Sunday, May 31, 2009

AGM of NTUC Income

I attended the AGM of NTUC Income and raised several questions. I shall post the answers separately. 

I wanted to submit a nomination for the board of directors, to represent the policyholders. However, the nominee decided to withdraw at the last minute. He felt that most of the attendees were staff and agents of Income, and would have voted in favour of the CEO - who was standing for re-election. I have to respect his wishes.

There appeared to be insufficient policyholders (who were not staff or agents) at the AGM. Even if they were there, most of them preferred not to ask any question or follow up questions.


Falcon said...

As a policyholder, I too did not want to attend the AGM as I know that it will not make any difference. I was persuaded to attend as I saw that there will be a challenge in the nomination of a representative to represent policyholders. I do not support the nomination of the CEO of Income to represent policyholders as there is a conflict of interest.
It is said that who pays the piper should call the tune but in this case those who pay, (policyholders) are not the one calling the tune but those who are on the receiving end of the money,(CEO and employees) are the ones who decide how they want to spend the money.
For example, in the AGM, it was repeatedly mentioned with pride the various contributions of Income to various schemes to help the poor and retrenched. It is alright if the CEO and the board of directors use their own money to contribute, no questions will be asked. But in this case, policyholders' funds are used during a time when bonuses are cut. In other words, instead of giving policyholders their dues, like projected returns during point of sale, policy maturity etc, money has been channeled towards causes that make the CEO and board of directors look good. This is tantamount to using public money for private interests and gains. This is unacceptable especially when the first and foremost obligation of NTUC Income has not been met like the expectations of policyholders were given lowest priority in favour of the board's own objectives.
So when there is no challenge to the position of representative of policyholders and there is a walkover in the appointment of the CEO for that post it is extremely disappointing as it showed that most policyholders are either ignorant or resigned to become just regular contributors of money for others to spend as and how they like. I hope more policyholders will take a keener interest to safeguard their own money and future.

zhummmeng said...

The AGM was AWARE deja vu.Almost 80% of the audience were own people who were rounded up to attend to give support to the ceo.Hey, the insurance agents have interest in the election. Whoever wins means their future commission will be reduced or not.In the hand of the ceo , commission is assured and not changed.Commission represents cost and cost eats into bonuses and return.
Falcon, you are right. Conflict of interest. It is like having a wolf in charge of the chicken coop.

Anonymous said...

At the AGM I heard the management talking repeatedly about how strong Income is, how socially responsible they are and how they will safeguard the policyholders' interests. I cannot understand what is so special about all the above as they were all done very well for the past decades under the leadership of Tan Kin Lian. The only thing that has changed now is that the 3 things mentioned appeared to be on the decline. And they are so proud about that???
When policyholders asked questions that they cannot answer, they conveniently wanted to take it offline. Then they blame that the problem is with the contact centre. Anything but themselves. Hello! they are the management, contact centre also their problem lah. The reply to all the questions is the usual we will do our best, we have your interests at heart! Even Lehman brothers management can say that lah if they are still around.
They mentioned Matthias Yao name in the nomination of the CEO as policyholders representative. Immediately Matthias yao's reputation takes a knocking in my records now. I am seriously questioning Matthias yao's capability and discerning powers. Isn't he the one who was knocked out when standing for election one to one with an opposition candidate?

Anonymous said...

He is always talking about his achievement. He is trying to outdo Mr. TanKL to show he is better. He is pulling wool over the public eyes. The public is so disenchanted with him. He thinks by giving the miserable donation and he brags about it will appease the public. It is a distraction.

Anonymous said...

He is a big sly crap.He is shamelessly thick skin to say and claim what he does. Social enterprice?

Anonymous said...

He is unashamedly using Mr. TanKL's backside skin for his face. The well kept secret is Mr. TanKL's and it was no secret until this foreign malaysian claimed it as his well kept secret.Isn't shameless? For a person who knows no shame can stoop to anything and claim anything for his credit.


Blog Archive