The lawsuit filed before the Constitutional Court alleges that it is contrary to the right to equality that women have to serve the same number of weeks as men (1,300), but in five years less, to retire.
(Pension and health, economic axes of debate Petro – ‘Fico’ – Fajardo).
The appeal filed by the specialist in constitutional law Diego Andrés López Suárez is directed against sections of article 9 of Law 797 of 2003 alleging that this legislation imposes a disproportionate and unfair burden on women.
So, asks that the general rule for women be 1000 weeks, that was the requirement of Law 100 of 1993 and that Congress be urged to regulate this issue to harmonize the rules of the game in pension matters.
(Pension funds, with an eye on private equity investments).
“The current law does not take into account that women, due to their important role as mothers, including childbirth, child care and housework, see their employment relationships constantly interrupted for months and years, and therefore, their contribution to the system. pension is lower, which translates into lower and inequitable pensions for women compared to men,” said López.
The plaintiff explained that in Colombia the old-age pension is obtained in two ways: in the private fund within the individual savings system with solidarity through a capital, and in the public regimethe average premium with a defined benefit, reaching the age (57 years old for a woman and 62 years old for a man) and accrediting 1,300 weeks of contributions.
For López Suárez, Law 797 of 2003 does not have a gender approach towards women as required by article 13 of the Political Constitution for being part of “discriminated or marginalized groups”. And, for this reason, she intends that “women have not only less age to retire, but also fewer weeks to contribute to achieve an old-age pension, on average 1,000 to 1,050 versus 1,300.”
The lawsuit ensures that in Colombia women suffer discrimination social, labor, cultural, economic, directly derived from their gender, such as, for example, having a lower salary compared to men.
“They enjoy lower pensions compared to men due to their salary scale. Barriers persist to occupy all positions or dignities in the public and private labor market due to the fact of being a woman,” adds the resource.
“They suffer major labor and listing interruptions when they are left in pregnancy and during maternity leave, that makes it difficult for them to re-enter or stay in the job market,” the lawsuit says.
For lawyer López, “by demanding the same weeks quoted from men within the public pension system to be able to retire under the old-age modality without any valid justification, it seriously breaches the constitutional mandate of article 13 given the notorious incompatibility of both regulatory bodies” .
BRIEFCASE
(Taken from THE TIME)
