Finland's Social Insurance Institution will soon remove employee names from official decisions following a sharp increase in threats against staff. The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health is preparing regulatory changes that would eliminate the requirement to include names on Kela documents.
Safety director Sami Niinikorpi confirmed the agency faces hundreds of harassment and threat incidents annually. The most serious threats target staff members' lives and health, with some extending to family members.
Security measures at Kela offices have already been increased, but officials say current tools cannot adequately protect employees while names remain public. The situation has worsened particularly around basic income support processing.
Specialist Jussi Syrjänen from the ministry noted that social media has made it easier to track down employees' personal information. Threats now often come through phone calls and face-to-face interactions at service points, not just online comments.
This represents a significant shift in Finnish administrative practice, where transparency traditionally required named decisions. One proposed solution would identify decision-makers using numbers instead of names, though public records laws would likely still allow requesters to eventually learn identities.
The regulatory draft will undergo consultation starting in late November, with the project expected to conclude by late February. The final decision rests with Prime Minister Petteri Orpo's government.
This move reflects broader societal tensions as economic pressures mount. When Kela clients struggle financially, that stress sometimes gets directed at frontline staff. The agency handles nearly all Finnish social benefits, making it a focal point during economic uncertainty.
While anonymity might improve staff safety, it raises questions about accountability in public administration. Finland typically operates on principles of transparency where public power shouldn't be exercised behind a veil of anonymity.
The practical effect would make identifying decision-makers more difficult but not impossible. This balanced approach acknowledges both safety concerns and Finland's strong tradition of open government.
Similar challenges have emerged in other Nordic welfare agencies recently, suggesting this isn't an isolated Finnish problem but part of a regional pattern affecting social service providers.