On the pension reform front it is dense fog. The hypothesis of reaching a synthesis by the end of April has largely disappeared. The government must keep attention on structural reforms, with particular regard to “the structure of the pension system for which, in full respect of the balance of public accounts, debt sustainability and the system’s contribution structure, solutions will need to be found that allow forms of flexibility in exit and a strengthening of complementary pension “, said the Minister of the Economy, Daniele Franco, in the introduction to the Def. “It will also be necessary to deepen the pension prospects of the younger generations”.
Translated: there is no concrete mention of the pension reform in the Economic and Financial Document (DEF) approved in recent days by the Draghi government. The Def approved by the government ignores possible corrections to the Fornero law (which would return into force as it is from January 2023), which could however be addressed after Easter in the scheduled table (barring unforeseen circumstances) with the social partners. There is certainly no shortage of concrete hypotheses.
When grandparents’ pension is due to grandchildren (even of age)
What should we expect then? From 1 January 2023 Quota 102 should not be renewed. The pension reform will set the stage, in the intentions of the trade unions and the executive, for a new “system” to leave work by overcoming the Fornero law. The government is proposing a small penalty, a mini-cut on the check in exchange for a discount on the retirement age. But the trade unions are niche for now.
The social partners, for their part, have for some time put the demands on paper: they would like to extend the flexibility from the age of 62 or with 41 contributions regardless of age, allowing workers to choose when to retire without penalties for those who started to pay before 1996. Among the hypotheses there is also the modification of the adjustment mechanism for life expectancy. CGIL, CISL and UIL are focusing on more favorable and structural conditions for access to retirement for the weakest categories, for example the usuring ones who fall within the social Ape, which could be expanded, becoming almost structural. The indiscretions really lead to a reform with the “64 years” at the center. But let’s proceed in order.
There is always also the Tridico plan, which “resists” always in pole position (or almost) among the various options circulating in view of the reform. The president of INPS, Pasquale Tridico, has repeatedly re-launched the proposal to provide those who leave work at 64 only the contributory part of the allowance accrued up to that moment, to then pay the salary portion of the pension once they have reached the 67 years (the age requirement set by Fornero). The strong point of this plan is sustainability for the state coffers. According to Tridico, this type of advance would cost 400 million euros a year. A much lower expense than, for example, the 10 billion “Quota 41”. On a general level, the plan of the two quotas of Tridico introduces a principle of equity on which a convergence could be found, precisely because it does not provide for penalties once the age of 67 is reached, but a reduction for only the first 2-3 years of retirement.
Read all the news
The executive’s plan seems more penalizing, if you look at the check. The proposal put on the table to retire before the 67 years of Fornero only with the recalculation of the contribution check, with exit windows from 64 years of age with at least 20 contributions, do not like the unions and various observers and experts because the treatment cut is likely to be equal to 30% (with the Woman Option today as it is today). Sure, the cut of the check would vary based on the years in advance, but the road is uphill.
In February it seemed possible to find an agreement in principle so that the first draft of the pension reform would be written in time for the April Def, the first step towards the new Budget law. It did not go like this: the government could decide in the continuation of the confrontation with the social partners to lower the quota by 2.8 times the minimum allowance (1,440 euros) for workers of the social security contribution wishing to leave before the age of old age and to extend the rule also to those who use the mix. But in this case we must also think about the guarantee pension for those who at 67 would not have a treatment equal to at least 1.5 times the minimum (770 euros). And those who leave their jobs at 64 would have a cut of the light allowance, at most 3 percent for each year in advance. Probably less.
The secretary of UIL, Pierpaolo Bombardieri, had appreciated the executive’s openness to flexibility in leaving, but warned that “assuming a transition to a fully contributory system would be a further penalty for those who have to retire and yet another retouching of acquired rights. I would like to point out that the average exit in Europe is 63 years, I believe that Italy should align “. He worries about the risk of a 30% cut on the check. “Doing the calculation with the contributory system lowers the check, it is clear. Nobody thinks of going back to a pay system, but we have a transition period in which there is a now low percentage of workers with a mixed system. rules now means changing the cards on the table “.
Quota 41 will be discussed until the end
“The openness of the Government to the provision of mechanisms that encourage flexibility out of the world of work goes in the direction desired by the UGL, however we are not in favor of the full contribution recalculation. Quota 102, currently in force, will expire at the end of the year and, in the absence of a pension reform, starting from 2023 the Fornero Law would return into force, which provides for retirement at 67 “. Paolo Capone, Secretary General of the UGL, commented some time ago: “As the INPS data reveal, the system is currently sustainable as 1.1 billion euros in social security checks have been saved in 2020 due to the increase of mortality as a result of the pandemic. The climate of uncertainty continues to fuel workers’ fears about their future. As a Ugl union, therefore, we ask the government to speed up the pension reform and extend the discussion table to all the social partners. at the same time – he specifies – we strongly oppose a gradual return of the Fornero Law and we believe that the best solution remains Quota 41, which provides for 41 years of contributions regardless of working age. It is therefore essential to protect the acquired rights of workers, guaranteeing, at the same time, the generational turnover and the entry of young people into the world of work “.
We will have to wait a little longer to get a more reliable picture of the pension reform. “It is significant that the Government recognizes that flexibility must be introduced in the age of access to retirement. But the UIL judges wrong the idea of linking this flexibility to the contribution recalculation, which would be a further penalty for workers”. This is how Domenico Proietti confederal secretary summarized last month the outcome of the ongoing confrontation.
“In Italy, for 10 years, people have retired at 67, while in Europe the average is only now 63. The theme, therefore, is to realign the age of retirement to what happens in Europe. . Also pursuing the path of heavy and tiring work by eliminating all the formal constraints that prevented workers from being able to use these tools “, he explains, reaffirming the position of the union. “An answer must be given to precocious workers by establishing that 41 years of contributions are sufficient to retire regardless of age”, he says again, asking that in the contributory system “the income thresholds that impose on those with weaker careers or discontinued to retire later. “
Retired at 64, but how?
The outgoing flexibility could be linked to Quota 102, envisaged by the Draghi government only for this year, with a sort of bridge on which the age threshold of 64 would move (in a mix until December with the maturation of at least 38 years of payments), which Mef technicians have been looking at for some time. However, the mechanism that will have to be triggered for the calculation of the allowance remains to be calculated.
Therefore, possible exits from the age of 64, and with at least 20 years of contributions, and the treatment calculated with the total contribution. But there would remain only one real difference between the mass of fully contributory subjects and those of the “mixed” system, which according to the latest monitoring would see no more than 192 thousand salaried workers in business: the minimum threshold of the monthly amount of the treatment which would drop to 2, 5 times the “minimum” (social allowance) compared to the 2.8 times currently provided for those who have entered the world of work since 1996. To consider the mix 64 + 38 (ie Quota 102) a viable path also for the future is the President of Social Security Itineraries, Alberto Brambilla, as long as the connection with life expectancy and the transition to contributory only is foreseen.
Odds 102 in 2023
More will be known in the coming days. The worsening of the energy crisis and the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine led the government to open a “wide” table after Easter with all the social partners in order to sign a new “pact” before the autumn. Which could also include some tricks on pensions.
But if before October, when the budget law will have to be passed, a shared solution on outgoing flexibility has not been identified, to avoid an “integral” return to the Fornero law, the hypothesis of an extension to the entire 2023 of Quota 102. At the moment, however, it does not find supporters in the government as well as among the unions.
When there are only 8 months left until Quota 102 (released with at least 64 years of age and 38 contributions) introduced by the Draghi government, the fate of the various options that had emerged at the table with Cgil, Cisl and Uil is in doubt: from retirement with no less than 64 years but with the contribution recalculation of the treatment, to the advance, again at 64 years, of the only contribution portion of the allowance, proposed by the president of INPS, Pasquale Tridico.