| In this newsletter: Benchtest 02.2019, National Pension Fund 3, Proportionate Supervision, COEs and more... |
|||||||||
|
Important notes and reminders
Phasing out of cheques - reminder
More specifically from a government’s point of view;
From a labour (union) point of view;
From an employer’s point of view;
As stated, most (if not all) previous and current consultants to the SSC on the NPF were foreign experts. These experts have preconceived views about suitable pension fund models based on first world experiences;
Finally, the laborious task to overhaul the statutory environment to accommodate the NPF has not received coordinated attention. There is a need to prepare a thorough assessment of the impact a proposed NPF would have on the statutory environment to fully appreciate its extent.
Tilman Friedrich's Industry Forum Monthly Review of Portfolio Performance to 28 February 2019 In February 2019 the average prudential balanced portfolio returned 2.8% (January 2019: 1.2%). Top performer is Investec Namibia Managed Fund (4.4%); while Hangala Prescient Absolute Balance Fund (1.4%) takes the bottom spot. For the 3-month period, Investec Namibia Managed Fund takes top spot, outperforming the ‘average’ by roughly 1.4%. On the other end of the scale Metropolitan Namibia Managed Fund underperformed the ‘average’ by 1.6%. Note that these returns are before asset management fees. Can we allow pension fund returns being diluted ever more? To the end of February 2019 the average prudential balanced portfolio’s return of 8.2% represents a slightly improved outperformance of inflation of 5.1% and of the money market return of 7.6% over a 5 year period but still falling far short of both the money market portfolio and its long-term performance objective over any shorter periods. It only managed to achieve its long-term objective of inflation plus 5.5% over 10 years and longer. Our concern is not so much that equities may not meet their long-term return expectations going forward. Our concern is much more that pension fund investment returns are diluted ever more by what we have been referring to as a serious onslaught on the pensions industry that seems to be considered a duck that lays the golden egg. Consider the ever increasing cost as a result of increasing regulatory and governance requirements. Consider fiscal and monetary objectives of healing all sorts of ailments government and our national economy are experiencing where pension fund assets are forced into unlisted investments and where the local investment allocation will soon reach 45%, higher caps having been mooted already. In our commentary in the September column of this investment brief, we speculated that the investment regulations will result in pension funds’ equity allocation effectively being capped at 60% as opposed to an implicit allocation of 75% that the current typical pension fund model presupposes. This will dilute expected long-term pension fund returns down from 6.3% to 4.6% before fees. After fees we will thus be looking at a net return of below 4% per annum whereas the pension model requires 5.5%. We believe that this is a very unfortunate development pension fund members are facing without them being able to do much about it... Read part 6 of the Monthly Review of Portfolio Performance to 28 February 2019 to find out what our investment views are. Download it here... The world of investments and retirement is not what it used to be! by Tilman Friedrich Politicians, particularly those of the western world, would want to make us believe we live in an open global economy. However, where international trade is concluded in a single currency, where fiscal and monetary authorities intervene massively in financial markets, more will have to be done by the politicians to make the public believe. The law of demand and supply, has no bearing on the behaviour of markets today. Savers are paying off the debt of borrowers through artificially low interest rates that are set by monetary authorities. So-called ‘safe haven’ investments are earning negative real interest rates and the investor is now conditioned to accepting that he will have to work until he drops dead, instead of realising his dream of retiring at an age where one might still be able to enjoy life for a while. Retirement ages are extended while pension entitlements are at best being questioned and already reduced in some countries. With negative real interest rates seemingly having become the ‘new norm’, asset valuation models are now being questioned. Why should this be of concern to a pension fund member? Well the point is that pension fund contribution structures were established over the course of the past century or more based on the assumption of cash returning around 2% above inflation, bonds around 4% above inflation, property around 5% above inflation and equity around 8% above inflation. A typical balanced portfolio comprising of a mix of these assets based on conventional investment theory was expected to return roughly 5% above inflation, net of fees. Pension theory then arrived at a net retirement funding contribution rate of 11%+, to produce an income replacement ratio of 2% per year of membership. Indications based on the ‘new norm’ are that one is now only looking at a net return of between 2% and 3% p.a. If this were to be true, the retirement funding contribution rate would have to be raised from 11% to at least 16%. Add to this a typical cost element of 6% for risk benefits and management costs, the ‘new norm’ for a total retirement fund contribution rate is now at least 22% instead of the 17% before the advent of the ‘new norm’. Alternatively the retiree would now have to settle on an income replacement ratio of only around 40% after 30 years of service, instead of his expected 60%! No wonder the mortals are being conditioned by politicians to be prepared to work until they drop dead. We are certainly living in a different world today to what it was 30 years ago. What we expected of the future will be materially different and we will have to find ways and means to deal with the impact these changes have on our lives and on our retirement planning. One can only find some comfort in the fact that we are all ‘in the same boat’, the answers have not been found and a lot of energy and time will be spent all across the globe to find answers how to still have time in retirement to enjoy. For local pension fund investors, one probably needs to take a different view of the risks of investing offshore. In the past, developing countries and Africa in particular was loaded with a political risk premium. Today the political risks in developed countries are probably as high, if not higher than those in developing countries. Sanctions and trade war are the weapons the US employs today to achieve its political goals and being the largest economy in the world such actions have serious repercussions for any country arousing the fret of the US, such as Iran, Turkey, Russia and so on. Add to this huge demographic risks, for a more callous view on investment in developed countries. In contrast the demographic risks Africa is facing appear to be receding going by general population growth rates. Given this environment, where can a pension fund still invest? Fixed interest assets are evidently too risky being too exposed to monetary and fiscal manipulation. Even if we at the southern tip of Africa are living in a much more sheltered environment, our financial markets are shackled to global developments. This essentially leaves real business as the asset class to invest in. We all have to live, eat, drink, dress, get to work, nurture our health, go on holiday, learn, find shelter and so on. The ‘real economy’ will continue and is best represented by commerce and industry, in short, investment in equity appears to be really the most appropriate asset class for the normal investor who shies away from the more exotic asset classes such as gold, works of art etc. Conclusion As we usually say, based on fundamentals, equity is our preferred asset class, more specifically value companies offering a high dividend yield. We believe that the normalization of interest rates has largely been factored into equity valuations already and that the risk of a further downward correction is slim. We expect normal returns from US equities and believe that SA equities need to catch up as they are behind the curve in terms of long-term returns. They should present a buying opportunity. Despite all we have said about the risks presented by offshore markets, sound risk diversification principles still dictate that investments should be spread across the globe, the prevailing exchange rate allowing, and again with an equity bias. If one can find value in property, it should also be an appropriate asset class, being closely tied into the ‘real economy’. Since there is no evidence that the global economy is busy turning around, it is difficult to identify any economic sector that might produce some fireworks over the next 12 months meaning that one should spread your investments across all economic sectors but should preferably pick companies with quality earnings and high dividend yields. In SA Consumer Goods and Consumer Services should be viewed with caution as they are still ahead of the curve having delivered stellar performance over the past 13 years, despite their more recent sharp correction. The Rand is currently substantially undervalued and should be closer to 12 to the US Dollar. It is probably to some extent weakened through the low Repo rate that should be around 2% higher than it currently is based on current inflation. An increase in the Repo will be forced by an increase in the Fed Rate but that looks like an unlikely course for the next 12 months. A weak Rand should allow the local economy to pick up which is what the SA Reserve Bank would like to see. We are therefor unlikely to see a change in interest rates for the next 12 months and we are likely to see a relatively weak Rand for the next 12 months The relatively weak Rand that holds the prospects of strengthening over the next 12 months intimates that it is not a good time to move money offshore for the purpose of diversifying one’s investments although that should remain the objective of any local investor who holds more than half his wealth in Namibia.. One elephant in the room and the question of proportionality I just came across an interesting discussion on regulation and supervision of financial institutions. Not NAMFISA this time around but its SA equivalent nowadays known as FSCA (the Financial Sector Conduct Authority - I love acronyms!) In Moneyweb of 13 March 2019, Patrick Cairns quotes Brandon Topham, newly appointed head of investigations and enforcement blowing his trumpet on his unit. This was now established as a “...division in its own right...in a fundamental change from how investigations took place within [predecessor] Financial Services Board”. His team has doubled to around 60 staff. “...With the change in legislation, the importance of being proactive and not just reactive has become emphasised, which is why we have established a separate division within the FSC...” He prides himself on one of their first major break-throughs “...In a recent example, the regulator was able to act within just one week of receiving a complaint against Dian Goosen, a licenced representative in Cullinan who was misappropriating clients’ funds. Having scrutinised what he was doing, the FSCA conducted an early morning search and seizure operation at his premises...” Well done, we say! At this juncture, just a brief interlude – if FSCA employs 60 staff in the investigations and enforcement division, NAMFISA should deploy 2 staff members, considering that our economy is about 4% of SA’s, applying proportionality! But let’s carry on and get to the story of the elephant in the room... As one reader of the FSCA’s trumpet blowing aptly comments “...Now, there’s an asset manager in Pretoria called the Public Investment Corporation. They’re a registered Financial Services Provider (FSP), so you’re their regulator. They’ve been a bit naughty with their client’s money, investing into some dodgy deals like AYO Technologies. Are they one of your 13 investigations? Or are you worried because the PIC is owned by the SA government, and answer to the Minister of Finance, who is actually your boss! Maybe you could use some of those great conflict of interest regulations that you expect the rest of us to adhere to, to resolve the problem...You might also want to know that the PIC’s client is the Government Employees Pension Fund. So the money they’ve been a bit naughty with is probably yours...” We are talking of billions of public moneys having been misappropriated between AYO and VBS by the PIC! By now you may have guessed where I am heading. We too have a PIC, called GIPF, the elephant in the room, and it seems the issues are not dissimilar. Fortunately the GIPF has pulled up its socks doubling and quadrupling its governance and oversight. Fact of the matter is that it is an elephant in the Namibian room. And unfortunately it is also intent to unleash its financial muscle to compete with the private sector for the spoils of the pensions industry it hitherto managed to survive on, considering that the GIPF represents 50% of all active members of pension funds and close to 70% of all assets owned by members of pension funds in Namibia. That is market domination by any measure! If government is at all sincere about creating an economic environment that will allow a private sector to flourish it should take urgent and purposeful steps to create an enabling environment for a vibrant private sector. I do not think it will be in anyone’s interest to further undermine the foundation on which our economy rests! Where the private sector is capable and willing to drive economic activity, it should be left to do so while government should preserve its extremely scarce resources on such economic activity that the private sector is not capable or willing to undertake. But back to the regulator and proportionality. So here we have this elephant that represents 50%+ of Namibian pension fund membership and about two-thirds of total Namibian pension fund assets. This means that in terms of supervisory effort, NAMFISA should allocate roughly 60% of its pension fund supervisory attention on the GIPF in terms of proportionality. I do not know how much attention NAMFISA spends on GIPF. I suspect it is disproportionally little, going by the number of on- and off-site inspections of funds as small as 200 members that in terms of proportionality should not ever feature on the inspecti0n program. Pension fund governance - a toolbox for trustees The following documents can be further adapted with the assistance of RFS.
Check out the new retirement calculator Our web based retirement and risk shortfall calculator has been enhanced and updated to assist you to determine how much if anything, you should contribute additionally, either by way of lump sum or regular salary based contribution, to get to your target income at retirement, death or disablement. Try it out, here is the link...
The Benchmark Retirement Fund - Flagship of umbrella funds in Namibia By Paul-Gordon, /Guidao-Oab, Benchmark Product Manager Agribank and Dutch Reformed Church in Namibia to join the Benchmark The board of trustees of the Agribank Retirement recently invited proposal from interested umbrella funds to accommodate Agribank as a participating employer of the umbrella fund. Similarly, the Dutch Reformed Church in Namibia Retirement Fund recently considered whether it should join an umbrella fund, after it became evident that it is no longer viable for smaller employers to maintain their own pension funds due to the ever increasing regulatory and compliance requirements, and the costs attached thereto. We are proud to share the news that both, the Agribank and the Dutch Reformed Church in Namibia resolved to join the Benchmark Retirement Fund! That is a feather in the cap of the Benchmark Retirement Fund. We welcome Agribank, the Dutch Reformed Church and their staff and look forward to serve them beyond expectations for many years to come!
News from RFS Long service awards complement our business philosophy RFS philosophy is that our business is primarily about people and only secondarily about technology. Every time a fund changes its administrator, a substantial amount of information is lost be it physically or knowledge. Similarly, every time the administrator loses a staff member, it loses information and knowledge. We know that as a small Namibia based organisation we cannot compete with large multinationals technology wise because of the economies of scale that global IT systems offer. To differentiate us we need to focus on personal service and on the persons delivering that service to get customer acceptance and service satisfaction. With this philosophy we have been successful in the market and to support this philosophy we place great emphasis on staff retention and long service. The following staff members recently celebrated their 10 year work anniversary at RFS! We express our sincere gratitude to these staff for their loyalty and support over so many years:
RFS once again sponsors prize giving for NAMCOL achievers For the 7th consecutive year RFS sponsored generous financial rewards to high performers at NAMCOL.  Above FLTR: Special advisor to the Governor of the Khomas Region, Mrs R Sibiya; Director of NAMCOL, Dr H Murangi; RFS Client Manager, Ms M Auene; and Director of Ceremonies Mr J Nitschke.  Above RFS Client Manager Mariana Auene handed the prizes (totalling N$ 16 000) to the recipients. FLTR: best overall NAMCOL candidate on NSSCO Level, Ms. Condensia Paulus; best overall NAMCOL candidate Mr. Simaneka L Mumbala; Ms Mariana Auene of RFS. We congratulate all NAMCOL achievers! May their dedication and commitment to their studies serve as an example to many other Namibians! News from the market RFS entrusted with the administration of NAMFISA Provident Fund With great pleasure and gratitude we announce our reappointment as administrator to the NAMFISA Provident Fund. This is a great compliment to our combined admin, fund accounting and client servicing team directly responsible for this account and of course the support teams and indeed the entire RFS team at large. We are humbled and grateful for this gesture of comfort in our service delivery and trust that we will be able to continue providing service beyond expectation! At this juncture we would like to quote wisdom of unknown origin: “In today’s world meaningful differences between businesses are rarely rooted in price or product, but instead in customer experience!” Specialist Administration Services swallowed by Liberty Life Specialist Administration Services (SAS) was launched in June 2014 by Monique Cloete, former managing director of Alexander Forbes Financial Services in Namibia and her colleague Janell van Wyk. Since its launch SAS attracted appointments by the Standard Bank Namibia Retirement Fund and the Meatco Retirement Fund. Rumours of a tie up between SAS and Liberty Life have been rife since its appointment by the Standard Bank Namibia Retirement Fund from the beginning of 2015. Although not publicly announced yet, the buy-out of SAS by Liberty Life was now confirmed independently. With this buy-out, RFS remains the only Namibian private fund administrator. SA heading the FIM Bill way A revised draft Conduct of Financial Institutions (COFI) Bill will be submitted to the South African cabinet for approval towards the end of 2019. The draft bill was published for comment in December 2018. It is designed to provide for the setting up of a consolidated, comprehensive and consistent regulatory framework for the conduct of financial institutions. These objectives are also integral to our own FIM Bill meaning that SA is now heading the FIM Bill way as far as market conduct standards are concerned. The SA Pension Funds Act must be next in line for a major overhaul. After all Namibia may once again be able to rely on big brother down south for training and legal support? Legal snippets Certificate of existence – unnecessary red tape? A guest contribution by Andreen Moncur BA (Law ) What is a Certificate of Existence (COE) in the context of retirement funds? When a person becomes a pensioner, the retirement fund that will pay his pension/annuity enters into a contract with the pensioner. In essence, this contractual arrangement provides for the pensioner to “pay” the fund a capital sum in exchange for the fund undertaking to pay the pensioner a monthly pension, usually for life. The fund and the pensioner may also agree that when the pensioner dies, the fund will pay a pension to a surviving dependant/s of the pensioner. For the fund to be able to pay the pensioner his pension, the pensioner must provide the fund with certain documentary and other information and proof, including but not limited to proof of age, bank details, and proof of life. Some of this information may need to be furnished only once, while some of it, such as a COE, may need to furnished at regular intervals. A COE is a form that essentially states that a pensioner is alive on a given date and that this fact has been verified by an authorised person (attestor), e.g. a Commissioner of Oaths, bank manager or police officer. This form is issued to pensioners annually by a retirement fund and must be completed, certified and returned to the fund by each pensioner before the expiry of a certain period. The pensioner must complete and sign the form and have it attested by the attestor. The pensioner must present himself, proof of identity and the form to the attestor to certify the form. If the attestor is satisfied as to the pensioner’s identity and other relevant facts, he attests thereto by signing and stamping the COE with an offical stamp. Thereafter the pensioner must return the certified form to the retirement fund by the due return date. Why is a COE necessary A COE is necessary because only members of a retirement fund and other beneficiaries as defined in the rules of the fund may receive benefits from the fund. Furthermore, in order to receive a pension from a retirement fund, a pensioner must be alive. There is a fiduciary relationship between the Board of Trustees (BOT) of a retirement fund and the fund and its members. The fiduciary role of the BOT creates fiduciary duties for the BOT to prevent possible abuse of the trust placed in it. A fiduciary duty is the duty of utmost good faith (uberrima fides) that demands a greater standard of care than the reasonable person would apply when dealing with his own affairs. This means that BOT must always act in good faith towards the fund and its members and always exercise its powers for the benefit of the fund and in the best interests of the members. Should a breach of its fiduciary duties by the BOT constitute a criminal offence, the BOT can be prosecuted under the Financial Institutions (Investment of Funds) Act 39 of 1984, which prescribes financial penalties and/or imprisonment. There could also be action by the fund for breach of trust and the BOT could be held liable for any losses suffered by the fund as a result of negligence. It is the duty of the BOT to direct, control and oversee the operation of the fund on behalf of the members and to look after the fund assets. This includes ensuring that:
Finally, the relationship between a retirement fund and its members is one of good faith. For each party to act in good faith and comply with their obligations, certain information/proof is required from the other party. Are COEs required by law? COEs are an established trade practice in the retirement funds industry and in other sectors in Namibia. In this sense, COEs are customary law requirements. COEs are also statutory law requirements, albeit implicit equirements. The Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956 (the Act) implicitly recognises the need for COEs. In terms of section 11(d), the rules of a fund must provide for the conditions under which any member or other person may become entitled to any benefit and the nature and extent of any such benefit. In terms of Regulation 6 of the Regulations made under the Act, the BOT of a retirement fund must annually furnish a statement of responsibility to the Registrar of Pension Funds wherein it confirms that during the financial year under review it has complied with duties imposed by law and the rules of the fund, including ensuring that proper internal control systems were employed. Fund ignores member instruction to transfer to another fund In this case (ref PFA/WC/00028340/2016/MCM) former fund member AJ van Zyl (complainant) laid a complaint with the Adjudicator on the basis that the fund paid his withdrawal benefit in accordance with his first instruction, ignoring a subsequent instruction he had submitted. The Adjudicator received the complaint on 19 October 2016 and this was forwarded to the former member’s fund for a response. It was alleged by the complainant and acknowledged by the former fund that it had paid a cash withdrawal benefit on 20 September 2016 to complainant’s bank account after having received a signed and stamped withdrawal claim form to pay the benefit in cash. Complainant had subsequently to his request for a cash withdrawal benefit, submitted a withdrawal claim form requesting the benefit to be transferred to another fund and submitted that the subsequent request was ignored by the fund. As the result he suffered loss as the result of tax on the benefit. The fund informed complainant’s former employer on 18 October 2016 that it assumed the second form was a duplication of the first form as the form was neither stamped nor signed by the authorised signatory and that it would have to submit an ACB recall to the complainant’s bank to reverse the payment already effected. The fund sent an email to complainant on 26 September after it received the member’s complaint on 26 September 2016, wherein the fund apologised and explained that it would have to submit an ACB recall in order to give effect to the second form. Complainant however advised that he no longer wanted to claim or continue as he had already invested the benefit and that he would lay a complaint. In adjudicating the complaint the tribunal considered whether the fund –
The tribunal concluded that -
Media snippets (for stakeholders of the retirement funds industry) Should government tell you what to do with your retirement savings? “...At the launch of its election manifesto in January, the ANC said that it intends to look at the introduction of prescribed assets to fund social and economic development. This would mean that retirement funds, and potentially other forms of investment, would have to invest in specific asset classes or securities set by the government. This is hardly a new idea. For a long period up until 1989, when international investment into apartheid South Africa dried up, the government prescribed that pension funds had to invest 53% of all their assets into para-statals and government bonds...It was not widely perceived to be a positive thing for individual investors then, and the return of the idea has not been welcomed by the industry now...Overall, limiting investment freedom is not a good thing. It creates artificial demand for certain asset classes and limits the amounts of money available for other asset classes, which has an impact on returns...There is no question that South Africa’s enormous retirement savings pool has the potential to play a bigger role in developing the country. It must however do so in a way that does not pose a risk to the investors whose money it is...This is because South Africa already has a retirement savings problem...The government therefore needs to bring a more nuanced approach to the problem...The question is whether one does that through prescription or other policies. We think you can do it by making asset classes that are difficult to invest in, like infrastructure, easier to invest in...This has shown conclusively that large amounts of capital, much of it from pension funds, can be freed up for economic development when the right incentives are created...” Read the full article by Patrick Cairns in Moneyweb of 8 March 2019, here... RA vs pension fund – here are the pros and cons “...Retirement annuity Retirement annuities are private retirement funds that anyone can purchase in order to save for their retirement. Pros
You contribute to an employee fund through your employer deducting the amount from your salary. An employee retirement fund can either be a pension fund or a provident fund. Pros
Read the full article by Zola Zingithwa in Sunday World of 13 February 2019, here... Media snippets (for investors and business) Is your leadership team acting like a true team...? Here is an extract of 2 interesting questions and answers from an article on leadership: Q. So how do leaders create that level of trust? A. As a leader, you have to be very open and up front yourself. If the team leader doesn’t demonstrate that they’re prepared to be challenged and questioned, then it’s very hard for the rest of the team to do the same. If you’ve got a senior leader with appropriate humility who is prepared to put issues on the table and be challenged and questioned, then I think it makes it easier for the rest of the team to do that. It also helps to be explicit in team discussions about what, as a leader, you want from the meeting. Have you already made your decision and you just want their input? Or do you want their input to help make a decision? I don’t think leaders are always clear with their team about such things in meetings, and people will generally be accepting if you’re clear with them because they know that, on the really big calls, it’s the CEO’s decision because he or she ultimately is held accountable for the outcome.” Q. What were some important leadership lessons for you personally? A. The biggest feedback I got about my leadership style early on was around my style of communicating to people on major issues. I would try to get them to see the issue through prompts and communication rather than being very direct. I was probably too empathetic as a leader, and that would get in the way of sometimes giving the direct or clear feedback that people needed to hear. I was told that I needed at times to be a lot more direct and a lot clearer and less consensus-driven and empathetic. One challenge for leaders is that you sometimes have to move into a style that’s not your natural style. Some people struggle with that because they almost feel like they’re acting – “That’s not who I am. I’m not being real.” But as a leader, sometimes you have to be different things to different people, and you may need to stretch your style. And that doesn’t mean in any way impacting your integrity or your honesty. But a lot of people struggle with that.” Read the full interview by Adam Bryan in Linkedin of 11 March 2019, here... Think your job is meaningless? Think again. “In our lifetimes, each one of us will spend the majority of the time we have on Earth doing one of two things: sleeping (26 years) and working (13 years). That’s right, 113,880 hours of our lives will be spent working - that’s more time than we will spend on holiday or even socialising... It goes without saying that that the career we choose to follow is a dominant force in our lives, not just in terms of the amount of time we spend doing it, but also in terms the impact it has on us... What gets us out of bed each and every morning for 13 years? I think most of us would agree that it’s not the pay packets or office perks that ultimately get us out of bed every single morning, time and time again, for years and years... In fact, what really drives us is the sense of meaning and purpose we get from what we do every day... Our jobs are changing yet again, with most of us facing the prospect of working alongside machines in the not too distant future. So, does this, combined with the fact that most will be working for longer, mean it will become even harder for us to find meaning in our work? Are some jobs more meaningful than others? The short answer is no. When people think about meaning at work, many wrongly assume this is reserved only for those who work for organisations that have a direct, positive impact on the world around us – for instance, charities, schools, hospitals etc. That thinking is wrong... How to build more meaning into your work, no matter what you do Even if, admittedly, you’re not inherently motivated by your company’s mission, it is, in fact, possible to find and build meaning in other aspects of your day-to-day work:
The secret power of a thank you note Thank-you notes might seem old-fashioned but there's plenty of value to be found in the tradition. According to a study by Accountemps, just 24% of job applicants send thank-you notes after interviews — but 80% of hiring managers who receive them say they are useful in evaluating the potential of applicants. Proponents of thank-you notes say they are an inexpensive way to strengthen a relationship and show the applicant cares about the job. Perspectives curated by LinkedIn Editors And finally... Did you ever wonder why?? WHY: In golf, where did the term 'Caddie' come from? BECAUSE: When Mary Queen of Scots went to France as a young girl, Louis, King of France, learned that she loved the Scots game 'golf.' He had the first course outside of Scotland built for her enjoyment. To make sure she was properly chaperoned (and guarded) while she played, Louis hired cadets from a military school to accompany her. Mary liked this a lot and when she returned to Scotland (not a very good idea in the long run), she took the practice with her. In French, the word cadet is pronounced ‘ca-day' and the Scots changed it into caddie. |
|||||||||
