“Due to political decision, early retirement schemes for old-age pensions have been established when other labor-related solutions, such as professional retraining, could have been found”, states the final report of the working group formed to study professions considered to be of rapid wear, presented today at a social conciliation meeting.
The schemes in question involve “the early retirement regimes of pilots and co-pilots of public commercial passenger, cargo, or mail transport aircraft” as well as air traffic controllers, the report elaborates.
Although it mentions that the current legal framework does not have a defined “concept of ‘rapid wear professions'”, experts point out that “some of the legal diplomas that establish early pension age schemes within the provident system justify, in their preamble and not in the dispositive part, their creation because the activity performed by workers/beneficiaries is arduous or exhausting from a physical standpoint.”
This is noted for “registered maritime personnel of research vessels,” miners, and quarry workers, the report recalls.
However, the officials criticize the fact that “neither the preambles nor the legal norms of the respective legal diplomas” define “what objective criteria were considered to determine that these activities are regarded as particularly arduous or exhausting.”
On the other hand, concerning the early retirement age regimes, “only” the early retirement scheme for classical or contemporary ballet dancers “was established under the provision that foresees the creation of early retirement regimes due to the ‘particularly arduous or exhausting nature of the professional activity carried out’,” they argue.
“However, no objective criteria are indicated for the restriction of the early retirement regime only to these professionals in the entertainment world and not to others whose performance is also demanding, such as circus artists and opera singers,” they add.
Regarding “the reasons justifying the establishment of special regimes for early access to old-age, retirement, and pension schemes for professionals covered by Decrees Law no. 3 and 4/2017, of January 6, it is only mentioned in the respective preambles that the early access to pensions is due to the permanent availability and special risk and danger inherent to performing these professions. There is no characterization as ‘rapid wear professions’, nor even as ‘particularly arduous or exhausting activities'”, the experts advance.
The document also lists other diplomas that allow workers to advance their retirement, such as police officers, military personnel, firefighters, forest rangers in autonomous regions, among others.
In light of these examples, the working group concludes that the legislator has been creating legal regimes without, however, “defining in the law that establishes them, the objective criteria underlying this ‘classification’, as they are legally obliged to do.”
“The lack of objective and measurable criteria that would allow identifying the professions or professional activities to be considered as ‘rapid wear’, or in legal terminology ‘particularly arduous or exhausting’, has generated situations that may compromise equity and social justice by not covering activities similar to those benefiting from special regimes,” it concludes.
The working group also argues that professional requalification policies “must facilitate career transitions well before individuals reach an older age” and that “the permanent withdrawal from the labor market in countries where special pension schemes exist, sometimes at very early ages, has proven to be an ineffective solution.”
In the report, experts further advocate “an effective articulation between existing information systems” to allow for the characterization of professions or professional activities that meet the criteria for inclusion in the concept of ‘rapid wear professions'”, as well as the creation of an Evaluation and Monitoring Commission for Rapid Wear Professions.
This working group included representatives from several organizations, notably the Directorate-General for Employment and Labor Relations (DGERT), the Authority for Working Conditions (ACT), the Directorate-General for Social Security, the Institute of Employment and Professional Training (IEFP), the Social Security Institute (ISS), and the Directorate-General for Health (DGS).
