…Says Staff Exits Were Voluntary and Part of Organisational Restructuring
By| Goodluck E.Adubazi, Abuja
The Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF) has strongly refuted allegations of a managerial crisis and mass resignation of employees, describing reports circulating in some media outlets as misleading, inaccurate, and devoid of factual basis.
In a statement issued by the Head of Corporate Affairs, Alexandra Mede, the Fund specifically faulted a report published by Sahara Reporters on June 4, 2026, insisting that the publication misrepresented events within the organisation and formed the basis of what it described as unfounded attacks by a coalition of civil society organisations.
According to the statement, NSITF management categorically rejected the allegations and maintained that the claims were rooted in a deliberate distortion of facts.
Addressing reports of mass resignations and staff intimidation, the Fund clarified that no such crisis exists within the organisation. It explained that the departures referenced in the reports resulted from a structured Voluntary Retirement Exercise (VRE) introduced as part of an institutional reform programme.
The exercise, which was publicly advertised on March 3, 2026, targeted confirmed staff in designated senior management cadres, including Senior Managers, Principal Managers, Assistant General Managers, Deputy General Managers, and General Managers.
NSITF said the initiative was based on recommendations from an independent staff audit conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and was designed to allow eligible employees to voluntarily exit the organisation with full financial benefits.
Management further disclosed that the exercise was extended following approval by the Fund’s Board during its 83rd meeting held on April 28, 2026.
“All exits recorded under the programme were voluntary, incentivised, and processed in line with Public Service Rules and applicable labour laws,” the statement noted, adding that portraying the exercise as a wave of resignations caused by intimidation amounted to “irresponsible journalism.”
The Fund also criticised the involvement of some civil society organisations, expressing concern that groups committed to promoting accountability would rely on what it termed unverified claims to mount a campaign against a federal institution.
NSITF stated that it has established channels for handling employee grievances through its Human Resource Management Department and noted that no credible cases of victimisation or administrative misconduct have been substantiated.
On allegations of financial impropriety, including claims relating to multiple bank accounts and a purported N297 billion scandal, the organisation stressed that the accusations remain unproven and are still subject to investigation.
The Fund argued that it was inappropriate for unverified allegations to be used as grounds for demanding the removal of key officials, emphasizing that NSITF remains accountable under existing statutory oversight mechanisms and is open to any lawful and evidence-based investigation.
Responding to calls for the removal of the Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, Barrister Oluwaseun Faleye, and the Chairman of the Board, management described the demands as lacking factual foundation.
The statement highlighted what it called significant improvements recorded under Faleye’s leadership, including expanded coverage of workers and enhanced operational efficiency, noting that such achievements contradict claims of institutional dysfunction.
NSITF urged government authorities and the public to assess the allegations based on verifiable evidence rather than speculation. It also called on relevant regulatory agencies to strengthen oversight of civil society organisations to ensure that public advocacy remains anchored on facts and the broader public interest.
Reaffirming its commitment to transparency, accountability, and the welfare of Nigerian workers, the Fund pledged to continue engaging stakeholders openly while encouraging all parties to uphold accuracy and responsibility in public discussions concerning the institution.
