Pensions: the permanence of the exceptional

With the intention of reducing its impact, the national State has implemented in the universe of liabilities – at least one sector of them: some 4.2 million – a policy of payment of monetary obligations in addition to the monthly credit already adjusted according to the pension law. Mobility. –

The particularity of what has been happening for six months and which will now be effective with the quarterly increase from March to May is that, unlike the previous obligations, these are permanentcoincide with the waiting period for the next law increase.

With the reference to permanent duration, I’m not assuming they’re part of the pension credit; since they are not considered as members of the monthly credit to be regularized.

They could also be called expected there necessary so that the final result of the adjustment of the law does not generate greater social discontent in the sector; since the application of the percentage of the formula has a negative impact, not yielding a monthly salary higher than that which they received with the supplement.

The increase determined by mobility is 17.04% in March from the February level of $50,124, or $8,541, to $58,665 gross.

The increase determined by mobility is 17.04% in March compared to the level of February, it rose to 22.52% for those who receive less than two SMICs

It should be remembered that due to the increase in the law and the bonus until February, the minimum pension had an additional monetary bonus of $10,000, making it possible to distinguish between legal amounts of $50,124 and paid reais of 60,124 pesos.

Afterwards; and as already mentioned, during these last two quarters (Sept-Oct-Nov and Dec/January/February), the permanence of the payment of the bonus has excluded the uniformity of the percentage increase granted to the sector; From when a 17.04% increase and $15,000 continuous payout bonus is announced until the next increase in June; Guaranteeing that the new minimum credit is $73,665, there is no denying that the industry will see its “true” adjustment percentage increase beyond what has been announced.

Taking the actual amount received, which already had a premium, and the new guaranteed minimum, the increase in benefits, at least in the minimum, is higher than advertised, amounting to 22.52%.

The necessary permanent exceptionality cannot be determined for one sector rather than another, since this exclusion thus generates a flattening of the scale of benefits.

The above had been illustrated at the end of the previous year, where those who were excluded from the bonus had a lower adjustment percentage – by more than 30 percentage points – than those who received it. –

Given this quantified evidence, and having decided the national government to implement a similar payment policy for the next quarter (increase in the law plus bonus for lower incomes); the new assignment percentage can be set to 5.48%; which cumulatively (considering the precedents) for the last six months and the next quarter amounts to 40%.

Those who had income above two minimum assets received an adjustment of 39.97% less compared to retirees with minimum assets.

Addition of payments and discrimination between recipients are not new; Therefore, if we refer in the present to permanent and expected anomalies, we can also add not original.

Those who had income above two minimum assets received an adjustment of 39.97% less compared to retirees with minimum assets

It would seem that, as already noted, these exceptions that are here to stay require, at present, that the Supreme Court also be the one that, even with arguments already used (“Badaro Adolfo Valentin vs. Andes” CSJN), rule anew and, in this regard, order the recomposition of the senior assets which were excluded from the payment of any bonus (recital 20).

This would not be assuming legislative powers to determine mobility, but only making the necessary corrections that the omission in the adjustment has deprived this sector of beneficiaries of receiving in accordance with what is framed by the law enshrined in the National Constitution.

Continue reading: