The Furious United Nations

News emerges today that the International Civil Service Commission has decided that Nairobi is getting safer, and so will be classified as a "Level B" U.N. posting, rather than the more dangerous "Level C" posting.

You would think that this might be a good thing. A sign of progress. Something to be celebrated. In some small measure, proof that the U.N. and all those NGOs based in Kenya are getting it done. Alleviating poverty, cutting down on corruption, giving people less reason to commit crimes.

But this move has provoked furious anger among U.N. staff, for whom a change in the city's security status will mean the loss of thousands of dollars each year in perks, cost-of-living allowances and hardship bonuses. They have demanded that the U.N. reconsider the move.

They argue that Nairobi is actually still a very dangerous place, and they're going to need all that extra cash to protect themselves. But let's be frank. Aid workers love living in Nairobi. It has some of the best weather on the planet, good food and plenty of shopping malls. They live as they could never live back home, in grand houses with lush gardens and lots of staff. It's a great place to sock away lots of savings (and drive a nice big fat SUV in the meantime).

I have always looked uncharitably on the nutjobs who believe the U.N. is a total waste of time, but you have to admit that this doesn't look good. Doesn't it just show everything that is wrong with the U.N., and with many NGOs? The goal of these groups ought to be to work themselves out of a job _ to make things so good that Kenya won't need them anymore. Of course, that's naive. They work for the U.N. because the pay and benefits are extraordinary, not because they buy into its philosophy. The system becomes a means of perpetuating the system.

Comments

[Rob Crilly]

The thing that brought it home to me was all those people working on South Sudan who transferred to Somalia programmes when they were told that their offices were moving from Nairobi to Juba. No danger of ever being moved to Mogadishu

[Alicia]

Yeah, Nairobi is a lovely place to live, an expensive one too, and there is another price to pay for the lush gardens: insecurity. It has actually gotten more dangerous over the last months, as some gangs have begun to kidnap foreigners for ransom. Kidnapped women were systematically raped, lush gardens or not. That's probably why you have some armed guards ready to come and rescue you at your house, Nick. Welcome to reality.

[Nicholas Wadhams]

Hi Alicia, thanks for getting in touch. My experience is that Nairobi is actually not that expensive _ assuming expats are willing to give up the palatial homes, the gardens and the huge staff. I would also be interested in talking to you further. Would you mind sending a note with an email address that works?

[Anonymous]

Hi Nick,

Not expensive ??
I think Nairobi is an expensive place to live in. Rent are very high, food isn't cheap (milk, butter, yogurt, water, electricity), cars are expensive and running-cost is high. Nick, forget the expat homes and gardens, etc...

But the 2009 Mercer cost of livig survey will rank Nairobi in 102th position (http://www.mercer.com/costofliving); 10th African town after Lagos (Nigeria), Douala (Cameroun), Dakar (Senegal), Abidjan (Côte d’Ivoire), Alger (Algeria), Casablance (Morroco), Accra (Ghana), Le Caire (Egypt) and Lusaka (Zambie). So you may be right, Nairobi is not that expensive... but still it is :)

[Lauren]

Even without a palatial home, prices have gotten substantially higher in the past several years: I agree that it's partially due to the UN/NGO phenomenon but there is also a thriving Kenyan middle class in Nairobi that is driving the pursuit of luxury goods and imported groceries. Plus, land is expensive, which is also a driver of the higher costs for rent, construction, etc. And for comparison sake, let's not forget that Kibera is one of the most expensive slums in the world (source: UN Habitat, state of the world's cities report)

[Andrea Bohnstedt]

Part of the reason that places like Nairobi and Kampala are so expensive to live in IS the fact that all the aid agencies and NGOs have their staff here - that pushes up price levels!

Security: If you read e.g. KK's weekly brief, yes, kidnappings have become more of a problem in 2009, but still mostly affect locals (and ransom payments are conveniently , plus in the past two or three months, the number of overall incidences has actually gone down.

But I don't actually care much about that debate. The UN staff have very cushy jobs already in the poverty industry. I'm not interested in their moaning, especially as long as we've still got IDPs, famine victims, flood victims ... talk about hardships.

http://www.ratio-magazine.com/201001111584/Ratio-Blog/Ratio-Blog-Untold-Hardships-of-the-Poverty-Industry.html

I

[Timo Luege]

Hmmm - what I'm asking myself is whether this is a case of Nairobi actually becoming safer or whether the UN simply wants to save money by declaring it safer. I don't know the answer but think that both scenarios are possibilities. Unfortunately, a lot of organizations cut corners when it comes to staff security.

[SS]

Cost of living is reflected in UN salaries using a different mechanism (post adjustment). So whether Nairobi is expensive or not is irrelevant in a sense to the changes described - it's surely not as expensive as Geneva for example, but the post adjustment is meant to equalise that.

There is a scale of how secure a place is to live and if it's very unsafe various benefits kick in, such as help getting out of the country for a while etc. At a certain level, your family is not allowed to live with you, although I imagine Nairobi wasn't at that level.

I think the UN has a lot of careerists who have lost site of the organisation's goals. They may bleat about the financial aspect. But there are many who haven't. I don't know if Nairobi is more secure or not, but yes it's great if it is!

[Charley]

Have we nothing better to say on the topic of NGO's than to bash on them?

Shall the NGO's leave? What then? Maybe we could just hire Blackwater, or whatever they are called now.

Many of these areas are dangerous. Our agency had four employees (three US expats) SHOT and killed last year.

If anything "gobsmacks" me, its that you would even go here in your argument.

I can't speak for the UN - but you seem to take a broad swipe at NGO's. Perhaps the country and region directors and other vip's live in some luxury. Why is that necessarily wrong? The cooks, cleaners, drivers, and security personnel employed by these NGO's are all locals. Not all expats live extravagantly. Many risk personal safety daily. Many have families at home they miss and are missed by. In our case, expats live communally in NGO owned or rented guest houses. I haven't met an expat yet who was there because it was a sweet gig with lots of perks. All of them are dedicated to causes their organization serves.

This is the second NGO-bashing article I've read in two days - I just don't get it...