Even in matters of pensions, the murderer always returns to the scene of the crime. There are three proposals circulating regarding the tampering of the Fornero reform, there are rumors of the introduction of a bonus to help people stay in work even after they have met the requirements to access retirement. As always, it will be necessary to see if and how this measure will take shape.
For pensioners of the Circus Barnum, the idea of the bonus brings them back to the so-called Maroni reform of 2004 (law n.243), the one that opened the door to boo boo of the so-called staircase, since from 1 January 2008 there was a three-year leap for the age requirement of early retirement. The ''scalone'' was corrected in 2007 by the Prodi government at a price of 7,5 billion euros over a decade. But that's a whole other story.
Until the end of 2007, according to the law n. 243, the current regulations remained in force. However, the following innovations were introduced: a) certification of pension entitlement: upon accrual of the right to seniority retirement, the worker would have received from the Institute to which he is registered the certificate enabling him to use it under the same conditions in the future even in the presence of changes that have occurred in the meantime; b) incentives: for private employees who had chosen to delay early retirement, the entire amount (tax-free) of the contribution payable by them and by their employer (the so-called super-incentive, overall 32,7%) was donated in their paycheck.
The pension was calculated at the beginning of the extension period and frozen. Only the increases deriving from the automatic equalization were applied. The incentive referred to in law no. 243/2004 was based on a previous regulation (initiated by Minister Cesare Salvi) which had never worked because it was more convenient for the employer than for the employee, who was required to resign, to transform the employment relationship into a fixed-term contract and, in exchange for these fulfilments, he transferred only the consideration of the contribution rate due to him to his paycheck, while the employer saved his share.
Initially, the Maroni bill envisaged that the contribution amount then corresponding to 32,7% would be divided fifty-fifty between worker and company; then, to make the incentive more attractive, it was established that the entire stake was recognized to the (private) employee, with the addition of exemption from income tax. The benefit, which came into force in November 2004, expired at the end of 2007. After that date, workers who had acquired the right to seniority retirement could not have opted for the postponement by collecting the dividend. The disbursement ceased for those who had received it up to that moment: they were allowed to continue working.
How can the super-incentive experience be judged, in view of its possible re-proposition? From November 2004 to the end of 2007, of the 104.031 applications presented, 96.564 were accepted, of which 85.258 were recognized for men and 11.306 for women. As for the sectors to which they belonged, 58,65% of those concerned (51.685) belonged to industry, 17,26% to commerce, 13,06% to credit, 8,18% to public bodies, 2,21. 0,37% to crafts, 0,26% to agriculture, XNUMX% classified as other.
60% of those who received the bonus had an annual income between 20 and 50 euros a year (a quarter was between 20 and 30). 8,3% had an income exceeding 100 euros and almost 5% in the range between 80 and 100. As regards the geographical breakdown, 23,5% was located in Lombardy, 12,3% in Lazio, 8,15% in Piedmont, 8,62% in Emilia Romagna, 8,07% in Veneto.
The shares of the two most important regions of the South are also fair: 5,84% in Campania and 4,65% in Sicily. But in essence the super-incentive turned out to be - like old-age pensions - an essentially male, manufacturing and northern institution, like the composition of the world of work and the generations of workers who were able to take advantage of the seniority treatment.
And above all a great favor to the highest income earners as clearly emerges from the tables. Has the super-incentive been used to delay retirement? Evaluating the data of the new old-age pensions paid in the years in which the bonus was in force and having ascertained that their number was more or less the same as in the time preceding the introduction of the incentive, it is to be assumed that the benefit has been recognized to people who had already made the choice to stay at work or who would have done so anyway, even without making use of the incentive.
It is however, in every sense, a probatio diabolica, since it is not easy to penetrate people's propensities. In any case, with a new bonus, "it would rain on wet" again, in the sense that those workers able to take advantage of the early treatment, replenishing their income, would be favoured, rather than introducing more stringent requirements for access to retirement.
