Teachers Explain Why They Opposed the New NSSF Deductions
Teachers Oppose the New NSSF Deductions and Explain Why They Left. The government withholds more than one-third of teachers’ salary as National Social Security Fund (NSSF) deductions on their way home.
The Kenya Union of Post Primary Union Teachers (KUPPET) filed a petition in the High Court, revealing that some teachers are barely making ends meet as a result of high deductions made by the Kenya Kwanza government.
KUPPET has filed a lawsuit against the Public Service Superannuation Scheme (PSSS) and the National Social Security Fund (NSSF).
According to the union, teachers are obligated to contribute 7.5% of their income to PSSS. They are required under NSSF to donate 6% of their earnings, with matching funds given by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC).
In addition, instructors must contribute 1.5% of their salaries to the housing levy, according to the union’s case, which was filed by attorney Linet Maiyo.
According to the Akelo Misori-led union, forcing teachers to contribute to two mandatory pension schemes and transfer more than a third of their monthly income overseas is unreasonable and violates the Employment Act.
“The petitioner (KUPPET) also claims that its members are coerced into joining two government-managed pension plans with the same goal of providing members with pension benefits.” In court filings filed on Friday, the union claims that there is no logical basis or explanation for why the petitioner’s members should be exposed to two government-mandated pension systems.
KUPPET has sued the Attorney General, the NSSF board, the TSC, and the National Assembly. PSSS has also been recognized as a party with an interest in the case.
A teachers’ union has challenged the government’s decision to deduct National Social Security Fund (NSSF) contributions from its members’ salaries in court.
According to the Kenya Union of Post Primary Union Teachers (KUPPET), withholding teachers’ pension benefits if they are not registered with or affiliated with the NSSF is illegal and discriminatory.
Teachers should not be subject to the NSSF plan because they were never consulted, according to Maiyo. She also claims that the scheme’s participation requirement violates teachers’ right to choose their own pension plan.
“Members of the Petitioner are already enrolled in a separate pension plan that provides higher returns than the plan required by the Respondents.” “Being forced to join the scheme under the NSSF Act has violated the petitioner’s members’ right to choose to be a part of a competitive pension scheme,” Maiyo contends.
Teachers Oppose the New NSSF Deductions and Explain Why They Moved
According to Misori’s supporting affidavit, teachers were automatically enrolled in PSSS because they worked for the government.
He argues that following the enactment of the NSSF Act, the union filed a lawsuit and successfully contended that the Act was unconstitutional.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court’s (ELRC) orders, according to Misori, were overturned by the Court of Appeal.
He alleges that the Principal Secretary of the Office of Public Service, Gender, and Affirmative Action issued an order forcing businesses to reimburse the social security contributions made by their employees.
“The aforementioned letter from the Principal Secretary was false, misguided, and inaccurate because it claimed that the Court of Appeal had upheld the constitutionality of the NSSF Act, which was completely false.” According to Misori, it also misinterpreted the wording of the disputed Act addressing employer and employee contributions.
He says that PSSS members are exempt from NSSF contributions.
He claims that these deductions, along with the other required deductions, such as those to the NSSF, “cause the Petitioner’s members’ net pay to fall below the statutory limit of 1/3 as set out in section 19(3) of the Employment Act, putting them at risk of disciplinary proceedings from their employer.”
KUPPET is demanding an order barring NSSF from requesting contributions from its members while the case is being heard and decided.
Furthermore, the union asks the court to find that teacher contributions to the NSSF are illegal. Simultaneously, it seeks a decision that the government’s requirement to seize more than a third of teachers’ monthly salaries violates their constitutional rights.