits than what they are entitled.
Should you be a victim of a miscalculation of your pensionable services which led to your retirement benefits being substantially reduced, and wish to find out more about this issue and whether you have a claim against the GEPF, feel free to contact us for legal advice.
