The maximum aspiration of the average Italian (representative of what they call ''public opinion'') is to work as little as possible, retire as soon as possible and receive the highest possible allowance. In general, it is quite difficult to achieve these resolutions all together. Pensions are conditioned, on the one hand, by the wages of active workers, who, in the pay-as-you-go financing system, meet the relative costs of the stock of existing treatments with their contributions. On the other hand, the amount of the pension is the consequence of a person's working history: his personal responsibilities and conditions cannot be completely excluded to determine the quality and quantity.
Usually, however, when newspapers and TV broadcast data on pensions (we recognize that in any case there is no reason to be happy) they give the impression of believing that, in the last phase of people's lives, the state is transformed into a good fairy (the image is borrowed from Lady Thatcher) who ensures that the elderly are treated according to their needs, regardless of the social security position they have been able to arrange during their working lives. But there's more: when someone manages to realize for themselves the recondite dream of the Italians (see the case of baby pensioners or, in even more hateful terms, the rich annuities - almost always obtained after a few years of '' – disbursed to parliamentarians, regional councilors, members of the various authorities and so on), he immediately becomes a person to be crucified: the idea of equity is evoked, but what speaks is envy towards those who have it he made. These are situations of privilege that need to be corrected and which have already been partly corrected.
But attacking the 'golden pensions' always makes it possible to make a good impression. Indeed, the congregation of the ''indignati speciali'' is present and at work in the major newspapers who, through this topic evergreen, has secured real fortunes as copyrights. The last crusade did not even concern an operational standard, but a missing one in the Fornero reform of 2011. It is known, in fact, that the Minister of Labor of the Monti government wanted to introduce, starting from the beginning of 2012, the calculation pro rata contribution for all. Elsa Fornero coherently thought that – if it must be contributory – it is to the end and in all respects. In the final text of article 24 of the Salva-Italia decree law, a couple of lines were deleted which would have introduced a limit clause, in the sense that, by applying the new calculation criteria, the interested party would be prevented from obtaining more favorable treatment than to those previously in force (according to the remuneration model). Because – it is good to know – under certain conditions the contributory system is much more advantageous than the salary one.
In determining, for example, the length of service useful for retirement in the first case all the years of work and payments count; in the second, a ceiling of 40 years is set even for those who have to work longer. Obviously there are categories of workers (INPS says there would be 160 in a decade) who have taken advantage of a law that is more favorable to them. Have they done something wrong? Should they be punished? It would seem so given that – in agreement with the government – amendments to the stability bill have been approved thanks to which not only is the guarantee limit clause not used in 2011 inserted for the new treatments; but from 2015 any bonus deriving from the application of the contribution calculation to those who have already retired will be cut from the pension. The beneficiaries (high bureaucrats, teachers, magistrates, in particular) are accused of having remained in service precisely to secure a higher pension.
Which, in Italy, seems to offend the common sense of decency. Basically, here, not only the "crafty", but also the ''workaholic'' should be punished: both those (and there are many) who obtained a ''golden pension'' by lobbying; both those who have earned it, in the open and in a manner compliant with the law, by working longer, thanks to talent, responsibility and professionalism. Meanwhile, the Hon. Maria Luisa Gnecchi, the Zorro of Italian pensions, has struck again. Until 2017, an amendment signed by you tampers with the system of penalties in the event of early retirement. It is good to stop and explain the operation that is about to be performed. At the time of the 2011 reform, faced with the overrun of old-age pensions and the introduction of a modest disincentive to use them before the age of 62, the Democratic Party obtained that there was an element of safeguard for those who were able to make apply the effective contribution requirement (around 41-42 years of age depending on whether they were women or men with the addition of the monthly payments deriving from the automatic connection to life expectancy) including some limited notional contribution items.
This until 2017. The Gnecchi amendment lifts the constraint of the effective contribution, opening the door to cases of figurative coverage, admitted in the previous legislation. Which means that, in the next two years, retirement pensions will return to their former glory. Let's not forget, then, that the unfortunate Lega referendum for the repeal of the Fornero pension reform not only obtained the go-ahead on the number of signatures from the Court of Cassation, but also the support of the CGIL. We await the judgment of the Consulta on the admissibility which, pursuant to art. 75 of the Constitution, should be negative. And if not?
