Retirees: by law they can not access the moratorium, but they go to court and get an exception

For exceeding 8% of the minimum wage he receives as a widow’s pension, and according to strict enforcement of system conditions and requirements, the ANSeS He was denied access to retirement due to a moratorium.

Because of that, claimed by the pensioner in courtand Judge Silvia Saino, of Social Security Court No. 8, considers that “if we make a literal review of Article 9 of Law 26,970 (moratorium) on separation, the petitioner in principle cannot benefit from the scheme debt regularization ”, because this moratorium is reserved only for people who do not receive another benefit or what they charge a minimum pension.

However, as article No. 3 of that law that the ANSes “conduct a patrimonial or socioeconomic evaluation according to objective criteria determined by regulations, to ensure access to the regime of people most vulnerablethe judge reviewed the case.

Thus, he considers that, for receiving a pension of only 8% higher than the minimum, the pensioner-that while he is an active worker. make contributions in the pension system has the right to access the pension moratorium like other pensioners which charges the lowest amount.

In addition, it argued that “the moratorium provided for by Law 26,970 is aimed at a sector of the population that is considered weaker in social terms and that is, consequently, due to its socio-economic situation. cannot access other current plans to cancel their debts to the system ”.

“The decision marks two very important points. It emphasizes the concept of ‘vulnerability’ to study the recognition of rights. And in a attempts to reduce social security litigationcausing significant delays in the full exercise of the rights, ANSES urges that interpret the rules more broadly, “ retains pension attorney Andrea Falcone.

And he added that, in addition, “it establishes that the pension agencies they are not parties in conflict with individualsbut social security application bodies, that is the law should be applied more rationallyconsidering the considerations of fairness and justice of the case ”.

Based on these grounds, the Judge upheld the claim and declared, for this case, “the unconstitutionality of art. 9 of Act 26,970 and the non -use of art. 8 of general joint resolution AFIP 3673 and ANSeS 533/2014.

At the same time, it ordered AnseS to within 30 days include the pensioner “in the moratorium provided by Law 26970 for the purpose of obtaining the retirement benefit it seeks. ”

The entry into Congress of a bill from the ruling party is expected to update and extend these moratoriums. Otherwise, due to informality and unemployment, nine out of 10 women between 55 and 59 years old and seven in 10 men between 60 and 64 years old, when they reach retirement age (60 years for women, 65 years for men) they cannot retire because they cannot meet the required 30 years of contribution.

This moratorium will take into account the years of contributions recognized by women to women care activities of sons and daughters.

NE