I SEEK your permission to use your medium to ask a few questions of the trustees of the Workers Savings and Loan Bank's Superannuation scheme. The appeal case will come up for hearing in the Court of Appeal shortly; however, as the time draws near, I would like to urge the trustees to answer the following questions.

I understand that the trustees met sometime in 2001 and decided to wind up the pension scheme. Based on the wind-up date agreed, only individuals who were considered to be members of the fund at that date stand to benefit.

My questions, therefore, are:

1. Was there a stipulated vesting period in the trust deed?

Individuals are of the opinion that after 10 years of employment, one would become vested. If this were the case, how is it that some past employees who have competed 10 years and more of employment with Workers Bank were not vested? Were these members misinformed at the time of their redundancy?

2. If the vesting period was in fact 10 years, how is it that some past employee who did not complete 10 years of employment were allowed to leave their money in the fund?

3. If there was no stipulated vesting period, what was the criteria for leaving money in the pension scheme?

One school of thought is that you had to be an employee. However, that cannot be the case, as two of the present trustees are no longer employed to the bank. However, by virtue of the fact that they were not paid their pension proceed, that is, they were "vested" at the time of redundancy their interest remains.

Duties revamp

I would like to use this medium to urge the trustees to re-examine what their duties were to the members and if in fact this was properly served. Were the members properly informed of the possibility of a wind-up and the benefits that might accrue to them?

The balance in the scheme, which currently exceeds $1 billion, comprises the employer (Workers Bank) contribution made on behalf of every employee that contributed to the scheme since 1976 when the scheme began. Why then should only a select few benefit?

I, therefore, say that we should take a page for the trustees of Air Jamaica and select a wind-up date that will benefit all surviving members that have contributed to the fund. The surplus belongs to no one individual and since the trustees have the power to wind up they should not use it for the benefit of a few. Trustees have a fiduciary duty to their members and must be reminded that they could find themselves as contrary with the law if these duties are not properly executed.

I am, etc.,

CONCERNED JAMAICAN