Ismael Bermudez
06/09/2021 9:54 AM
Clarín.com
Economy
Updated 06/09/2021 9:54 AM
The Chamber of Bahía Blanca recognized, within the framework of the Public Emergency, the
validity of the suspension
of the
mobility
formula
for the payment of retirees and its replacement by increases by decree.
But it determined something key
: that after the Emergency ended, it corresponds that the retirement of December of last year
is adjusted
in relation to the same month of 2019
according to the percentage of the suspended formula
, as decided by judges Pablo Esteban Larriera and Leandro Sergio Picado in the cause "Martinez, Eduardo Rubén, c / Anses, s / Various adjustments".
The ruling
recognizes the "validity" of the suspension
of the mobility formula but - he points out - "it becomes imperative,
once the
declared
emergency is over
, to analyze whether there is a difference between the suspended mobility and that granted by the decrees, due in the event that so be it,
restitute the sums not awarded
".
And the sentence adds: due to the decrees issued, mobility varied between 24.28% and 35.31% depending on the amount of the credit.
It was lower than the 42.13% increase that would have corresponded
to all beneficiaries during 2020, if the suspended formula had been applied.
"Consequently, based on all of the foregoing, the Administration must integrate the pension credit of December 2020 with the percentage of increase that the plaintiff
has stopped receiving
by virtue of the legally arranged suspension," concludes the sentence.
This means that
an interannual increase of 42.13% should be applied
, replacing the mobility of the decrees
that went from 24.28% to 35.31%
, depending on the amount of the credit.
“What the Bahía Blanca Chamber decided is correct since Congress chose to 'suspend' the increases in the formula then in force for the duration of the Emergency it declared.
So it is obvious that, once
the Emergency is over, what is 'suspended' must be applied
.
If this difference is not reimbursed, for the retiree the Emergency will continue without any limit ”,
the lawyer and specialist in Social Security, Elsa Rodriguez Romero
, told
Clarín
.
Thus, up to now, there are two rulings of the provincial Chambers
challenging
the increases by decree,
two rulings
of the Chamber of the City of Buenos Aires - Room I and Room II -
which considers them constitutional and the one from Bahía Blanca
, which admits them. during the Emergency but orders, after the Emergency, to increase the December 2020 assets by 42.13%, according to the suspended formula.
Now define the Court
As
Clarín
explained
,
after two years (2018/19) in which pensions and other social benefits had lost 19.5% in relation to inflation, with the Emergency Law, mobility until then applied was "suspended "and replaced in 2020 by increases by decrees.
Thus, last year, apart from the extraordinary bonuses for retirees with minimum assets,
there were four decrees
that increased retirements between 24.3% (maximum
assets
) and 35.3% (maximum
assets
)
versus a year-on-year inflation of 36 ,1%.
Faced with these differences,
many retirees started lawsuits
and so far, with variations, in the federal provincial chambers there are three sentences in favor of the plaintiff retirees and in CABA two against.
Meanwhile, for cross appeals,
the issue must be resolved by the Supreme Court,
which does not have deadlines to rule.
The hope of retirees is that following its own recent jurisprudence, the Court ratifies that the Emergency does not enable the Government to pay less than what arose from the "suspended" formula.
NE
Look also
Retirees: another House ruling favors the Government in the increases by decree of 2020
Retirement for women without 30 years of contributions: the moratorium is added to the recognition of the children
PAMI launched a platform with almost 7 thousand free virtual workshops: how to register
