Pensions and those responsible for Law 51

Law no. 51 of December 27, 2005 who reformed Panamanian pension model, contrary to what those who designed and approved it think, had, it is now evident, serious consequences for the insured. It was not in vain at that time qualified as the law of death.

Back in 2007, only before this Act began its devastating effect, all insured persons were protected by the solidarity pension model. In total, there were 872,579 active taxpayers who supported pensions for 156,116 persons. It was a 5.6 to 1 ratio between these two groups. Law 51 served to drastically reduce this share, sentencing women to death. joint pensions.

This Law forced all those people who were enrolled in CSS starting in 2008, include in the so-called mixed subsystem, the basic component of which are individual accounts. This led to the fact that from that date no new taxpayer could enroll in the solidarity model, which is now called the subsystem andExclusive defined benefit.

This turned those who remained in the solidarity model into a closed group in which age continued to advance. The result was what was noticed at the time: fewer and fewer contributors, and more and more pensioners. Thus, by 2019, just before the pandemic, the number of active taxpayers fell to 592,044, while the number of pensioners increased to 274,462. Relationship between active associates -pensioners fell to 2.2 to 1.

The destruction of joint pensions was completed with Article 157 of Law 51, according to which: “The funds of each subsystem They may not be used to cover the costs of another subsystem or resources can be transferred from one to another”. This meant, taking into account the above, that those who contributed in full to the pensions of those who retired before, could not expect the generation following them to contribute to theirs. The latter were simply forced to participate in the individual account model.

It was, in our opinion, a real fraud against collaborators in the solidarity modelwith a price that is up to the moment the approval of Act 51 has already been calculated to 145.0% of gross national product. This robbery enabled the advancement of the interests of the dominant sectors, to the extent that it introduced individual accounts and the possibility of arguing in favor of stricter the intention of the parametric reform raise significantly retirement age and achieve private governance pension funds.

Law 51 also harmed the interests of the youngest, forcing them to fall victim to the individual account model that only generates poverty pensions. A study conducted by the Fund International monetary in 2015 showed that those who retire under the individual account model from 2050 will receive pensions close to 20.0% of what they previously earned as employees. It must be remembered that it is minimum pension in the solidarity model is 60.0% of the average salary of the 10 best years.

In our opinion, it is unacceptable that whoever served as President of the Republic when Law 51 was designed and approved, he now presents himself as a person with the necessary experience to solve the pension problems faced by insured persons, citing the form national agreement. In our opinion, this character could use some modesty and remorse. The struggle from the social for the return of solidarity is the only safe way!