In retirement age of 67: Or from work to the graveyard

From school and college in the white world, and after work to the cemetery; imagine masons at the end of the seventh decades of life on scaffolds or nurses who do not recognize patients - are just some of the reactions to the announcement of a pension reform in Croatia. According to these announcements, the lifespan would be extended to the youngest member of the European Union by the age of 67, and such a measure would be introduced in the next 15 to 20 years.

With prolonged working lives, there were rumors and a reduction in pensions for all those born after 1962, but also a reduction in income, the so-called. penalizing those who early retire. However, the pension reform is still in the form of an elaboration, and the Minister of Labor and the Pension System, Marko Pavić, announces social dialogue and public debate. All information that was published in the Croatian media on the issue of pension reform was labeled "absolute misinformation".

Look at Croatia

With praise on the pension reform, but also on the situation in the pension system of Croatia, economic analyst Admir Cavalic points out that similar reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina "are no longer a matter of political will but necessity". It also recalls that the reforms so far, at least in the Federation of BiH, were mostly "cosmetic". "Only legislative solutions have been modernized for the purpose of short-term sustainability," he notes.

In order to raise the retirement age, he says that the basic priority is to improve the stability of the pension fund, but also the need to adapt to demographic trends. And the disadvantages are numerous, it continues, making it harder to find a job in the 60's and the fact that such reforms are most affecting physical workers.

However, the pension reform in Croatia is inevitability and the legislator announces changes to New Year with the promise that no one will be damaged. They firmly believe that the goal is to create a long-term sustainable pension system, improve it and ensure adequate retirement. Opponents warn of the impoverishment of all future retirees, the need to define occupations that can work until the age of 67, but also enable those who can and are willing to work at work and stay because they claim that older people are often better, more loyal and more productive workers.

Experts: Necessary and positive measure

"Employees are required to work longer and contribute to higher retirement income during their working lives. The same worker is expected to live as soon as possible and enjoys deserved retirement, "says Lazar Grujić, president of the Pensioners' Party.

He believes that instead of prolonging working life, "it is necessary to make more money in pension funds, to strengthen the economy, to return to the land of alien money, to educate workers about the need for individual retirement savings, to introduce programs for psychological and financial assistance to new retirees, to abolish preferential pensions or to provide additional working for retirees ".

On the other hand, experts say it is almost plain to talk about whether to increase retirement age as this is necessary and positive. Such a position is Predrag Bejakovic, a senior advisor at the Zagreb Institute of Public Finance, who believes that raising the statutory age is justified and necessary if the relationship between insured and pensioners is to improve and to increase pensions. It also points out that in Europe it clearly understood that early or early retirement does not increase the space for new employment, but even reduces it because they are large contributions through contributions and retirement income taxes, which is why this work is expensive.

Think in time about age

The existing system of intergenerational solidarity is too rigid and accordingly does not follow the preferences of its users, but simply wants to keep it at all costs, Admir Čavalić points out.

According to him, he could function at a time when more workers came to a pensioner. Today, the number of pensioners and workers almost equaled throughout the Balkans, which he considers to be long-term unsustainable.

"Citizens need to think ahead of time about what other investment opportunities they need to bring income to their old age. In that case, the task of the state would be to transfer citizens to voluntary pension systems and to enable them to freely and with less obligation invest their surplus income while they work, "Čavalić suggests.

"However, at first glance, the paradoxically higher employment of the elderly means higher employment of young people: the allocation for pensions is lower, and the work is (relatively) cheaper. Finally, many researchers around the world have clearly shown that working activity at a later age is to a great extent a determinant of satisfaction and happiness of health, as such persons feel involved and socially useful, "explains Bejaković.

You do not need to listen to the EU blindly

Although in the Croatian media as a deadline for raising the retirement age, in 2038, New List journalist Gabrijela Galic recalls that that year and the age limit of 67 years are also listed in the current legislation. However, the government headed by Andrej Plenković wants to speed it up, so unofficial information is that the deadline for the introduction of new retirement rules will be shifted to 2033.

"All the analyzes of the Croatian pension system are about its long-term sustainability and the gradual reduction of pension funds in GDP. With a long stay in the world of work it is difficult to fill budget holes because pension contributions are not the source of 'filling' budget holes. Namely, pension contributions are not collected enough to pay pensions and the state retirement payments are partly covered by other budget revenues, "says Galic.

The necessity of adopting the pension reform in the Banjaluka court justifies the demands of Brussels, but Galic says it is not good to "blindly listen to the recommendations of the European Commission without respecting the domestic specifics". In this regard, the status of women is particularly emphasized, because in Croatia, the graduation of the age of women with men for the retirement age of 65 has been gradually increased. Thereafter, according to the current legislation, there would be a gradual increase in retirement age for women and men for two years.

The work can not be slaves

"Serbia does not have any particular idea when it comes to pension insurance and, in general, the aging of the population," warns Aleksandra Jovanovic from the Penzin portal , which monitors events in Serbia's retirement scene. She is aware that in this country she would not accept with approval the significant shift in the retirement limit.

The bigger the problem is, the fact that pensioners submitted the "greatest sacrifice of consolidation", although they were told that they would be "the last to feel the austerity measures". There was no reaction, so it also feared that the possible increase in the retirement age for 70 years, "with some mandatory three-day shouts," was very easy.

He also thinks that "the working conditions are bad for every employee, and with age and material barriers they become getting worse and harder," and advocates "work is not slaves." It would only then be possible to talk about the benefits of moving the age limit. "People who perceive their business as a call, and after retirement, can contribute a lot to society if they are still in some way at least related to the work they have done," he says.

"The announced reform would greatly accelerate this process and in some way punish women. At the same time, the acceleration of reform in the short term will also reflect on the demand for greater allocation. Namely, anyone who can make a pension under more favorable conditions, that is, according to the current legislation, will do so. And that means that, probably at the end of this year, there will be pressures on the pension system, "warns Galic.

Pensioners on scaffolds

Regardless of the demographic indicators that show that life expectancy everywhere in Europe, and so in Croatia, is constantly increasing, as well as on the fact that retirement can cause consequences for people accustomed to a certain rhythm of life and obligations, it remains problematic to adjust working responsibilities to people in the seventh or eighth decade of life (if they feel good and ready to work).

Lazar Grujić can not imagine his fellow pensioners walking on construction scaffolds in their 67th year, but also believes that there are a large number of jobs that retirees can do in the 1970s. He recalls that once workers have retired before increasing salaries and moving them to work, and this is not the case today, because it is easier for the employer to dismiss an employee who is over fifty.

Gabriela Galic is aware of the existence of a more humane solution for people in retirement, but she is afraid she is "part of a program of some utopian state." In practice, it is rare for workers to be protected before retirement, it states, and "people who are worn out due to the nature of work in those years" usually end up in an early retirement. "

"Where would you, for example, shift a textile worker or a construction worker or any other worker in the activities of workers and how they spend it during their working life? These people are full of old-age retirement and do not wait, but they usually end up in early retirement, and the state plans to further punish them in the future because it will increase their penalties, ie permanent retirement pensions in case of early retirement, "Galic warns.

"The current policy is forgetting that people do not go to early retirement because of the fact that they can no longer work in their workplace, and that the other is not easy. That is, premature retirement is because the employer in this way resolves the older labor force. And then the state will make those people, instead of creating the conditions for a full retirement, further punishable by permanent retirement, "he adds.

Showing an understanding of citizens' opposition to raising retirement ages and punishing premature insurance, Predrag Bejaković notes, however, that this is the only way to preserve the financial viability of the system. He considers that changes are necessary if he wants to preserve the pension system in changed living and working conditions, ie to increase the existing very low pensions. He suggests that rules should be set so that retirement decisions are made by personal attitudes and preferences, not because punishments are punished because "the goal should not be that people are doing longer than eliminating punishment".

• 2 Apr, 2018
• 1477 views