NIGERIA SOCIAL INSURANCE TRUST FUND

UYO BRANCH OFFICE

MEMO

To: The Branch Manager

From: Human Resource (Deputy Manager)
Date: 9th April, 2021
Subject: Re-Query on letter of success (Jacob, Kesiyemiere Felix (Miss)
Supervisor (Aa/8544)

Issue:
The above named officer was issued a query on 8 th of April, 2021 for contravening
section 06: 03b of the staff conditions of service on the issue of Misconduct. She was
expected to respond to the query within forty-eight (48) hours.
Stating the case:
1. The officer submitted a success letter that did not emanate from the University of
Port Harcourt to the Management of the Fund.
2. Her action contravenes section 06:03b of the staff conditions of service on the
issue of Misconduct.
Representation of the officer:
1. The officer acknowledge receipt of a query which borders on the issue of
misconduct.
2. The officer agreed that she submitted a success letter from the said University to
the Management.
3. She stated that on completion of her BSc programme in computer science, she
went to the school to seek for clearance to obtain her statement of result.
4. The officer also stated that however she was informed that the statement of result
was not available but that a letter of success can be issued to her to present to
her employer, based on this she concluded formalities required and was issued
the said letter which she presented to the Fund for the purpose of upgrading of
appointment.
 5. The officer said she had no idea that the letter of success issued to her was not
from the appropriate authority and got to know about this only when a query was
issued to her with regards to the mentioned letter.
6. She stated that she is confused over the issue and is in deep shock, however she
said her effort to make findings from the school authority on the source of the
letter has proven abortive.
7. The officer said her actions was not deliberate as she wouldn’t forward a letter
that will jeopardize her future in the Fund.
8. In her representation, she pleaded for pardon.
Analysis of the response:
The analysis of the representation of the officer is hereunder highlighted:
1. The officer submitted a letter of success from the University of Port Harcourt to
the Fund.
2. She claimed she did not know the letter did not emanate from the appropriate
authority.
3. Her also claimed her action was not intentional.
4. She claimed to be deeply sorry for submitting a letter which could jeopardize her
future in the Fund.
Findings of the analysis:
Following the analysis of the representation, these findings were made:
1. It is true that the officer submitted a letter from the University of Port Harcourt to
the Management.
2. It was established that her action contravenes section 06: 03a of the staff
condition of service.
3. Upon findings, it was established that she had undergone a BSc programme in
computer science in the University of Port Harcourt.
4. It was established that the officer was not aware that the letter did not come from
the appropriate authority as she might have been swindle by the university staff.
5. The findings shows that her action was not intentional as she did not know the
letter did not emanate from the University of Port Harcourt.
Conclusion:
The officer was remorseful in her representation.
Recommendations:
In the light of the above response of the officer to the query issued, it is hereby
recommended that:
1. The Management should temper justice with mercy.

Uko, Unyime Idem

Deputy Manager (Human Resources)