Malicious amendments

There is such a category in Russia - early retirement pensioners. They receive about the same pension as an ordinary pensioner who went on vacation at 60 (men) or 55 (women) - an average of about 10 thousand rubles. The only difference is that this pension is paid to early-age workers 5-10 years earlier.

There is such a category in Russia - early retirement pensioners. They receive about the same pension as an ordinary pensioner who went on vacation at 60 (men) or 55 (women) - an average of about 10 thousand rubles. The only difference is that this pension is paid to early-age workers 5-10 years earlier. There are quite a few of these people: up to 30% of citizens today are retiring early. There are calculations that show that in Russia, thanks to the large army of early workers, the actual retirement age for men is not 60 years, but 58-58.5 years, and for women, respectively, not 55 years, but 53-53.5.

Who are they - prescheduled? Even in Soviet times, the so-called lists No. 1 and No. 2 were formed. People from the first list have the right to retire 10 years earlier, and people from the second - 5 years ahead of schedule. All of them work in hazardous working conditions - for example, they come into contact with toxic substances, X-rays, and noise. There is a third, rather large category - those who work in the Far North and in areas that are equated with the Far North. In the event that they work there for 15 years, they have the right to retire 5 years earlier.

There are also so-called small lists. For example, it includes ballerinas and flight attendants. There are also early pensions for teachers and doctors: for example, if a teacher has 25 years of professional experience, although he has not yet reached retirement age, he receives a so-called seniority pension.

In general, even such a cursory enumeration shows that the army of pre-scheduleers is very diverse, and the system for granting them benefits is quite confusing. First of all, they are all related by the fact that the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation still pays for this difference in years (5-10 years): it is he who undertakes to finance additional obligations in relation to early-age workers related to the fact that they work in special working conditions . This means that all other workers contribute to the payment of an early pension for these “chosen ones”. It doesn't seem quite fair.

The government has recently approved amendments to the laws governing mandatory pension insurance that apply to those who work in hazardous working conditions. In the case of early retirement, an additional tariff is introduced for the employer, which will force him to pay these "early" 5-10 years. According to list No. 1, in addition to the usual tariff, the employer will pay 9% of his salary already in 2015, according to list No. 2 - 6%.

For a particular employee, nothing seems to change - after all, the employer pays additional contributions. But this is only at first glance. In reality, the changes will affect many workers. 6-9% of the additional burden on the payroll is a lot. And, of course, it is unprofitable for the employer to pay this "extra" money. He is already often in a difficult financial situation, especially in the current crisis. How will he “optimize” his expenses? It is very likely that they will not once again raise the wages of those who work in these harmful conditions, they will ignore indexation: the cost of living is growing, and usually the employer periodically raises the wages of workers at least to the extent of inflation, and maybe even more - if the enterprise is successful. And here, in order to save money (after all, he will have to find these 6-9% from somewhere), he will once again not increase the wages of employees. An employer can even cut some jobs if early pay is too much for him.

Worse, the owner of the enterprise may begin to hide that this workplace is harmful. Just to avoid paying contributions to the Pension Fund. And the worker will continue to work in these harmful conditions. Of course, at large enterprises where there are trade unions and people are used to defending their rights, this is hardly possible. But there are not so many such enterprises in modern Russia, and in most places people hold on to jobs with their teeth and are ready to bend to the employer. So for part of the workers the deterioration of the situation will be inevitable.

Finally, that extra 6-9% can be a death blow to businesses teetering on the brink of low profitability and lead to business closure. What should be done with early adopters so that such problems do not arise?

No doubt, it is necessary to introduce an additional contribution to the employer. Because it is unfair that the whole society pays for harmful working conditions in actually private (in the vast majority of cases) production. But this additional burden cannot simply be placed on the employer's shoulders immediately and abruptly. In order to really stimulate him, you need to provide him with a certain transitional period: you should give the employer (if he pays these 9% in good faith) an income tax benefit or some other tax at least for a few years. So he can adapt to the new situation. Otherwise, you can generally ruin a significant part of the business associated with working in harmful conditions, which, by the way, is an important part of any developed economy.

The bill is still under discussion. If the Duma manages to consider it in the autumn session, it will enter into force as early as January 1, 2013. Employers and trade unions, of course, are dissatisfied with the amendments. But it is known that within the government there is agreement on the issues that are raised there. Proceeding from this, apparently, the Duma will make a decision - after all, it has long been dependent on itself.

PS By the way, not a word is written in the new law about those early workers who worked in the Far North. The Pension Reform Strategy (this is a more general document that is currently being discussed) says the following: with regard to northerners, decisions will be made in accordance with the main directions of the northern policy of the Russian Federation. But we simply do not have such a policy in our country: there is not a single document that would speak about the country's policy in relation to the regions of the North. This means that the government does not know how to resolve the issue of early-term workers from the northerners. And he doesn't even have any ideas about it. It turns out that one category of early workers is in a privileged position. And the risks mentioned above do not apply to them. And we all continue to pay for the fact that these people - northerners - retire early. This is another flaw in the government's position.

The publication was prepared by Dmitry DOKUCHAEV

Read also:

Nikita Krichevsky: “Deficiency is nothing personal”

Lyudmila Rybina: "The half-life of pensioners"

Olga Eracina: “You can’t spread a peaceful atom on bread”