SEK Secretary-General Andreas Matsas now considers the goal of submitting the pension reform bill to Parliament on September 20 to be unfeasible, noting that the social partners have not yet received the draft legislation. He also said that, given the circumstances, a substantive discussion of the bill cannot take place at the first meeting of the Labor Advisory Council on August 19.
In statements to KYPE, Mr. Matsas noted that “it is unrealistic to expect that we will engage in an in-depth discussion” on August 19, as the bill has not yet been sent to the social partners. As he said, this meeting may have “an initial informational and exploratory nature,” while a comprehensive position from the social partners is not expected to be possible before the end of August.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
“We had said that we would have two months ahead of us to review the bill, but it still hasn’t been sent to us,” he said, recalling what was discussed at the last meeting of the Labor Advisory Council held on June 22. He noted that two meetings are scheduled for August, on the 19th and the 28th, however, the first one cannot be used for substantive consultation without the bill having been sent beforehand. Even if the bill is sent this week, he estimated that, due to the summer recess, it will not be possible for the social partners’ collective bodies to convene to discuss it.
It cannot be just the first pillar
The General Secretary of SEK emphasized that in order to achieve consensus on the reform, the plan must be comprehensive and include the second pillar of the pension system—namely, the Provident Funds.
“For us to agree to move forward with the reform, the plan must be comprehensive. Otherwise, we won’t be talking about reform; we’ll be talking about piecemeal revisions,” he said.
As he explained, the bill currently under consideration concerns the Social Security Fund and amends existing legislation, covering, among other things, issues related to the minimum pension, state assistance for retirees who are unable to pay the minimum required contributions, as well as the 12% issue.
Provident Funds will be regulated by a separate bill, following the discussion currently taking place in the technical committee of the social partners. Mr. Matsas said that SEK believes the issue of the second pillar must be part of the overall plan, even if its implementation is agreed upon at a later date.
“If there is no comprehensive plan and we say that the second pillar is to be decided upon in two or three years, no one can guarantee that it will ultimately be part of the reform. Governments change, and priorities shift,” he said.
He added that the position of the social partners is to move forward with the pension “package,” even if the individual measures are implemented at different stages. The goal, he said, must be to ensure adequate pensions, as “the first pillar alone cannot guarantee adequate pensions.”
Mr. Matsas did, however, express the view that it is feasible to complete the process and pass the comprehensive reform by the end of the year, provided that the dialogue with the social partners moves forward.
Regarding the technical committee examining the Provident Funds, he said that the goal is to complete this specific part of the dialogue by September so that it can be incorporated into the overall reform plan.
“The more consensus there is on the proposal submitted to Parliament, the less debate may be needed,” he said, adding that SEK considers it more helpful and less time-consuming to reach an agreement on the Provident Funds within the framework of the Labor Advisory Council before the relevant bills are submitted in the House of Representatives.
High pensions take center stage following a report on possible cuts
Following today’s report in “Fileleftheros” regarding the possibility of reducing pension benefits as part of the reform, CYPE reports that any changes to pension benefits derived from employees’ contributions to the Social Insurance Fund are not expected to be accepted by the social partners.
According to the same reports, the issue of reducing so-called “high” pensions is linked to the discussion on boosting lower pension benefits; however, the key question remains what will be considered a high pension and, above all, whether it is permissible to adjust benefits that are calculated based on the contributions paid by insured persons to the Social Insurance Fund.
According to information from KYPE, the position expressed by the social partners is that the impression must not be created that retirees with higher pensions are being asked to finance those, as the support of low pensions is an issue that should be addressed within the framework of state policy.
It should be noted that the President of the Republic and the Minister of Labor have publicly stated that the pension reform will not have a negative impact on pensions.
Source: CNA
