Social Insurance Fund (SIF) Deductions and Ambiguous Restructuring

Who Protects Workers’w Rights at the Khartoum Refinery Company?

By: Abdelrahman Mohamed Zain Abdeldafae Ahmed
Employee, Khartoum Refinery Company
Employee No.: 353
Email: mr.zainrac@gmail.com

Since 1986, my professional journey in the industrial sector began at the Arab Sudanese Poultry Company, one of the companies affiliated with the Arab Authority for Agricultural Investment and Development. Then continued my work following a restructuring process carried out through the Management Development and Productivity Efficiency Center, which resulted from the merging of several companies into a single entity known as the Arab Company for Agricultural Manufacturing and Production, operating through specialized units.
From that time onward, the National Pension and Social Insurance Fund had been a constant part of my professional career. A monthly deduction of 8% was made from my salary, while the employer was obligated to contribute 17%, in accordance with the laws governing social insurance in Sudan.
In 1999, I left the company and joined Khartoum Refinery Company, where my insurance account was duly linked, and deductions continued without interruption until 2026, the year I retired nearly four decades of continuous hard work.
The Administrative Shock
Instead of being formally notified through an official letter clarifying my employment and insurance status, I was shocked to receive a WhatsApp message from an unidentified person outside the recognized administrative hierarchy, asking me to choose between:
Receiving my entitlements and leaving the job, or
Continue in service
with no legal clarification whatsoever regarding the fate of the social insurance entitlements deducted from me and also from my colleagues over many years.
This approach does not merely lack professionalism; it undermines the most basic principles of administrative correspondence and disregards hierarchical order, decision credibility, and respect for workers.
The Core of the Crisis: Deductions Without Remittance
More alarming than the method of communication is the fact that a large number of employees who were referred to retirement since the outbreak of the war have not received their social insurance benefits, despite the continuation of monthly deductions from their salaries.
Available information indicates that the company failed to remit the deducted amounts to the Fund, citing system disruption due to the war, despite repeated demands by the National Pension and Social Insurance Fund for payment.
This creates a fundamental question:
How can workers’ funds be deducted regularly yet not transferred to the competent authority?
Legal Basis
According to Sudanese legislation, social insurance contributions constitute an inherent right of the worker, not an administrative option.
The system is financed by contributions from both the worker and the employer, and these funds are used exclusively to pay pensions for old age, disability, death, and compensation for work-related injuries.
The International Social Insurance Association (ISSA) has confirmed that the regular transfer of contributions is a fundamental condition for protecting insured persons’ rights and ensuring the sustainability of pension systems.
https://www.issa.int/node/183812
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) also states in Article 22:
“Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security.”
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Restructuring… and Why This Ambiguity? (A Strict Legal Perspective)
The demand by the Board of Directors of the Khartoum Refinery Company to reduce the workforce by 30% is, in principle, legitimate and lawful. However, the role of the executive management has been unsuccessful due to its actions without an official announcement of an approved technical, financial, or legal study, and without disclosing the criteria and foundations upon which the decision was based. This constitutes a clear violation of the principles of good governance.
The seriousness of this decision is further compounded by the fact that the refinery already possesses complete and approved restructuring studies prepared by internationally recognized consulting firms, including:
SAGA (India)
KBC (United Kingdom)
Institut Français du Pétrole (IFP)
Shell
OGS (Canada)
These studies were based on job analysis, job classification, and linking workforce levels to production requirements and operational safety, rather than individual decisions or improvised estimates.
Ignoring these studies, resorting to opaque methods lacking consultation and participation, and failing to involve national experts, workers’ unions, and professionals of integrity constitutes a deliberate waste of institutional knowledge and a serious erosion of modern management principles.
This approach also contradicts the standards of the International Labour Organization (ILO), which require genuine and prior consultation in cases of collective redundancies or restructuring, and consider failure to do so a breach of decent work and social justice principles.
https://www.ilo.org/global/standards/lang–en/index.htm
Furthermore, the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance confirm that boards of directors bear full responsibility for any strategic decision that is not based on adequate information or reliable studies.
https://www.oecd.org/corporate/principles-corporate-governance/
Accordingly, any workforce reduction carried out:
without reliance on approved restructuring studies,
without safeguarding workers’ social insurance rights, and
without a transparent and formal administrative process
constitutes a decision subject to legal challenge, and the company’s management and Board of Directors bear full responsibility for its social and legal consequences.
Conclusion
Social insurance and restructuring are not internal administrative matters; they are issues of rights and justice.
There can be no meaningful discussion of reform, efficiency, or cost reduction while workers’ rights remain suspended and sensitive matters are handled through non-institutional and non-transparent practices.
Respect for human dignity, protection of workers’ rights, and adherence to the rule of law are the true foundations of any national institution seeking sustainability.
References
National Pension and Social Insurance Fund – Sudan
https://www.nsif.gov.sd
International Social Security Association (ISSA)
https://www.issa.int
International Labour Organization (ILO)
https://www.ilo.org
OECD – Corporate Governance Principles
https://www.oecd.org
United Nations – Universal Declaration of Human Rights
https://www.un.org