Site icon Latin america News

"Pyramid flattening": the MEF’s reason for changing the minimum pension adjustment criteria


The social director representing workers at BPS, Ramón Ruiz, He explained on his Twitter account that The Board of Directors of the BPS resolved that the differential adjustment received in July 2021 ($ 243) by lower-income retirees and pensioners should no longer be paid.

For the social representative, this decision means “a change with respect to what was done in the last 16 years and that harms the minimum passivities”, since with this measurewill be saved in 2022” but “harming 146,098 retirees and pensioners”.

For its part, Ariel Ferrari –alternate director representing the passive– explained in a statement that “who until December charged $15,097, will now charge $15,768” which it involves “4.44% more and not the 6.16% general increase”.

With inflation at 7.96%, the group of 145,000 retirees and poorest pensioners, who earn the minimum, is the one affected”, he added.

The government’s response and the flattest “pyramid”

BPS Vice President Daniel Graffigna said to The Observer that the agency “does not have the power to increase or reduce pensions” but rather responds to the decisions of the Executive Power according to the Law 16,713 of Social Security. “If one day the Board of Directors made that decision, it would be unconstitutional,” he assured.

“When Ruiz says in one of his tweets that the majority of the BPS Board of Directors resolved that the adjustment no longer has to be paid, it is a lie. The Board of Directors did not resolve, it was not on any point of the agenda, that possibility does not exist, ”he questioned. And he added: “The most serious thing of all is that it is the first time since I have been on the Board of the BPS that a director publicly affirms something that did not happen.”

The BPS andwill issue an official statement in the next few hours.

The Minister of Labor and Social Security, Pablo Mieresmaintained in dialogue with La Diario that “the resolution that was taken in July was that the only increase that was made for the minimum pensions was on account of the increase that would occur at the end of the year, with which when the increase is paid at the end of the year, what is advanced in July is taken into account”. The Minister of Labor commented that the change in criteria came from the Ministry of Economy and Finance and that it was a “calculation criterion” for which there was no further debate.

The chief added to La Diaria that there is a perception in the government that “as differential increases continue to occur, a flattening of the pension pyramid is generated, which does not seem to be the most convenient either.” In that sense, he explained that this leads to “minimum pensions increasing more than the others and it may happen that some (of a higher amount) remain below the minimum.”

Pablo Mieres, Minister of Labor and Social Security

Likewise, the hierarch denied that “have increased less” passivities, and said that “they had already increased a part of what corresponded to them in July”. “The July increase was imputed, it was not taken as a floor, but as part”, he indicated.

In this line, Graffigna criticized that it is said that now there is a change with respect to the criteria of the previous 16 years of management, since there were “at least three different criteria” during that time.

In 2008, the advance is revalued but revalued is subtracted, that is, it is ultimately not taken into account. In 2009 the advance is not revalued, it is lost. But Ruiz says that in the previous 16 years he had been acting in the same way, is not telling the truth”, he explained.

He also expressed that the social directors of the opposition maintain that in the last two years pensions “they lost purchasing power” when in reality that situation has been going on since 2019, with the Frente Amplio government.

On the other hand, Graffigna highlighted that “for the first time in history” in mid-2021 the Executive Power made the decision to give a food basket (equivalent to $2,500), non-refundable, to the minimum liabilities. “They do not put the emphasis on that that they do put on other statements“, critical. The minimum passivities They also received that basket at the end of 2021, for which they received a total of $5,000 extra, the BPS chief recalled.

Source link

Exit mobile version