Despite the fact that Justice claims that they are suffering “torture” in the collection of theirs retirementsTHE ANSWERS continues without increasing the salaries of retired teachers who have filed and won lawsuits for the readjustment of these salaries.
Therefore, even if they are right, many retired teachers They hesitate to start a trial, which they know will be favorable due to judicial precedents, because they fear that later they will have the having frozen in a context of megainflation.
“The retired teacher who wants to obtain mobility pursuant to law 24016 (82% mobile of the active position) must initiate a readjustment process. Once you win the trial, ANSeS pays what the sentence establishes and then no longer pays you any increase, neither for the special law nor for the general (quarterly) law,” the lawyer María Alejandro Orero told Clarín.
The ANSeS thesis is that it doesn’t know What is the updated salary for the position? so the teacher retired. And it should be the pensioner who proves it.
“As assets are frozen, over time they stop receiving up to the legal minimum, thus ending up paying, for example, $9,000 in retirement (February 2024), in some cases. You are also not entitled to bonuses because it is a special law. Then he will have to turn to ANSeS and the Department of Justice again to be readapted, having to demonstrate what the salary would be for the position for which he retired”, according to Orero.
Specialist Martín Perez, from Studio Jauregui, also recognizes this “a long-standing problem It is the difficulty that the teachers of Law 24016 have when they win a requalification process which requires that the pension asset be paid with 82% of the salary that the teacher had while working. When this happens, ANSeS freezes the salary being collected and does not apply the increases until the retired teacher demonstrates the current salary linked to his retirement. This requires a long period of administrative procedures which the justice system has described as torture.”
For example, in one ruling, Section A of the Federal Chamber of Mendoza recognized that “currently, once the ruling is final, pension benefits are frozen and, therefore, exempt from any mobility, and beneficiaries must collect the rebalancing through execution, which implies an unsustainable burden for the beneficiary”.
“In other wordsthis generates torture for the pensioner during his passivity, product of the wear and tear caused by not having obtained a concrete answer to his problem; when what should happen is that he receives his dues for contributing to the business, resulting in his mobility, but what actually happens is that his pension assets are frozen when wages in the business increase.”
According to Justice, it is the pension agency that is responsible for “obtaining the data necessary for the readjustment in question and not the pensioners”. Another variant is that teaching mobility (RIPDOC) is applied until the ANSeS verifies the remuneration of the asset.
SN
Source: Clarin
