The minimum pensions will certainly be revalued and indexed up to 1.400 euros per month. And the maxi-amendment presented today by the Government to the Chamber to foresee it. Is that right? If a senior has only this income it is certainly an equity decision. But the reality is a little more complex.
As a welfare expert Maurizio Ferrera writes in today's Corriere della Sera, who recalls that "according to Istat, one third of pensioners receive multiple benefits and more than a million even 3 or more checks from different or different types of bodies (e.g. example old age and reversibility)". How then to regulate the revaluation of the minimum pensions in the face of the accumulation of treatments, which is worth around 70 billion euros? Will the government's maxi-amendment reevaluate pensions also for those who combine them with other incomes? Ferrera suggests selecting the revaluations by cross-referencing the pension position of each beneficiary with the situation of his/her family nucleus.
But the revaluation of minimum pensions is not the only dilemma on the table. Another, always in the Corriere della Sera, was raised by the guru of business consultancy, Roger Abravanel. According to the former head of McKinsey Italy raising the retirement age without bundling old-age pensions but creating incentives to work longer raises a fundamental issue: given that it is the worker who decides whether to retire or continue working and that the company must accept it, how to avoid so-called adverse selection, according to which the most productive workers retire to carry out other activities with a VAT number and the company is forced to keep the least productive until the age of 70. According to Abramavel, it would be better to completely eliminate old-age pensions and modulate social security treatments in a more flexible way.
