The Ape (Retirement advance) in its various types, now operational or nearing completion, and the concessions for the so-called early CDs (whose access criteria are the same as those of theSocial bee) perform the same strategic function (obviously in the context of the pension system) that the French General Staff, before the Second World War, had entrusted to the Maginot Line: that of resisting a frontal assault by German troops, since it was considered, alas, unlikely that Germany would again violate (as during the Great War) the neutrality of Belgium and Holland, to attack from the North West. A maneuver which, on the other hand, was repeated regularly, splitting the Anglo-French front in two (those who had not yet done so, run to see the magnificent film by Christopher Nolan "Dunkirk") and bypassing the fortifications of the Maginot Line which from then on became a comfortable shelter for pigeons and mice.
out of metaphor, in preparing the budget law for 2017, the Palazzo Chigi brain trust had the brilliant intuition of the Ape in order to avoid – at the time there was talk of exit flexibility – an onerous revision of the rules on the retirement age as modified by the 2011 reform. The Government's plan could be summarized as follows: with the Ape sociale (a purely welfare measure charged to general taxation) it allows those who have an objective need - against the required requisites - to leave the labor market three years before reaching old age; while those who want to use this possibility outside the recognized needs pay out of their own pocket. L'Voluntary bee it is technically a loan, regulated and controlled, but to be repaid in twenty-year installments on the amount of the pension once the magical and coveted goal of retirement has been crossed. As is known, the Ape is an experimental measure until the end of 2018, while the "twin" measure (on the early ones) is already structural in nature.
INPS is examining applications for access (66 in total) to the Ape sociale and early retirement for the early submitted by the deadline of July 15th, in order to send all the answers by October 15th. In the event that the allocations for 2017 prove to be inadequate, the granting of the social security benefit would be postponed to 2018 for excess applications. to 15 July, but presented by 15 November next. Considering the number of applications and the fact that there will be several not accompanied by documentation corresponding to the required requirements, it is to be assumed that the services recognized will not deviate too much from those envisaged. And that the planned appropriations will be sufficient.
In the confrontation between the Government and the unions on the subject of social security (on these occasions we always talk too much about pensions and too little about work) we witness a new attempt to get around the Maginot Line and strike at the heart of the Fornero reform. A powerful political and trade union offensive is underway (which will not lack adequate media support) to achieve the block (for now temporary) of the automatic link to life expectancy. Then, you know, from what comes what. Even without wanting to prosecute the intentions, it was also the same for the modest economic penalisation introduced by the Fornero reform for those who took advantage of early retirement before the age of 62: the postponement was twice followed by the suppression.
To this new assault, the Government has responded with a few shovelfuls of concrete on the cracks in its Maginot Line: facilitations for female workers (six months for each child up to a maximum of two years) regarding the age at which it is possible to apply for the Ape sociale, a reduced contribution requirement of two years and an expansion of the types of disadvantaged jobs which allow you to enter the audience of those entitled to the benefit. What to say? Women who, due to their position in the labor market, are practically obliged to take advantage of old-age retirement since they do not have work histories that would allow for early retirement regardless of age (private female workers have an average seniority contribution equal to 25,5 years against 39 for men). Therefore, the equalization of the age requirement with that of men is significantly affecting the possibility and times of retirement for women.
But we are always there: where is it written that women (also in consideration of the longer life expectancy) must leave the labor market earlier and retire (obviously with less adequate treatment) as soon as possible? Especially in the contributory system, the length of active life (which also applies to men) is the first condition for the adequacy of benefits. Not by chance, the equalization of the retirement age (carried out in the public sector) was included among the recommendations of the ECB in the letter of 5 August 2011; it is no coincidence that Italy is under fire from the EU because its pension system allows women to retire early one year earlier than men.
Then there is a more general discourse to make: the Ape, we recognized, was (together with the Rita) an attempt to prevent the breakthrough on the retirement age. But if he were to continue chalking; if, with each budget law, new categories were to be added among those entitled or the number of years of payments were to be trimmed or anything else devised (this while the attack on the cornerstone of the retirement age continues and is exacerbated) it would strengthen the a tendency that the Fornero reform has undergone up to now: that of being a Harlequin dress woven with derogations, exceptions and postponements, rather than a regulation effectively applied.
As for proposals for young people, the idea would be to use the scalpel around what the Fornero reform foresees for those to whom the contribution system is fully applied (because they started working from 1 January 1996). Currently, the rules establish that these subjects can retire at the age set from time to time provided that their allowance is at least equal to 1,5 times the amount of the social allowance (ie approximately 750 euros gross per month). The proposal under discussion concerns a reduction of the parameter to 1,2 and an improvement in the possibility of accumulation between pension and social allowance (from 33% to 50%). Therefore the 600-700 euro pension we are talking about would not be a guarantee (as is today the integration of the pension calculated up to the legal minimum), but the concrete result, which can be assumed as a consequence of these changes.
As it regards instead the early retirement of these workers, current regulations allow you to retire at the age of 63 (plus adjustment) by claiming 20 years of contributions, provided that the pension received is at least equal to 2,8 times the amount of the social allowance (about 1.500 euros gross per month). The unions - dazzled by a lower retirement age - bet their cards on a substantial reduction of the parameter, without realizing that in doing so they mistreat another objective - in addition to sustainability - which should be guaranteed by a balanced pension system: the adequacy of treatments.
Beyond the laconic and somewhat esoteric declarations of Minister Giuliano Poletti, Marco Leonardi – who is part of the Palazzo Chigi pool that holds the cue – assured that there is still time to reflect. It would not make much sense, in fact, to now account for an operation destined to be fully operational in at least twenty years. Moreover, from what has emerged from the words of the confederal leaders, the trade union organizations are more interested in blocking the automatic link to life expectancy for the next retirees, rather than finding solutions for young people, who will be retired in a still distant tomorrow . Also on this occasion, Italy reveals itself to be a country in love with pensions to the point of worrying about protecting today's young people for when they are old, rather than allowing them to provide for themselves by working.
Source: Politically (in)Correct
