The South African government has stepped into the controversy surrounding sharp increases in contributions to the Government Employees Medical Scheme (GEMS). Public Service and Administration Minister Mzamo Buthelezi told Parliament that officials will engage with GEMS trustees regarding what he called "unaffordable tariffs."
This follows a 9.8% hike in GEMS member contributions this year, on top of a 13.4% increase in 2025. The scale and frequency of these price hikes have provoked backlash from public sector unions and beneficiaries alike.
While Minister Buthelezi hinted at a future reduction in monthly contributions, such a move would be unprecedented. Any change would require formal approval from the Council for Medical Schemes, the industry regulator.
GEMS Under Fire Despite State Subsidies
GEMS, the largest restricted medical aid scheme in the country, serves over 2.4 million public service employees and their families. The government currently subsidises up to two-thirds of these members' monthly premiums. Yet, the scheme remains under fire from unions like Nehawu, which argue that the rate hikes are unsustainable and undermine GEMS' founding mandate to deliver affordable care.
Nehawu previously called on GEMS to limit increases to the consumer price index of 3.3%. Instead, members are contending with a cumulative two-year increase of nearly 25%, significantly eroding disposable income and trust.
Minister Buthelezi defended GEMS' competitiveness. He pointed out that for a typical family, GEMS is around 25% cheaper than comparable open-market options before subsidies — and about 67% cheaper after subsidies are applied. That equates to a monthly saving of R4,361 compared to private schemes such as Discovery Health or Bonitas.
Sustainability Versus Affordability
GEMS leadership maintains that the increases are necessary to ensure the scheme's financial sustainability. The board of trustees, supported by Minister Buthelezi, warned that without the hikes, GEMS would face a decline in reserves, threatening insolvency.
Vuyo Gqola, GEMS' Chief Operations Officer, stressed that the scheme must balance affordability with its ability to pay out claims. She cited rising medical inflation, an increasing disease burden among members, higher service utilisation, and the growing cost of medical technology as major financial pressures. Additional challenges include ongoing issues with fraud, waste, and abuse in the healthcare system.
Future Of GEMSTariff Intervention Hinges On Regulation
Though the government has signalled willingness to address affordability concerns, any direct intervention in the GEMS pricing structure will be complex. The Council for Medical Schemes must approve all contribution changes. Regulatory processes and the need to preserve financial viability limit the extent of adjustments.
Nevertheless, discussions between the Department of Public Service and Administration and GEMS are ongoing. The outcome may set a precedent for how the government balances healthcare access and cost containment in public sector schemes.
For now, GEMS must navigate the dual pressures of maintaining reserves and retaining member trust. With affordability once again in the spotlight, public servants will be watching closely to see whether intervention translates into tangible relief.
Read the Original Article (May require a subscription)