Beskæftigelsesudvalget 2018-19 (1. samling)
BEU Alm.del
Offentligt
2040740_0001.png
Retirement regimes for workers
in arduous or hazardous jobs in
Europe
A study of national policies
2016
David Natali, Slavina Spasova and Bart Vanhercke
July 2016
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0002.png
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
Directorate C — Social Affairs
Unit C.2 — Modernisation of social protection systems
Contact:
Emanuela TASSA
E-mail:
[email protected]
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
European Social Policy Network (ESPN)
Retirement regimes for workers
in arduous or hazardous jobs in
Europe
A study of national policies
2016
David Natali, Slavina Spasova and Bart Vanhercke
Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
2016
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0004.png
The European Social Policy Network (ESPN) was established in July 2014 on the initiative of the
European Commission to provide high-quality and timely independent information, advice, analysis
and expertise on social policy issues in the European Union and neighbouring countries.
The ESPN brings together into a single network the work that used to be carried out by the European
Network of Independent Experts on Social Inclusion, the Network for the Analytical Support on the
Socio-Economic Impact of Social Protection Reforms (ASISP) and the MISSOC (Mutual Information
Systems on Social Protection) secretariat.
The ESPN is managed by LISER and APPLICA, with the support of OSE - European Social Observatory.
For more information on the ESPN, see:
http:ec.europa.eusocialmain.jsp?catId=1135&langId=en
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number
(*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*)
The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone
boxes or hotels may charge you).
LEGAL NOTICE
This document has been prepared for the European Commission, however it reflects the views only of the authors,
and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http:www.europa.eu).
ISBN 978-92-79-62119-2
Doi: 10.2767/978434
© European Union, 2016
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Quoting this report: Natali, D., Spasova, S. and Vanhercke, B. (2016),
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous
or hazardous jobs. A study of national policies,
European Social Policy Network (ESPN), Brussels: European
Commission.
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0005.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
Contents
PREFACE ...................................................................................................................... 4
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 6
Summary ................................................................................................................. 6
Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 8
Recommendations..................................................................................................... 9
1 OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF THE END-OF-CAREER POLICY MIX TARGETED AT WORKERS
IN ARDUOUS OR HAZARDOUS JOBS .......................................................................... 11
1.1 Recognition of the arduousness and hazardousness of work in national legislation ..... 11
1.1.1 Categories and definitions ......................................................................... 11
1.1.2 Working in arduous or hazardous situations: approximate numbers ............... 12
1.2 End-of-career policy mix for WAHJ ....................................................................... 13
1.2.1 Countries facilitating WAHJs’ early exit from the labour market ...................... 14
1.2.2 Countries favouring prolonging the working lives of WAHJ ............................. 14
1.2.3 Countries combining early exit and prolonging working life measures ............. 15
1.3 Policy shifts, on-going reforms and current debates ............................................... 16
2 PENSION RULES FOR WORKERS IN ARDUOUS OR HAZARDOUS JOBS ............................ 20
2.1 Separate pension rules for WAHJ ......................................................................... 20
2.1.1 Pensionable age for WAHJ ......................................................................... 20
2.1.2 Career or contribution record requirements and accrual of pension rights........ 22
2.1.3 Funding rules for WAHJ pensions ............................................................... 23
2.2 Compensating for the absence of specific WAHJ provisions: early retirement rules and
social protection benefits ................................................................................... 24
2.2.1 Early retirement rules and disability/invalidity pensions ................................ 25
2.2.2 Sickness and occupational injury benefits.................................................... 26
2.2.3 Unemployment benefits ............................................................................ 26
3 RETIREMENT PATTERNS AND THE RETIREMENT INCOME OF WORKERS IN ARDUOUS OR
HAZARDOUS JOBS .................................................................................................. 27
3.1 Retirement patterns of workers in arduous and hazardous jobs ............................... 27
3.2 Effective Retirement age of workers in arduous and hazardous jobs ......................... 30
3.3 Income situation of the retired workers in arduous and hazardous jobs .................... 32
3.4 More recent and ongoing developments in the retirement patterns of WAHJ ............ 33
ANNEX 1:
PRESENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL POLICY NETWORK (ESPN) ............. 34
A. ESPN Network Management Team and Network Core Team ...................................... 34
B. ESPN National independent experts for social protection and social inclusion (Country
Teams) ........................................................................................................... 35
ANNEX 2: COUNTRIES’ OFFICIAL ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................... 45
ANNEX 3: SPECIAL PENSION SCHEMES FOR WAHJ .......................................................... 46
ANNEX 4: COMPENSATING THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC WAHJ PROVISIONS ....................... 47
ANNEX 5. RECENT TRENDS IN THE RETIREMENT PATTERN OF WAHJ IN SELECTED
COUNTRIES ............................................................................................................ 48
ANNEX 6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 50
3
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0006.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
PREFACE
This report focuses on the retirement regimes for workers in arduous and hazardous jobs
1
,
which can be defined as: “Occupations involving the exposure of the worker over a period
of time to one or several factors leading to professional situations susceptible to leave long-
lasting and irreversible effects on his/her health; these factors are related to physical
constraints, psychosocial risks, an aggressive physical environment, working organisation
and working rhythms, including shift work”
2
.
In a number of European countries workers employed in jobs recognised as “arduous” or
“hazardous” seemingly benefit from more favourable pension rules, including
advantageous accrual of pension rights and/or access to a (nearly) full pension before
reaching the statutory pensionable age (SPA). In recent years though, pension systems
across Europe have been experiencing a shift towards longer working lives and later
retirement, against the background of population ageing and fiscal constraints. Statutory
pensionable ages are being increased and early retirement pathways restricted, while
policies increasingly focus on alternatives to early retirement, including for workers in
arduous or hazardous jobs.
In the 2012 White Paper on Pensions
3
, the European Commission observed:
Workers in particularly arduous or hazardous jobs can be offered alternatives to
early retirement, such as job mobility. In some Member States, eligibility rules are
being tightened – for instance by increasing the eligibility age. Some countries are
also either reducing the levels of benefits provided by special schemes or closing
these schemes. Whenever early retirement options are eliminated, it is important
to ensure that the individuals concerned are enabled to work longer or, if this is not
possible, can enjoy adequate income security.
The 2015 Pension Adequacy Report (PAR
4
) further noted that: “[M]any governments have
put great efforts and huge amounts of political capital into raising the pensionable ages:
[including] reducing the scope of pension advantages for people in arduous jobs; restricting
disability benefits to those ‘genuinely’ sick and unable to work; and so on”. The policy shift
towards longer working lives may prove particularly challenging for workers in arduous
and/or hazardous jobs – hereafter mostly referred to as WAHJ. Member States (and
European countries in general) may address this challenge by leaving in place special
retirement pathways for WAHJ, putting a greater focus on reactivation (e.g. training;
mobility), or a combination of the two. As the European Commission continues to monitor
pension policy developments and pension adequacy, it is important to obtain a more
detailed analysis of the impact of this pension policy shift on the retirement patterns and
income adequacy of WAHJ. The range of measures that have been implemented in this
policy area, as well as the relevance of the topic and availability of data, vary a great deal
among European countries. Moreover, existing studies
5
typically only cover a limited
number of countries.
1
The report covers only workers in arduous and hazardous jobs in the private sector. Public sector provisions are
not covered.
2
ETUC et
al.
(2014),
Better Understanding ‘Arduous Occupations’ within the European Pension debate. Final
Report.
Available
online.
European Commission (2012),
White paper. An Agenda for Adequate, Safe and Sustainable Pensions,
COM
(2012)55. Available
online.
4
3
European Commission (2015),
The 2015 Pension Adequacy Report: current and future income adequacy in old
age in the EU,
Volume I, pp. 181-183. Available
online.
See, for instance:
Zaidi, A. and E. R. Whitehouse (2009),
Should Pension Systems Recognise "Hazardous and Arduous Work"?,
OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 91, OECD Publishing. Available
online
ESIP (2016),
Career management, rehabilitation and early retirement in strenuous jobs
(“Hard Jobs”), European
Social Insurance Platform, Final report. Available online.
5
4
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0007.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
To support the Commission’s analysis, the European Social Policy Network (ESPN) was
asked to conduct an exploratory description and analysis of the policy orientations and
measures for end-of-career of WAHJ, which was complemented with relevant data when
these were available.
The present Synthesis Report draws on national contributions prepared by the 35 ESPN
Country Teams
6
. It was written by David Natali, Slavina Spasova and Bart Vanhercke of
the ESPN’s Network Core Team
7
, with helpful comments and suggestions from the ESPN
Country Teams and from colleagues in the Network Management Team
8
. Comments and
suggestions from the European Commission are also gratefully acknowledged.
The purpose of the present Synthesis Report is to provide an overview of these policy
measures in 35 European countries, the take-up of retirement by WAHJ and the impact on
retirement income adequacy. The report covers recent and ongoing reforms, looking at
pension rules and further policy measures for WAHJ. It identifies promising strategies which
countries have found for the end-of-career of WAHJ within their social systems. It also
refers to the state of the policy debate between policy makers and stakeholders and
provides recommendations for EU countries and the EU alike. In doing so, the Synthesis
Report seeks to answer the following two research questions: (a)
how do national policies
strike a balance between prolonging working lives (including raising pensionable ages,
career reorientation and reactivation policies) and facilitating early labour market exit (e.g.
a more favourable pensionable age) for workers in arduous and/or hazardous jobs?;
and
(b)
how has this balance changed as a result of recent reforms?
The Synthesis Report’s aim is to illustrate the main trends in national policies through a
limited number of examples. In this respect, countries with similar developments are listed
in brackets so that the reader can examine the ESPN national experts’ reports for more
information. In producing their reports, experts cite many different sources in support of
their analysis. References to these are not included in this Synthesis Report. Readers
wishing to follow up the original sources are again invited to consult the individual expert’s
reports (see reference above).
6
For a presentation of the ESPN Network Core Team and the 35 ESPN Country Teams, see Annex 1. This ESPN
Synthesis Report and the 35 ESPN national experts’ Reports can be downloaded from:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1135&intPageId=3589.
7
8
The three authors are from the European Social Observatory (OSE, Brussels).
Hugh Frazer (Maynooth University, Ireland) and Eric Marlier (Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research,
LISER).
5
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0008.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The present Synthesis Report examines the retirement regimes for workers in arduous or
hazardous jobs (WAHJ). To this end, the 35 ESPN Country Teams provided, first, a brief
description of the policy mix targeted at WAHJ, secondly a thorough assessment of the
pension rules and other social protection benefits tailored to them and, finally, an analysis
of their retirement patterns and the adequacy of their pensions. Based on the in-depth
account of the various national policies, the Synthesis Report puts forward five key findings
on the ways in which countries address the arduousness and hazardousness of work in
national policies.
The
first key finding
is that there are two main and opposite legal approaches in the way
countries tackle WAHJ. The first approach consists of the legal recognition of WAHJ through
national statutory rules and, in most cases, specific policy provisions (most often pensions)
for their end of career. Some countries following this approach provide recognition of the
arduousness and the hazardousness of work for a broad category of workers based on a
list of conditions/occupations/sectors (AT, BE, BG, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT, LI, LT, LU,
LV, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR
9
); others provide formal recognition of only one or two
occupations (CZ, CY, DE, HU
10
, IS, NO). The second approach is to neither recognise WAHJ
in legislation, nor to have specific policy measures to address them (CH, DK, IE, MT, NL,
SE, UK)
11
. Generally speaking, the arduousness and hazardousness of work can cover
diverse situations ranging from physical or (less often) mental work conditions and/or
occupations such as (a) harmful work environment/conditions (e.g. handling of chemical
materials, nuclear plants, underground and underwater activities); and (b) strenuous
physical or mental activities such as mining, aircraft staff, metal-workers but also dancers
or bullfighters.
The
second key finding
is that, notwithstanding the relatively long lists of “arduous and
hazardous” work conditions and occupations, the number of WAHJ represents a strictly
limited proportion of the workforce in all countries under scrutiny. WAHJ represent between
1 and 4% of the total workforce
12
for the period 2015-2016. As for WAHJ pensioners
13
,
they are estimated to represent between 5 and 8% of all pensioners for the same period.
It should be noted however that data is often incomplete since they do not cover all the
categories included in the aforementioned lists. Oftentimes, these WAHJ are treated in
national policies through special retirement provisions: mainly pensions (AT, BG, CZ, FR,
FI, EE, EL, ES, HR, HU, IT, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR) or unemployment schemes
(BE, LU). The majority of these countries favour WAHJs’ early exit from the labour market.
Only a few of the countries which have special pension provisions for WAHJ provide a
combination of both early exit and prolonging working life measures such as
comprehensive active labour market policies and health and safety measures (AT, BE, DE,
FI, FR).
The
third key finding
is that social protection benefits for WAHJ, often perceived as
advantageous, are in practice subject to strict conditionality. More particularly, the national
experts’ reports show that in some countries benefits for WAHJ are higher than the average
9
For the countries’ official abbreviations used in this report, see Annex 2.
As a result of a reform passed in Hungary in 2011, there are no new eligibilities for special pension’s provisions
for WAHJ since 2015. The WAHJ special provisions have been phased out with the exception of miners and ballet
dancers. Those eligibilities that were collected before this date can still be converted to preferential retirement
age under the original conditions.
11
10
When describing these countries, the term WAHJ is still used, in a non-legal sense, for the purposes of this
report.
12
13
These are data for the period 2014-2015 on workers who have been in arduous or hazardous employment.
Pensioners who met the conditions (age and contributory period) and are receiving pensions under special
pension rules or schemes for WAHJ for the period 2015-2016.
6
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0009.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
old-age pension, which is partly the result of higher WAHJ and their employers’
contributions in most of these countries. Other countries have pension provisions that are
lower than the average old-pension, due to requirements of the contributory period as well
as defined contributions schemes. As for countries which do not have any special provisions
tailored to WAHJ, this report describes a variety of social protection benefits that can be
used by WAHJ: early retirement schemes, disability pensions, sickness and occupational
injury benefits. Most of these countries have a policy mix oriented towards prolonging the
working life of all workers through restricted eligibility for early retirement and disability
pensions, active labour market policies (re-training, life-long learning, job counselling, job
handovers) as well as health and safety at work measures. In this respect, the Nordic
countries in particular have emphasised improvements in in-work conditions through an
approach which builds on work ability schemes comprising health and safety at work
measures, rehabilitation and targeted activation policies. Still other countries (AT, BE, DE,
CH, FI, FR, NL) combine early exit and prolonging working life measures such as active
labour market policies (vocational training, counselling, job handovers), part time leave,
reduced weekly working time) and work ability provisions.
The
fourth key finding
is that a significant policy shift towards prolonging working life
has taken place in all 35 countries over the past decade. There are three main trends in
how countries are addressing the arduousness and hazardousness of work: (a) narrowing
access to special schemes targeted at WAHJ by introducing stricter conditions on age and
contributory periods; (b) individual assessments of work conditions and work ability for the
purpose of granting pensions and disability, sickness and unemployment benefits; and (c)
redesigning specific rules and schemes with a view to increasing efficiency and
sustainability through means-testing, introducing contributory rates and mandatory
insurance, and shifting schemes from the pension system to other social security budget
regimes. Measures to enhance the ability to work by means of health and safety
programmes and other innovative activation schemes have been implemented only in a
few countries (e.g. BE, DE, DK, FI, FR, NO, SE). In general, the reduced access to special
retirement provisions has not been matched by measures supporting longer working lives.
Recent reforms have aimed at simplifying the set of policies to regulate the end of career
of WAHJ. Here, countries have followed different paths: some have prioritised special
programmes for WAHJ, others have focused on the reform of disability, sickness and
unemployment programmes while doing away with special rules for WAHJ. All in all, we
have identified three main challenges for the future protection of WAHJ which result from
the reform trends. First, in some countries WAHJ receive inadequate benefits (e.g.IT, LT,
LV, UK). Secondly, many countries do not have well-developed active labour market
policies (e.g. BG, CY, CZ, EE, EL, HR, HU, IT, LI, LT, LV, MK, MT, PL, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR).
Thirdly, many of these countries need comprehensive strategies for the improvement of
health and safety at work and rehabilitation services.
As a consequence of these three challenges, stricter retirement conditions for WAHJ are
leading to the individualisation of old age risk, i.e. workers are required to maintain their
employability and progressively bear the responsibility for their old-age income adequacy.
In the area of pensions this implies the requirement for longer contribution records and
thus longer careers.
The
fifth key finding
is the lack of systematic data collection on WAHJ. There are two
main issues in this respect. First of all, less than half of the countries which recognise and
have specific policies targeted at WAHJ provide up-to-date data (e.g. AT, BG, EE, EL, HR,
IT, LT, LV, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI). In this respect, Central and Eastern countries are good
performers. Nevertheless, even among these countries in-depth and systematic data on
the number of WAHJ per category of workers are not always available (e.g. RO, RS). The
second issue concerns countries which do not formally recognise WAHJ in their legislation.
To this end, data are needed in order to assess which category of workers are potentially
WAHJ, using, for instance, indicators of self-evaluation, life-expectancy etc. The lack of
systematic data collection has implications at two levels. First of all, accessible data should
7
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0010.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
be a priority for policymakers and stakeholders with a view to assessing the general need
for special treatment for WAHJ, and especially the adequacy of their retirement incomes
and the sustainability of their pension schemes. Secondly, in the context of the ageing of
the population with fiscal constraints as well as the technological transformations at the
workplace, original data are needed with regard to new occupational risks, in order to
design innovative policy measures.
Conclusions
The Synthesis Report sheds light on the huge variation in the way workers in arduous and
hazardous jobs are treated in Europe, and on their retirement pathways. While in many
countries the group is legally recognised in national statutory rules and often enjoys special
pension provisions, a few other countries do not recognise this group of workers and apply
the general rules (old age pensions, disability, early retirement, unemployment benefits
etc.) to them.
The diversity of regulations has an impact on the policy mix countries have applied so far.
Many (in particular Southern and Eastern European) countries have implemented an “early
exit strategy” with the aim of facilitating the exit of these workers from the labour market.
A few others (in particular the Nordic countries, BE in the caring sector) have traditionally
implemented a holistic approach to prolonging the working life of these workers. The latter
has been based on a combination of measures: strategies aimed at improving health and
safety at work, prevention and rehabilitation programmes, innovative active labour market
policies as well as stricter early retirement conditions and access to some social benefits
(disability, sickness etc.). A third group combines early exit and prolonging working life
measures such as active labour market policies (vocational training, counselling, job
handovers) part time leave, reduced working hours and work ability provisions.
In the majority of the countries under scrutiny, irrespective of the policy mix inherited from
the past, recent reforms have aimed at prolonging working lives through reducing the
scope of special provisions. Policymakers have pursued this reform path through different
– sometimes contradictory – measures. In some countries, the general schemes have seen
a tightening of conditions: this is especially true for early retirement and disability
pensions. In some other countries, special programmes for WAHJ have been terminated,
while general schemes (targeted at a larger proportion of workers) have been maintained
and reformed in line with the objectives mentioned above.
A further common trait of recent reforms has been the simplification of the complex set of
programmes and rules targeted at WAHJ. While in the past a mix of special schemes, rules
and broader retirement as well as other social and unemployment schemes were part of
the policy strategy, in recent years, policymakers have opted for less diversity. Here, again,
countries have followed different paths: some have prioritised special programmes for
WAHJ, others have focused on the reform of disability, sickness and unemployment
programmes, while doing away with special rules for WAHJ. The main instruments to
simplify the institutional set of schemes and the policy mix have consisted of: tightening
the conditions for retirement; means-testing for more focused intervention; increased
contribution rates; and more effective medical control of the difficulty of working
conditions.
Recent reforms have largely contributed to reducing the opportunities for an early exit
from the labour market, even in the case of WAHJ. Data in some national experts’ reports
show increased employment rates for older cohorts of workers and a more limited number
of pensioners leaving the labour market early. In some countries this has led to an increase
of the number of claimants of special WAHJ benefits, which has however been
counterbalanced by a reduction in the number of claimants of disability and early
retirement benefits. It should be noted that the lack of systematic monitoring in some
countries raises concern. A more systematic collection of information on the topic would
make it possible to develop a more evidence-based approach to future reforms.
8
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0011.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
We have identified two main challenges for the future protection of WAHJ. First, in many
countries WAHJ receive low levels of benefit (pensions below the average level of general
old age and disability benefits), or benefits similar to ordinary workers, but for a shorter
period of time (given their lower life expectancy). This has led many WAHJ to postpone
retirement and/or combine pensions with income from labour. In this respect, introducing
stricter conditions for retirement leads to an individualisation of old age risks borne by the
WAHJ. The second challenge is related to a lack of active labour market policies and
measures for the improvement of health and safety at work. The tightened access to special
retirement provisions has not been matched by measures supporting employability and
work ability. The latter could be implemented through a more holistic approach to the
arduousness and hazardousness of work: prevention, improving the work environment,
rehabilitation and innovative active labour market policies.
Recommendations
This part of the Synthesis Report provides recommendations to both the countries under
scrutiny and the European Commission. They build upon the recommendations proposed
by the ESPN Country Teams in their national experts’ reports.
Recommendations to countries with a legal recognition of WAHJ and special
pension provisions for this category of workers
1. More targeted measures should be developed to improve the employability of WAHJ,
notably through:
a) An integrated approach, combining pension policy and employment policy
measures, to help this group of workers to remain active in the labour market while
enjoying decent working conditions. This would also help to improve average
pension protection through longer careers and thus contribution records.
b) A policy mix containing career reorientation, reactivation, re-training, and life-long
learning aimed at WAHJ should be implemented.
2. Countries should consider introducing partial retirement schemes
14
with a view to
better addressing tensions in the labour market, including tough working conditions
and unemployment.
3. Work ability of WAHJ should be improved through measures encouraging co-operation
between medical experts and worker’s representatives in order to properly assess the
risks for occupational diseases and accidents at work.
4. Efforts are needed to find the best ways of integrating statutory Pay-As-You-Go (PAYG)
schemes and supplementary funded schemes to provide better social protection to
WAHJ. Statutory and supplementary pensions should be part of an integrated strategy
to provide old age protection and flexible approaches to the end of career. Some
countries have shown that supplementary pensions (voluntary or mandatory) can
provide additional protection for WAHJ.
Recommendations to Countries lacking a legal recognition of WAHJ or special
schemes for this category of workers
5. Countries which do not legally recognise WAHJ should improve their monitoring
capacities to map this category of workers. This is crucial to monitor trends in the early
These schemes can consist of a combination of part-time work with partial retirement. For instance, the
reduction of working hours which can be partially compensated by supplementary employers’ payments.
Additional leaves and job handover practices, combined with re-training, can also be envisaged. In Belgium this
reduction is partially offset by unemployment insurance for leave, and is completely made up by employers in
the case of reduced weekly working hours in the health and social care sector.
14
9
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0012.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
retirement, disability and sickness schemes that are often used to address problems
with arduousness and hazardousness of work.
6. Once countries have established more clearly the situation of WAHJ, consideration
should be given to their legal recognition and to the development of a set of integrated
and targeted schemes (as outlined in Recommendation 1 above) to address their
situation.
Recommendations for all countries
7. Lessons should be drawn from the comprehensive strategies already present in some
countries for addressing problems related to the end of career of workers. In particular:
a) Further efforts should be made to find out more about the interplay between the
different parts of the policy mix, such as early exit (special retirement provisions)
and prolonging working life (active labour market policies, health and safety)
measures.
b) There is scope to identify “good practices” in existing holistic approaches, which
emphasise improving WAHJ’s work ability and targeted activation measures.
8. The governance of the policy measures aimed at WAHJ should be improved, more
particularly in view of the evidence of some ESPN national experts’ reports of the key
positive role of collective bargaining in regulating the end of career of WAHJ:
a) Trade unions and employers’ representatives should be closely involved in providing
more information about the arduousness and hazardousness of work and the most
effective ways to provide protection to workers.
b) Interactions between statutory rules and collective agreements should be developed
in view of the fact that WAHJ are clearly associated with targeted occupational
groups and industrial sectors.
c) Social partners should be closely involved in designing active labour market policies
which would benefit WAHJ.
9. Real efforts are needed to develop more effective and more systematic statistical data
collection regarding the following:
a) The effective retirement age and average pension of workers performing arduous
or hazardous jobs.
b) The gender balance or bias in the retirement patterns of WAHJ.
c) The adequacy of the protection provided by special schemes for WAHJ in view of
their particular profile (average life expectancy etc.).
Recommendations to the European Commission:
10. Innovative policy measures introduced for WAHJ should be systematically identified and
assessed to then be used to promote exchange on improving policies in the context of
a wider active ageing strategy. In that respect:
a) The European Commission and the Social Protection Committee should systematise
the exchange of information on this topic. It will be important to ensure that all
relevant stakeholders are involved in this exchange.
b) The working conditions and end of career of WAHJ should be monitored in the
context of the European Semester. The effective policy mix to address WAHJ should
be considered as part of the strategy to achieve the Europe 2020 employment and
social inclusion targets.
c) Exchange of information between different data sets – at the EU and international
level (incl. the OECD) – could be further promoted, to improve knowledge about
WAHJ.
10
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0013.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
1
OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF THE END-OF-CAREER POLICY MIX
TARGETED AT WORKERS IN ARDUOUS OR HAZARDOUS JOBS
This section provides an overall description of the end-of-career policy mix targeted at
workers in arduous or hazardous jobs (WAHJ), focusing on three main features of national
policies: the recognition and definition of arduousness and hazardousness of work in
national legislation (Section 1.1), the end-of-career options available to WAHJ (1.2) and
finally, the policy shifts that are apparent in recent reforms (1.3).
1.1 Recognition of the arduousness and hazardousness of work in
national legislation
1.1.1 Categories and definitions
Countries vary a great deal with regard to how they recognise the arduousness and
hazardousness of work in their national legislation. They can be divided into two main
clusters, as can be seen in Table 1. These clusters are not watertight, but help to grasp
the “big picture” and variation among the 35 European countries.
The by far largest cluster is composed of countries that formally recognise WAHJ in national
legislation. This cluster can be divided into two groups.
•
The first one comprises countries which provide a recognition of the arduousness
and hazardousness of work for a broad category of workers, namely through lists
of either work or environment conditions or jobs occupations, or both. This is the
case for AT, BE, BG, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT, LI, LT, LU, LV, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS,
SI, SK, TR
15
.
The second group of countries provides formal recognition only for one or two
categories, as is the case in
CZ, CY, DE, HU, IS, NO.
For instance, some countries
recognise and provide special policy treatment for seafarers (DE, IS, NO) and/or
miners (e.g. CZ, CY, DE, NO). Within this group, some countries have established
rules on the arduousness and hazardousness of work through collective agreements
that cover a large part of the workforce (DE, IS and NO).
•
Table 1: Recognition of WAHJ in national legislation
Formal recognition of WAHJ
Arduousness and
hazardousness of work
enshrined in national
legislation
AT, BE*, BG, EE, EL, ES, FI,
FR, HR, IT, LI, LT, LU*, LV,
MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK,
TR
Recognition of one or two
categories of arduous and
hazardous occupations in
pension statutory rules**
CZ, CY, DE, HU, IS, NO
WAHJ not formally recognised
CH, DK, IE, MT, NL, SE, UK
*BE and LU: statutory rules on night and shift work conditions. **DE and NO: statutory rules only for miners and
seafarers; CZ and CY: statutory rules only for miners; IS: statutory rules only for seafarers; HU: since 2015, only
miners and ballet dancers are recognised.
The second cluster is composed of countries which do not recognise arduous and hazardous
work conditions in statutory rules: this is the case in CH, DK, IE, MT, NL, SE and the UK.
In these countries workers who could plausibly be considered as being in this kind of
occupation do not benefit from any specific policy treatment. Only in the Netherlands,
Sweden and Switzerland national experts pointed to some examples of collective
15
Belgium and Luxembourg are included in this group because they recognise a narrow list of conditions related
to night and shift work which cover different occupations or sectors. Belgium has some collective agreements
which recognise the arduousness and hazardousness of specific work conditions and occupations.
11
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0014.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
agreements which recognise the arduousness and hazardousness of work, but in most
cases these are not all-encompassing and refer only to some sectors and/or occupations.
Surprisingly enough, only five countries use a precise definition of the arduousness and
hazardousness of work: FR, LI, RO, SI and SK. For instance, the French definition
emphasises physical strenuousness: “marked
physical constraints, an aggressive physical
environment or certain work patterns likely to have lasting, identifiable and irreversible
impacts on health.”
The Romanian definition covers “jobs
in which exposure to risk factors
can lead to occupational diseases and have severe consequences for workers’ health and
safety at work”.
As mentioned above, in other countries arduousness and hazardousness of work is tackled
by collective agreements. This is the case particularly in Belgium, Iceland, Germany,
Sweden, Switzerland and Norway, and the agreements often cover entire sectors
16
. For
instance, in the Netherlands, collective agreements cover around 90% of the workforce
and typically use broad categories to distinguish between different types of work. In
Germany, there is a variety of contractual regulations which define arduousness and
hazardousness of work and include provisions on the duration and forms of working hours
(reduced weekly or daily working hours, shift-work and/or night-work), safeguarding
employment and wages (in periods of restructuring measures, changes of tasks), further
training measures, dismissal provisions and early exit pathways.
More often, the arduousness and hazardousness of work is described through a list of
strenuous physical or (in some cases) mental work conditions and/or jobs and occupations.
•
harmful work environment/conditions, e.g. handling of chemical materials, nuclear
plants, underground and underwater activities (e.g.
AT, BG, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT,
LI, LT, LV, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR
);
strenuous physical or mental activities such as mining, air craft staff, metallurgy
but also dancers (BG, EE, EL, ES, HR, HU, MK, PT, RO, RS, SI), musicians and actors
(e.g. EL) or bullfighters (ES);
•
With regard to the measurement of these arduous conditions, some countries apply
quantitative tools related to factors such as heaviness, energy expenditure, temperature
and pressure, night work and shift work to all WAHJ (e.g. AT, BE, FR, LU, SI, SK). For
instance, in France the minimum threshold for the daily manual handling of loads to be
labelled as “arduous” is 7.5 tons/day and the minimum time threshold is 120 days/year.
Austria defines “unfavourable” working conditions as those requiring energy expenditure
above a certain threshold of kilojoules
17
. Arduous “night work” is also qualified differently
between countries
18
.
1.1.2 Working in arduous or hazardous situations: approximate numbers
Notwithstanding the seemingly long lists of work conditions and occupations, it should be
noted that WAHJ represent a strictly limited proportion of the workforce in all countries
under scrutiny. However, the data provided below should be considered with due caution
as they are incomplete since they do not cover all the categories included in the
aforementioned lists. Moreover, some national experts consider that many workers are
in
practice
working in arduous or hazardous situations, even if they have
formally
been not
included in these categories (e.g. RS).
More precisely, arduousness and hazardousness of work arrangements in collective agreements are particularly
widespread in the public sector in Belgium and Norway. The Belgian report points out that there are 53 special
regimes in the public sector with special early retirement conditions due to arduous working conditions.
17
18
16
In Austria, it is set at 8,374 kilojoules.
Six hours between 10pm and 6am for at least 6 days/month (AT); at least one hour between 12pm and 5am
for at least 120 nights/ year (FR); and work between 10pm and 6am (except 11pm and 6pm in hotel and catering
business) in Luxembourg.
12
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0015.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
The ESPN national experts’ reports roughly estimate that WAHJ represent between less
than 1% and 4% of the total workforce in European countries. In Estonia and Hungary,
WAHJ account for around 1% of the employed population. In Spain the number of
contributors to the sea workers’ regime makes up 0.39% and coal mining workers 0.03%
of the total contributors to the social security system. In the Czech Republic, workers in
the mining industry represent less than 0.6% of the labour force, whereas miners
considered as WAHJ represent only approximately 0.1% of the total labour force. In
Romania, the category of
difficult work conditions
represents around 0.36%
19
of the total
employed population. In Poland and Croatia WAHJ represent around 2.2% of all insured
workers, in Serbia 3.6% of the total workforce and in Slovakia 4.1 % of all employed
persons. Greece is an exceptional case, where formally recognised WAHJ account for no
less than 12.9% of all employed persons or 29.52% of all insured salaried employees in
the private sector.
In many countries experts point to a decrease in the number of WAHJ over the past decade:
this is the case in BG, EE, EL, ES, HU, LT, LV, MK, PL, RO, RS, SI, SK and TR. In Romania,
where legislation recognises two categories of arduous and hazardous jobs, i.e.
special
work conditions
and
difficult work conditions,
there was a significant decrease in the
number of workers in the latter category of around 90% between 2004 and 2015. This is
a result of a revision of the legislation, which reduced the number of jobs considered as
arduous and hazardous and imposed improved work conditions on a significant share of
them. In Greece, there was a significant decrease in the number of WAHJ during the period
2009-2014: from 17.1% to 12.9% of all employed persons (or from 42.6% to 29.5% of
all insured salaried employees in the private sector). In general, there are multiple reasons
for the overall decrease in the number of WAHJ in European countries: these include
economic downturn in sectors employing WAHJ and revision of the lists of conditions and/or
occupations, including for budgetary reasons (for further discussion, see Section 1.3 on
reforms).
European countries have deployed a variety of policy instruments to tackle the end-of-
career in arduous and hazardous work: these include pensions (old-age pensions, early
retirement schemes, partial pensions, disability pensions), passive labour market policies
(unemployment protection, sickness benefits), active labour market policies (re-training,
life-long learning, job counselling, job handovers), health and safety at work measures.
Two ideal type approaches can be identified for tackling the arduousness and
hazardousness of work. The first one focuses on a single policy that is specifically tailored
to WAHJ and/or available to all workers (namely in countries that do not recognise WAHJ
per se). The preferred policy options are mostly early exit provisions such as pensions (old-
age and disability schemes). The second approach is holistic, prioritising a variety of
policies including pensions, but putting the emphasis on active labour market policies
promoting employability, as well as health and safety at work with a view to enhancing the
work ability of WAHJ.
1.2 End-of-career policy mix for WAHJ
The 35 European countries under scrutiny use various packages of policy measures and
forms of regulation to address the arduousness and hazardousness of work. As can be seen
in Table 2, countries can be grouped in three clusters with clearly distinguishable policy
mixes as regards end-of career: countries facilitating early exit from the labour market
(Section 1.2.1), countries favouring prolonging working life measures (1.2.2) and countries
19
While the WAHJ are divided between two categories of work conditions (i.e. “difficult work conditions” and
“special work conditions”), statistics are available only for workers in difficult work conditions. According to an
estimation issued by the Romanian government, the category of
difficult work conditions
numbered approx.
30,000 workers, representing approximately 0.36% of the total employed population.
13
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0016.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
combining early exit and prolonging working life measures (1.2.3). The present section
refers to traditional policy packages while Section 1.3 provides a summary of more recent
reforms that, at least in some cases, have shifted the logic of the policy mix inherited from
the past.
Table 2: End-of-career policy mix for WAHJ
Countries facilitating
early exit measures
(Cluster 1)
BG, EE, ES, EL, HR, IT, MK, PL,
PT, RO, RS, SI, SK
20
, TR
Countries favouring
prolonging working life
measures
(Cluster 2)
CY, CZ, DK, HU, IE, IS, LI, LT
LV
21
, MT, NO, SE, UK
Countries combining
early exit & prolonging
working life measures
(Cluster 3)
AT, BE, DE, CH, FI, FR, LU, NL
1.2.1 Countries facilitating WAHJs’ early exit from the labour market
The majority of the countries in the first cluster - mostly Central and Eastern European
(CEEC) and some Southern countries - deal with the end-of-career of WAHJ through special
pension provisions (i.e. separate rules or special pension schemes) and/or other social
security benefits in order to facilitate early labour market exit of the workers concerned.
This is the case in BG, EE, ES, EL, HR, IT, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK and TR, as can be
seen in Table 2. WAHJ pension provisions vary widely, not only between the countries in
this cluster, but also within the same country, depending on the category of workers and
often gender.
Most of the countries in this cluster provide separate pension rules within the general
pension system for WAHJ (EE, EL, ES, HR, IT, MK, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR). A few countries
have special pension schemes for this category of workers (BG, ES, PL, SI). Spain and
Slovenia combine special pension schemes with separate rules in the general pension
scheme, according to the categories of workers (Sections 2.1 and 2.2). All countries in this
cluster also use other social security benefits as early exit routes by WAHJ. These include
disability pensions, sickness benefits and unemployment schemes. However, such benefits
usually provide low replacement rates and in some cases are used as bridging benefits
22
until the conditions for old-age pensions are met. This is often the case for unemployment
benefits, which can be claimed during an economic downturn in sectors employing WAHJ
(e.g. construction, mining sector).
1.2.2 Countries favouring prolonging the working lives of WAHJ
The countries in the second cluster (see Table 2) do not have specific provisions for the
end-of career WAHJ
23
: formally speaking, these workers have the same length of working
life as ordinary workers. This is the case in CY, CZ, DK, HU, IE, IS, LI, LT, LV, MT, NO, SE,
UK. Among these countries, Liechtenstein is the only one which recognises WAHJ in
national legislation (based on a list of occupations) but, surprisingly perhaps, it does not
provide any special provisions for them. In Latvia and Lithuania, arduousness and
20
In Slovakia, there are special provisions only for workers in arduous and hazardous employment before 2000.
However, the country is classified in this cluster because a 2016 agreement between the government and the
trade unions proposes new early exit measures for WAHJ.
Latvia and Lithuania have special pension provisions, but only for those who were working in arduous or
hazardous jobs before 1996 (LV) and 1995 (LT): workers who entered the labour market after these dates have
no special treatment.
Bouget D., Frazer H., Marlier E., Peña-Casas R., Vanhercke B. (2015),
Integrated support for the long-term
unemployed in Europe; A study of national policies,
European Social Policy Network (ESPN), Synthesis Report to
the European Commission, Brussels: European Commission.
23
22
21
With the exception of one or two categories of workers (such as miners and seafarers), as explained in Section
1.1.
14
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0017.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
hazardousness of work is still enshrined in law, but special pensions provisions apply only
to WAHJ before 1996 (LV) and 1995 (LT).
In this cluster, social security provisions such as disability, sickness and unemployment
benefits sometimes serve as bridging benefits until WAHJ reach the SPA.
Within this second cluster, there are two main approaches to tackling the end of a career,
and particularly prolonging working life of WAHJ. The first, a “holistic” one, is taken by
Nordic countries (DK, IS, NO, SE). As put forward by the Danish expert’s report, this
approach builds on linking social and labour market policies and (more recently) health
policies to support longer working lives. It aims at enhancing “workers’ functional capacities
through empowerment and rehabilitation” in order to reduce “early exits and to increase
retirement ages and employment rates” (DK expert’s report). The holistic approach
towards WAHJ is pursued through a variety of policy instruments but there are typically
only few early retirement possibilities through pensions while disability and sickness
benefits have strict eligibility conditions. These countries have put the emphasis on
improving in-work conditions and work ability of all workers. The holistic approach indeed
builds on active labour market policies aimed at promoting employability; it also promotes
work ability schemes comprising health and safety at work measures as well as
rehabilitation.
The second approach stresses prolonging working life mainly through tightening eligibility
conditions and providing incentives for later retirement rather than enhancing the
employability and work ability of supposed WAHJ (CY, CZ, HU, IE, LI, LT, LV, MT, UK).
These countries provide some early retirement schemes (except for the UK) but have
restricted their conditions over the past decade. The same is true for disability and
occupational injury schemes. For instance, the UK has replaced the previous Incapacity
Benefit and Severe Disablement Benefit (which were considered as facilitating early exit
and alternatives to unemployment benefits) by an Employment and Support Allowance,
with tighter eligibility conditions.
1.2.3 Countries combining early exit and prolonging working life measures
The countries of the third cluster (AT, BE, DE, CH, FI, FR, LU, NL) combine early exit and
prolonging working life measures. On the one hand, these countries provide special early
exit options, either through national legislation or collective agreements. On the other
hand, they provide comprehensive supporting working life measures such as active labour
market policies (vocational training, counselling, job handovers) and work ability
provisions. For instance, Austria has two special pension schemes for WAHJ: “heavy labour
pensions” and “special retirement for WAHJ in heavy night work”. Likewise, France has
several early retirement schemes for categories of WAHJ (e.g. for asbestos workers etc.).
Belgium favours early labour market exit for WAHJ through the Scheme of unemployment
benefit with employers’ supplement (Régime
de chômage avec complément d'entreprise,
RCC), along with a variety of active labour market policies (ALMP). Luxembourg has a
limited pre-retirement scheme (paid by the unemployment system) which serves as a
bridge to retirement, with a more generous benefit than for ordinary workers to be paid
by the employer. Some countries, such as France, have introduced schemes that combine
access to ALMP measures and early retirement (see Section 1.3 for more detail).
In Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland, WAHJ conditions and partial
retirement schemes (through mostly occupational pensions) are negotiated exclusively
through collective agreements. For instance, in the Netherlands the most common
provision in collective agreements is extra leave for older workers, on the assumption that
older workers need extra time off to remain healthy and fit for work. Some 62 collective
agreements covering about 51% of workers include this type of measure. 52 of these
collective agreements provide extra leave which increases with age from 50 to 60 (a
maximum of 15 extra days of leave). In addition, 43 collective agreements covering 29%
of workers allow older workers to benefit from reduced hours. This type of provision usually
applies to workers aged 45-64. Finally, 68 collective agreements (62% of all Dutch
15
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0018.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
workers) exempt older workers from overtime, irregular working hours, weekend work and
team work. In Germany, there is a great variety of contractual regulations which protect
and favour older employees - with regard
inter alia
to the duration and form of working
hours, to safeguarding employment and wages, to further training measures, dismissal
provisions and early exit pathways. Of particular relevance are partial retirement
agreements, which can refer not only to the age of employees but also to employees in
shift- or night-work. The collective agreements that were concluded in 2015 for the metal
and electrical industries in Baden-Württemberg allow employees who have worked night
shifts and alternate shifts during a certain period to benefit from a partial retirement from
the age of 58 onwards (for up to five years); the income reduction is partially compensated
for by supplementary employer payments. In 2003 Swiss social partners reached a
collective agreement - binding for all firms in the construction sector - which allows
workers, under certain conditions, to retire at age 60 rather than the SPA at 65. It provides
an income-replacement benefit for a period of 5 years at most, between the ages of 60
and 65. The agreement has been in force since 2003, and consists of an ad hoc foundation
which provides pensions, jointly run by the social partners (Stiftung flexibler Altersrücktritt
– Fondation retraite anticipée, the FAR foundation), that is separate from both the basic
state pensions and company based occupational pensions. The FAR foundation is generally
considered as a successful example of how to deal with the issue of providing access to
adequate retirement provision to WAHJ within the framework of collective agreements
rather than through general legislation. However, this agreement is rather exceptional
(attempts by the unions to extend the agreement to construction-near branches such as
electricians, plumbers, etc. have failed so far).
1.3 Policy shifts, on-going reforms and current debates
This section describes the main reform trends in recent years (2009-2016) for the policy
instruments tailored specifically to the end-of-career of WAHJ. It also addresses other
social security schemes that are used by these workers to provide a smooth end of career
in countries which do not recognise arduousness and hazardousness of work in national
legislation.
The main reform trend in all countries during the past decade has been towards introducing
stricter conditions for favourable pension and other social security benefits. Countries can
be divided into three main clusters, as can be seen in Table 3.
Table 3: End-of-career of WAHJ: main reform trends
Tightening early exit and
promoting employability
and work ability
measures
AT, BE, CH, DE, ES, IT, IS, FI,
FR, LI, LU, NL, DK, NO, SE
Tightening early exit
Facilitating early exit
BG, CY, EE, EL, HR, IE, HU**,
LT, LV, MK, MT, PL, PT, RO, RS,
SI, SK, UK
CZ*, TR*
*CZ and TR have implemented early retirement provisions only for miners. CZ implemented a pre-retirement
benefit in 2013 for all workers within the voluntary funded individual schemes of the pension system.
**HU: the entire WAHJ pension provisions’ system has been phased out since 31 December 2014 (except for
miners and ballet dancers).
Slightly less than half of the countries under scrutiny have implemented strategies and
programmes aimed at supporting longer working lives and promoting employability and
work ability while tightening early exit schemes: this is the case in AT, BE, CH, DE, ES, IT,
IS, FI, FR, LI, LU, NL, DK, NO and SE. This trend is particularly visible in Scandinavian
countries, where further emphasis has been placed on promoting employability and
enhancing work ability. For instance, in Sweden, along with tightening eligibility conditions
for occupational pensions, the emphasis has been put on prolonging work capacity through
16
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0019.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
prevention and rehabilitation measures. In Denmark, even people with the weakest work
capacity have been encouraged to join the labour market through the “Flex Job Reform”
of 2013, which introduced intensive re-insertion programmes (“resource process
programmes”). In Norway, enhancing work ability policies are enshrined in the Working
Environment Act and the tripartite agreement on “An inclusive work life” (2014-2018),
both of which have the clear objective of prolonging working lives of elderly workers.
Similar measures based on agreements between social partners have been launched in
Finland as well.
In some of the countries that followed this reform trend, early exit routes have been
negotiated through collective agreements and are being implemented by occupational
pensions or disability funds. However, these favourable conditions are being tightened in
many countries. For instance, in Sweden and Norway, occupational pensions are moving
towards stricter early retirement conditions. In Sweden, the age limit for earliest pension
withdrawal from private pension plans (occupational and private individual) is to be
increased from 55-years to 62-years by 2017. In Iceland, where prolonging working life
has been a general trend for decades, the Occupational Pension Funds (OPFs) have been
pushing during 2016 for a rise in the pensionable age to 70 and for tighter eligibility
procedures for disability pensions. The German expert’s report points to the decrease in
the coverage of collective agreements from 70% in 2003 to 57%. The on -going political
debate is focused on the strengthening of the medical and professional/vocational
rehabilitation measures, and on the assumption that active labour market policy is of major
importance for activation and vocational integration measures for older employees.
However, benefits for further vocational training have been sharply reduced in recent
years. In the Netherlands, where the collective agreements cover 90% of all workers, these
benefit from occupational pension schemes which are collectively organised and quasi-
mandatory at firm, sectoral or professional level. In 2013, the Dutch government raised
the pensionable age for the statutory basic pension, to 67 by 2021. Collectively negotiated
occupational pension schemes followed the example of the statutory pension and raised
pensionable age to 67.
Only few countries have implemented innovative schemes combining early exit with
activation and improving work ability policies, such as the French “compte de prévention
de pénibilité” and the Finnish “years-of- service pension”. The new French scheme
(implemented in 2015) allows employees to acquire points according to their exposure to
ten defined risk factors. These points can be used under certain conditions for (a)
vocational training (b) part-time-work on the same pay and (c) early retirement. In
Finland, along with an emphasis on work ability, there has been a process of harmonising
the occupational pension provisions for WAHJ. Following the closing down of many early
retirement routes for individual occupations, a specific
years-of-service
scheme for WAHJ
has been created (implementation is scheduled as of 2017) which requires 38 years of
contributory period and is applied to all major pension schemes. In Austria and Germany,
the policy mix has also been clearly oriented towards activation and occupational health
and safety
24
. For instance, Austria has reformed early retirement schemes (while leaving
a transitional period for WAHJ) as well as disability schemes. At the same time the focus
was put on rehabilitation and ALMP such as retraining. The “temporary invalidity pension”
in Austria has been replaced by two new benefits, namely “rehabilitation benefit” and “re-
training benefit” which are aimed at all workers.
The second reform trend is towards tightening the eligibility conditions of pension schemes
through three main measures: reducing the categories of working conditions/occupations
considered as arduous and hazardous; increasing pensionable ages and insurance periods;
and closing down favourable pension provisions for WAHJ. In this group of countries,
measures to invest in employability and work ability of workers in arduous and hazardous
jobs are underdeveloped: prolonging working life is mainly approached through reducing
24
In Italy, the
staffetta generazionale scheme,
which covers all workers aged 50+, allows them to shift from full-
time to part-time employment if the employer hires at least one younger worker.
17
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0020.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
opportunities to exit the labour market. For instance, in Hungary, the whole WAHJ system
has been phased out since December 2014, and no new eligibilities can be accumulated.
Advantages collected before 2015 can still be converted to a preferential retirement age,
subject to the original conditions. Moreover, the eligibility conditions for disability and
sickness benefits have been tightened. Significant changes in the list of WAHJ and to the
preferential pension treatment have been planned in Croatia as regards jobs that have
become automated and are therefore considered less arduous than in the past. For the
past 20 years, Baltic countries have been reforming pension schemes inherited from the
Soviet regime. In Latvia the pensionable age of some categories of WAHJ has increased
rather spectacularly, i.e. by 10.5 years during the past 20 years. Special pension rules
within the statutory retirement system remain only for workers who worked in arduous
and hazardous jobs before 1996; the same as in Lithuania for WAHJ before 1995
25
. In
Malta the pension reform of 2004 has opened up early retirement routes for “manual
workers”, but in 2014 incentive mechanisms for increasing the benefit amount were
introduced in order to prolong working lives of workers between 62 and 65.
26
In Belgium,
the unemployment benefit scheme with employers’ supplements has been made subject
to far stricter conditions: the general minimum age condition is now 62 years for all workers
and for WAHJ the age is 58, provided that they have contributed for 35 years.
While tightening eligibility conditions and closing down exit routes, the countries that follow
the second reform trend have not implemented coherent working life extension measures
targeted at these categories of workers. Some ESPN experts highlighted schemes targeted
at older workers (45+) in general, but these remain underdeveloped or underused (e. g.
BG, EE, LT, PL, RO). Some countries have targeted special schemes at older workers in
certain sectors (e.g. in BE, the health and social care sector). In some countries there are
discussions on implementing specific ALMP and rehabilitation policies which are mainly
proposed by trade unions (e.g. BG, EE).
The third reform trend – which aims at facilitating early exit routes for WAHJ – is an
exception (as can be seen in Table 3) and is mostly linked to peculiar economic conditions
especially at sectoral level and for some occupational groups. For instance, in Turkey, along
with promoting longer working lives by regulating pension accruals (i.e. the rate at which
one builds up pension benefits while being an active member of the scheme), recent
reforms have reduced the pensionable age of miners in order to facilitate labour market
exit. This decision was a direct consequence of the 2014 coal mine disaster in Soma, the
deadliest industrial catastrophe in Turkey’s history. Likewise, in the Czech Republic more
favourable rules for the early retirement of miners were enacted in 2009 and in 2016
27
about further relaxing these due to economic downturn in the mining sector. Moreover,
since 2013 it has become possible to claim pre-retirement benefit from the voluntary
funded individual schemes under favourable age and income conditions. Although in the
debates on introducing this measure the emphasis was on targeting WAHJ, it is accessible
to the entire workforce.
In Slovakia there is an ongoing discussion (2016) on introducing more favourable pension
rules for WAHJ based on a trade union proposal inspired by the German and Belgium
schemes. Likewise, in Belgium, along with government and social partners are preparing
(originally planned for June 2016, now postponed until autumn 2016) a list of arduous jobs
25
In Romania, as well, the general tendency is to reduce the number of WAHJ: as a result, there was a redefinition
of some categories and a transition of many occupations from the “difficult work conditions” to the “normal work
conditions” list. In Slovakia, the pre-existing classification of jobs according to their riskiness was abolished in
1999 and is now used only to calculate the pension entitlements for WAHJ employed before 2000. In Bulgaria,
recent reforms planned an increase in the pensionable age of WAHJ as of 2017.
26
In Cyprus, incentive mechanisms equally aim at increasing the effective retirement age to 68 years. In
Liechtenstein, the emphasis is put on certain activation measures (consultations and retraining for career change)
as well as prevention. There are occupational pension schemes for some categories of workers but the benefit
structures are left to the employers’ discretion.
27
A new law voted on 11 July 2016 which will enter into force as of 1 October 2016 decreases the pensionable
age for WAHJ miners from 5 to 7 years bellow the SPA.
18
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0021.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
to benefit from special retirement conditions for a transition period until 2030. WAHJ
pensions would use a notional points system. In the ongoing discussions in Belgium on the
definition of arduousness and hazardousness of work there are proposals to tackle this
issue at individual level, without referring to jobs or occupations.
19
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0022.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
2
Pension rules for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
As discussed in Section 1.2.1, many of the countries which formally recognise WAHJ in
national legislation provide early exit provisions through the pension system. This section
focuses mainly on the two kinds of pension provisions specifically targeted at WAHJ:
separate pension rules for WAHJ within the general pension scheme and special pension
schemes tailored to WAHJ (2.1). It also briefly describes early retirement schemes and
other social security schemes in countries which do not have specific pension provisions
for WAHJ (2.2).
Countries providing special pension provisions for WAHJ can be divided into two clusters.
The first cluster (15 countries) provides separate pension rules for WAHJ
within the general
pension scheme:
CY, CZ, EE, EL, ES, HR, HU, IT, LV, MK, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK
28
and TR. The
second cluster (10 countries) has
separate
pension schemes for WAHJ: AT, BG, DE, ES,
FR, FI (as of 2017), IS, NO, PL, SI. Slovenia and Spain are included in both clusters because
they have separate rules within the general pension scheme as well as special pension
schemes according to the category of WAHJ.
A summary of the situation in the 35 countries under scrutiny is provided in Table 4.
Table 4: Pension rules for workers in WAHJ: general and special schemes
Separate pension rules
for WAHJ within the
general scheme
CZ*, CY*, EE, EL, ES, HR,
HU**, IT, MK, PT, RO, RS,
SI, SK**, TR
Special pension schemes
for WAHJ
Absence of special
pension provisions
tailored to WAHJ
BE*, CH, DK, IE, LI, LT**, LU*,
LV** MT, NL, SE, UK
AT, BG, DE*, ES, FR, FI (as
of 2017), IS*, NO*, PL, SI
* Schemes with a narrow scope (only miners and/or seafarers; BE and LU only night and shift workers).
** LT and LV have separate pension rules within the general pension scheme only for a tiny number of workers
employed in arduous or hazardous jobs before 1995 (LT) and 1996 (LV); HU: the whole WAHJ system has been
phased out since the 31
st
December 2014 (except for miners and ballet dancers). SK provides separate pension
rules only for WAHJ employed before 2000.
2.1 Separate pension rules for WAHJ
Separate pension rules within the general scheme and special schemes for WAHJ are
determined by three main sets of rules. These pertain to (a) pensionable age (Section
2.1.1); (b) the career or contribution record that is required to access a pension and (c)
the accrual of pension rights (2.1.2). The funding of these special schemes is discussed in
Section 2.1.3.
2.1.1 Pensionable age for WAHJ
First, with regard to pensionable age, countries provide early retirement rules tailored to
WAHJ (see illustrations in Box 1 below). On average, WAHJ can benefit from a full pension
5-6 years before the SPA.
The pensionable age rules depend on three main elements: the categories of WAHJ (BG,
CY, CZ, EE, EL, ES, FI, HR, HU
29
, IT, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, SI, SK, TR)
30
, the contributory
period (BG, EE, EL, ES, FI, HR, HU, IT, MK, PT, RO, RS, SK, TR) and gender (AT, BG, HR,
HU, MK, PL, RO, RS, SI). Gender is an important variable in both groups, women being
entitled to retire on average 5-6 years earlier than men (e.g. AT, BG, MK, PL, RO, RS, SI).
In this respect, some countries have implemented transitional equalisation periods for
28
29
In Slovakia, special pension provisions cover only workers in arduous or hazardous employment before 2000.
As pointed out above, the Hungarian system has been phased out in December 2014. New eligibilities are no
longer possible.
30
See Annex 3 for countries having special pension schemes for WAHJ.
20
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0023.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
gender pensionable ages (e.g. BG, HR, SI). For instance, in Bulgaria the pensionable age
for WAHJ will start to increase as of 2017 by 2 months for men and 4 months for women
each year, until the same age is reached for women and men in 2037. For Bulgarian
workers whose jobs belong to “labour category I” the target age for early retirement is 55
years and for “labour category II” the target age is 60 years. In Croatia, the pensionable
age for women is being increased by 3 months a year between 2011 until 2030. In Slovenia
both pensionable age and contributory period have been equalised for men and women.
Box 1. Pensionable age of WAHJ: illustrations
In
Germany,
the pensionable age for miners varies between 60 and 62 depending on
the contributory period, but they can retire earlier if there is an economic downturn in
the sector.
In
Greece,
the pensionable age for WAHJ is 62 for a full pension while the SPA is 67 years. Some
categories of WAHJ are entitled to a reduced pension at the age of 60 (construction sector,
municipal cleaning sector), others at 57 years (mining, underwater and air activities, some
categories of artists).
In
Italy,
WAHJ retire at 61 years/7 months, i.e. five years before the SPA, if they attain the
required contributory period.
In
Croatia,
the pensionable age varies widely depending on the category of WAHJ, on their
contribution period in this kind of employment and on gender. For instance, ship crew members
can retire at 60 years, while pensionable age for asbestos workers can vary from 45 to 48 for
women and from 50 to 53 for men. For most WAHJ the effective retirement age is between 60
and 62 years.
In
Hungary,
men are entitled to a reduction of pensionable age of 2 years after 10 years in an
arduous or hazardous job, which is extended by one year for each additional five years of activity.
For women the condition is more favourable: 2 years’ reduction for each additional 8 years spent
in an arduous or hazardous job and 1 year for each additional 4 years.
In
Macedonia,
the age reduction can vary from 7 to 3 years compared to the SPA, depending
on the category of WAHJ, the entitlement to an extension of the contribution period and on
gender.
In
Romania,
the pensionable age is lowered by 6 months for each year of arduous and hazardous
employment for “special work conditions”: the reduction ranges from 1 to 13 years depending on
the contributory period. For several other categories (i.e. miners, artists and employers exposed
to nuclear radiation), the pensionable age is even lower.
In
Portugal,
the pensionable age can vary (from 45/ 50 years for miners to 60 years for
embroiderers from Madeira) and is calculated according to the contributory period.
In
Spain,
bullfighters and artists can retire respectively at the age of 55 or 60 according to the
contributory period but with a benefits deduction of 8% for each early retirement year after the
age of 60. For some other categories of WAHJ, there are special age reduction coefficients (for
miners and aircraft personnel).
In
Slovakia,
the SPA is 62 years with at least 15 years of contributions, while WAHJ can retire
between 56 and 59 years (depending on the category) provided that they have a contributory
period of at least 25 years as WAHJ.
As a general rule, miners can retire between the ages of 55 and 57. Sometimes there are
opportunities for earlier retirement, depending on the period spent underground, the
contributory period and also the economic situation of the sector.
Special pension schemes are typically narrower in scope than the separate pension rules
within the general pension system (Section 2.1). Many countries provide special pension
schemes only for very specific categories of WAHJ, such as miners and seafarers, or in
21
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0024.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
sectors where activity is expected to considerably diminish (or even be abolished). Even
then, several ESPN national experts’ reports point to the very low proportion of WAHJ (as
compared to the total workforce) in these sectors (Section 1.1.1). Typically, special pension
schemes for WAHJ - which often provide low incomes - act as “bridging benefits” for some
years, until the worker is eligible for the statutory old-age pension. Afterwards beneficiaries
can qualify for a full statutory old-age pension. This is for example the case for the “heavy
labour pension” in Austria, the “bridging pension” in Poland, the “seafarer pension” in
Germany, and the “fishermen’s pension” in Norway.
2.1.2 Career or contribution record requirements and accrual of pension
rights
Career and/or contribution record provisions vary among the different countries and often
within the same country, according to the categories of WAHJ. In most cases, the accrual
of pension rights depends on the contributory period (counted with or without extended
duration) and in some cases on the level of paid contributions.
In this respect, historically recognised occupations such as miners (and in some cases
seafarers) have favourable pensionable conditions for a full pension at a lower age and
following a shorter contributory period. In many cases, miners benefit from pension-accrual
which can be calculated using a multiplier coefficient per contributory month (e.g. PL), an
age reduction coefficient according to the danger and the toxicity of the activity (e.g. coal
mining in ES) or a preferential pension formula (e.g. CZ). The required career record for
miners varies between 25 years in Germany and 10 years in Poland: in the latter country,
miners can retire at the age of 55 after a career of 10 years, at 50 years after a career of
15 years, and there is no minimal pensionable age if they have had a 25-year career.
Apart from these special pension provisions for miners (and in some cases for seafarers),
the remaining special schemes for WAHJ show a great deal of variation – both between
countries and among schemes in a single country – as regards contributory periods and
accrual rights. Some countries apply twofold conditions with regard to the contributory
period that gives the right to a pension: these pertain to the contributory period over the
whole working career, and to the contributory period as WAHJ (e.g. AT, EL, ES, FR, IT, PT,
SI). For instance, in Greece the contributory period needed to reach the pensionable WAHJ
age (62 years) and qualify for a full pension is 35 years; at least 25 years of these should
concern arduous and hazardous work. For a reduced pension the contributory period in
arduous and hazardous employment is limited to 12 years. In other countries a
contributory period as WAHJ is all that is required in order to qualify for a full pension (e.g.
ES, HR, MK, PT, RO, RS, SK, TR). In Romania, the complete contributory period for a full
pension for an ordinary worker is 35 years as a result of additional seniority accruals, while
for WAHJ it can vary between 23 and 28 years according to individual occupations and
category of arduous and hazardous jobs. In Austria both the “heavy labour pension
scheme” and the “special retirement pension for those who worked heavy night work”
apply twofold conditions as regard the contributory period
31
. In other countries a
contributory period as WAHJ suffices in order to qualify for a full pension (e.g. BG, FI, PL,
SI). The new “years-of-service” pension in Finland (as of 2017) requires both reduced work
capacity certification and a working career of 38 years in arduous or hazardous conditions.
With regard to accrual rights, many countries have advantageous rules (BG, EL, ES, HR,
MK, PL, RO, RS, SI, TR). In some countries the contributory period is counted with an
extended duration (years/months of career) which provides favourable accrual rates (e.g.
HR, MK, RS). For instance, in Croatia, the regular maximum pension contributory period
within a year is 12 months, while for WAHJ each 12-month contribution period is counted
as 14, 15, 16 or 18 months, depending on the category of occupation. Croatian benefit
formula is based on a points system, as a consequence of contributory periods counted
31
The first scheme requires 45 years in total, and 10 years as a WAHJ within the last 20 years; the second
scheme requires a contributory period of 20 years, with 15 years of contribution within the last 30 years.
22
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0025.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
with extended duration, WAHJ accumulates a higher number of pension points within a
shorter effective contributory period than an ordinary worker. Likewise, In Romania WAHJ
pensions are calculated through a points system: a WAHJ accumulates a higher number of
pension points than an ordinary worker, and benefits from a higher accrual rate. The
increase in pension points varies between 25% and 50% according to the category of
WAHJ. In Greece, accrual of pension rights is based on additional WAHJ contributions,
starting from 14% (for 15 years of contributions as WAHJ) up to 20% (for 35 years of
contributions as WAHJ).
In Slovenia and Bulgaria, the contributory period is also counted with an extended duration
(years/months of career). However, in both Bulgaria
32
and Slovenia
33
, some WAHJ need
to contribute to a special statutory funded scheme. In Bulgaria, all WAHJ need to be insured
under the statutory PAYG scheme
34
and also be members of the statutory funded and
defined contributions scheme
35
, so the total benefits depend on the accumulated
contributions. The Bulgarian experts’ report points to the fact that in many cases persons
with a long service as WAHJ have a low level of accrued rights: this could be the
consequence of the practice of paying contributions only on a lower declared income than
that received in reality. In Austria the “heavy labour pension” is calculated using the same
formula as for old-age pensions, and there are deductions for each month of early
retirement.
2.1.3 Funding rules for WAHJ pensions
Alongside more favourable pensionable ages and accrual of pension rights, WAHJ (AT, EL,
ES, MK, RS, SI) and their employers (BG, EL, ES, HR, MK, PT, RO, RS, SI, TR) pay higher
contributions than ordinary workers and their employers. In some countries, part of the
WAHJ pension is financed by state contributions (e.g. AT, BG, PL, PT, SI). In Portugal,
many pensions are financed by employers, but some are funded by both employers and
the social security budget (e.g. miners and air traffic controllers)
36
, by the state budget
and the social security budget (embroiderers from the island of Madeira), or only by the
social security budget (some artists and dancers).
In most countries of the first cluster, i.e. those which have special rules within the general
scheme (e.g. CZ, CY, EL, ES, MK, PT, RO, RS, SI and TR), WAHJ are covered by the
statutory PAYG schemes. For instance, in Greece, the statutory PAYG scheme also includes
supplementary pensions.
WAHJ must, regardless of their age, become a member of the statutory funded scheme (called “professional
second pillar pension fund”) in addition to the PAYG pension scheme. Professional pension funds are not organised
by the employer and individuals may join the fund of their choice.
In 2000, the pension reform separated insured persons into two categories according to the age of the workers
at the time of the reform. The first remained only in the statutory PAYG scheme (“first pillar”). The second were
enrolled in the statutory funded scheme (“second pillar”).
“Different types of pension schemes are usually grouped into two, three, four or more pillars of the pension
system. There is however no universally agreed classification. Many pension systems distinguish between
statutory, statutory funded, occupational and individual pension schemes” (European Commission 2015, Vol.1:
277). For the purpose of this report, we use the term PAYG statutory public pension schemes, i.e. “pension
schemes where current contributions finance current pension expenditure” (European Commission 2015,
Vol.1:277).
35
34
33
32
Many ESPN experts use the term “second pillar” to (mostly) refer to fully funded defined contribution plans
with independent investment management. The second pillar can cover a variety of statutory funded pension
schemes, “access to which is based on legislation”. “In statutory funded schemes, part of participants’ social
security contributions is converted into funded assets, typically administered by authorised private fund
managers”. (European Commission 2015, Vol. 1:278). In some other cases second pillar schemes are voluntary.
In the case of Slovenia, for instance, the “second pillar” comprises statutory funded schemes only for some
categories of workers, including WAHJ, but also various voluntary schemes organised by employers and regulated
by employment contracts or collective agreements.
36
In nearly all cases, these employers are public companies.
23
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0026.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
One of the exceptions is Croatia
37
, which has statutory funded pension scheme for workers
under a certain age, including WAHJ.
Employees working in arduous jobs typically pay supplementary contributions, compared
to ordinary workers, on their gross salary: the difference can vary between 1.5% and 11%,
depending on the countries, or within the same country according to the category of
WAHJ
38
.
As for the second cluster, special pension schemes for WAHJ are mostly part of the
statutory PAYG scheme. The only exceptions are Bulgaria and Slovenia, where WAHJ
employers make a mandatory contribution to the funded schemes. In most of the countries
the latter schemes are funded by both employers and employees (except for PL and BG)
and in some cases there is supplementary funding from the social security budget (e.g.
AT, BG, PL, SI). For instance, in Bulgaria the contributions to the supplementary funded
schemes are paid only by employers: 12% for “labour category I” and 7% for “labour
category II”. In Poland, employers pay a supplementary contribution of 1.5% to the
Bridging Pensions Fund which is also financed by a state budget subsidy. In Austria, both
special pension schemes are funded by a mix of social insurance contributions and
resources from the largely tax-financed federal budget. Pension schemes for miners and
seafarers are, in most of the countries, statutory PAYG schemes (e.g. DE, PL). For instance,
in Poland the source of funding is the Social Insurance Fund
39
.
Employers’ contributions for WAHJ are usually higher than those for ordinary workers, and
can range from around 1.5% to 26% depending on the category, the length of the
contributory period (e. g. HR, MK, RO, RS) and on the pillar to be funded (e.g. HR). For
instance, in Croatia the employer’s additional contribution rate depends on whether the
WAHJ is covered only by the statutory PAYG scheme or also by the mandatory funded
pension scheme, as well as on the length of the pension contributory period. It can vary
between 4.86% and 17.58% according to the length of the contributory period for first
public pillar WAHJ pension
40
. In some countries there has been a tendency over the past
decade to decrease the level of employers’ contribution rates (e.g. RO
41
).
2.2 Compensating for the absence of specific WAHJ provisions: early
retirement rules and social protection benefits
This section addresses the main policy instruments providing early exit from the labour
market in three groups of countries: (a) those that do not have special pension provisions
37
Regarding right of participation in a “multi-pillar system” (according to the terminology used by the Croatian
ESPN report) there are three situations that should be differentiated between: 1) all persons under the age of 40
(either at the time of the 2002 reform or at the time of becoming an insuree) have to participate in the two-pillar
mandatory system, i. e. both in the statutory PAYG scheme and the statutory funded scheme; 2) persons aged
between 40 and 50 at the time of the reform can choose between staying within the PAYG scheme or joining the
new “two-pillar mandatory system”; and 3) persons over 50 have to remain within the PAYG scheme only.
38
For instance, in Greece, WAHJ and their employers pay a total of 45.66% of their gross salary in contributions,
compared to 40.06% for ordinary workers. The additional contributions paid by WAHJ in comparison to other
workers amount to 2.2% paid by employees to the PAYG pension, and 0.75% for the supplementary pension
within the statutory PAYG scheme. A further special contribution of 1% is paid on top of the additional
contributions by workers employed in specific arduous and hazardous jobs such as in underground mines and
lignite mines, as well as those working in airborne or underwater activities. In Croatia, WAHJ who have only PAYG
pensions pay a pension contribution rate of 20%. Those who are subject both to the PAYG scheme (defined
benefits) and the mandatory funded scheme (defined contributions) pay 15% to the former and 5% to the latter
scheme.
39
Miners who claim miners’ pensions cannot be members of open pension funds in the statutory funded schemes.
40
In Greece, the additional contributions paid by WAHJ employers are set at 1.4 % for the main pension and at
1.25% for the supplementary pension within the PAYG scheme. In Romania, employers’ contribution rates differ
according to the category of arduous and hazardous work conditions: 25.8% of taxable income for special work
conditions, 20.8% for difficult work conditions and 15.8% for normal work conditions.
This downward tendency – in the RO case - refers to all social contributions for pensions. As a consequence, it
has also affected the level of social contributions payable for arduous and hazardous work; yet it is not specific
to these.
41
24
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0027.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
for WAHJ (CH, DK, IE, LI, MT, NL, SE, UK); (b) countries that do have special pension
provisions, but only for a narrow category of WAHJ (BE, DE, CZ, CY, HU, IS, LU, NO); and
(c) countries that have special pensions for a broad category of WAHJ, but which are
accessible only to workers employed in arduous and hazardous conditions before a certain
date (LT, LV, SK), or where these schemes are in a transitional stage (FI (as of 2017) and
SI). In other words: these are countries where the absence of specific WAHJ provisions
may be compensated for through early retirement rules and other social protection
benefits.
All these countries provide a mix of policy instruments which are formally targeted at all
workers but are in practice likely to be more often used by WAHJ. The section assesses
mainly three sets of provisions: early retirement and disability pensions (Section 2.3.1),
sickness and occupational injury benefits (2.3.2) and unemployment schemes (2.3.3). A
more detailed overview of early exit options other than pension provisions specifically
targeted at WAHJ can be found in Annex 4.
2.2.1 Early retirement rules and disability/invalidity pensions
Early retirement schemes within the statutory pension system are available in all of the 35
countries except in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Most countries have
considerably tightened or even closed down early retirement schemes over the past two
decades (e.g. AT, DK, FI, IE, NO, SE). In many countries, early retirement is subject to
eligibility conditions relating to age and contributory period which do not considerably differ
from the full retirement conditions (e.g. CH, DK, IS, IE, LT, LV, MT, NO, NL, SE). The legal
early retirement age in these countries is, on average, 2-4 years before the SPA and the
contributory period is not considerably shorter than for the full old-age pension. For
instance, in Malta the legal retirement age is 61 years for a 40 years’ contribution history,
while the
SPA is 62 years with a contributory period of 40
years. In Denmark there is a
voluntary early retirement scheme (VERP) funded on a contributory basis and through
general taxation. The pensionable age for this scheme will be rising from 60 to 64 years
and the SPA from 64 to 67, by 2023. In the Netherlands early retirement is not allowed
under the statutory pension system but can be provided through collective agreements
where rules vary considerably. Collectively negotiated occupational pension schemes
followed the example of the statutory pension, and most of them enacted the pensionable
age at 67
42
.
In most countries, early retirement triggers penalties. In Lithuania and Estonia, for
example, the pension is reduced by 0.4% for each month of early retirement. The reduced
pension amount is paid for the full period of retirement. In Latvia an ordinary worker
receives only 50% of the full pension until the SPA. For WAHJ employed before 1996 in
Latvia there is a favourable condition allowing such workers to retire 2 years before the
SPA with 15-20-25 years of work experience and receive 100% pension. In the Czech
Republic, retiring one year before the SPA (62 for men and 60 for women) reduces the
pension by about 4-6%, depending on the personal calculation basis and the length of the
contributory period.
Eligibility conditions and funding rules for disability pensions equally vary among countries.
Usually these pensions are granted after an individual medical assessment and consist of
flat rate amounts (e.g. IE); in other cases, they are calculated on the basis of earnings or
household situation (e.g. DK) or the contributory period (e.g. LV). In Denmark there is also
a strict eligibility condition relating to age: persons under 40 years of age cannot apply for
a disability pension but instead undergo a process focusing on assessing the person’s work
42
In Norway, the legal early retirement age is 62, which is 8 years lower than the SPA at 70, but this pension is
subject to strict eligibility conditions on accumulated pension rights. In Latvia and Lithuania, which restricted
WAHJ access to special pension provisions only for those employed before 1996 (LV) and 1995 (LT), the early
retirement age does not considerably differ from the SPA. In Latvia, pension legislation allows early retirement 2
years prior to the SPA (63 years in 2017) for a contributory period of 30 years. Likewise, in Lithuania, workers
can retire 5 years prior to the SPA, with a 30-year contributory period.
25
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0028.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ability. Moreover, a new disability pension (SDP) has been implemented since 2014, which
is specifically targeted at workers five years before reaching the SPA, providing an
accelerated administrative procedure for applying for a disability pension.
2.2.2 Sickness and occupational injury benefits
There are short-term or long-term benefits related to occupational sickness and injuries
and resulting disabilities. In some cases, the difference between invalidity/disability
benefits and invalidity/disability pensions is that the latter are part of the pension system
while the former are part of the health system, occupational injury funds etc. For instance,
in 2003 Sweden replaced the disability pension by sickness cash benefits and separated
disability pensions from old age pensions, the former now falling under the universal
sickness insurance.
Sickness and injury benefits are in most cases temporary and can act as bridging benefits,
pending permanent ones such as invalidity and old-age pensions. For instance, in Ireland,
workers who (a) receive Illness Benefit for a year, (b) are unable to work because of long-
term illness or disability, and (c) are likely to be unable to work for 12 months, can transfer
to a long-term invalidity pension. In Germany occupational illness and accident benefits
and services are provided by the statutory occupational accident insurance. If rehabilitation
measures are not possible or ineffective, the insured employees can claim a reduced
earning capacity pension
43
.
In some countries, these benefits are subject to strict conditionality (e.g. IE, UK). In the
UK, disabled workers can claim Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). This allowance
replaced the incapacity benefit and the severe disablement allowance. The ESA is
contributory and/or income-related (means tested). It requires a Work Capability
Assessment to be carried out by a private contractor using standard assessment rules. The
emphasis is put on retaining people at work and getting them back to work through regular
medical assessments of “fitness” and work-focused interviews.
2.2.3 Unemployment benefits
Unemployment benefits represent a significant early exit option only in a few countries
(e.g. BE, LU). Belgium provides early labour market exit for WAHJ through the scheme of
unemployment benefit with employers’ supplement (see Section 1.2.3), through which
WAHJ are entitled to retire as of 58 years (with 35 contributory years of contributory
period). However, since mid-2015 such schemes have been considerably tightened and
already over the last decade their general use has been declining significantly in relative
terms and is scarcely used by the 50-59 age group. In Luxembourg the pre-retirement
scheme is an instrument to prevent unemployment, and falls under the unemployment
regulation. It can be considered as “benefits for the older unemployed” which can be
received for a maximum of three years.
In most countries, unemployment benefits are short-term and subject to activation
measures. For instance, in the UK an unemployed person is able to claim a contributory
jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) for up to six months, and income-related JSA as a top-up
and/or thereafter. Claimants are expected to actively seek work and there are elaborate
activation measures in place to ensure that they do so. In Estonia, the new work ability
allowance scheme is gradually replacing the incapacity for work pension scheme, and those
with partial loss of work capacity have to be registered with the Unemployment Insurance
Fund and may be required to participate in active labour market measures to receive their
benefit. In Cyprus, persons entitled to an unemployment benefit who do not satisfy the
insurance conditions for an old-age pension at the age of 63, are allowed to receive
unemployment/sickness benefits up to the date on which they satisfy the relevant
43
In Lithuania, the Social Insurance of Accidents at Work and Occupational Diseases Scheme provides a lump
sum and short-term benefits but also long-term regular compensation in cases of permanent incapacity. It acts
as a supplementary long-term benefit over and above the general social insurance disability pension.
26
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0029.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
insurance conditions, but only until the age of 65. In some cases, the benefit can thus be
used to enable early exit from the labour market.
3
Retirement patterns and the retirement income of workers in
arduous or hazardous jobs
This part of the Synthesis Report is concerned with the actual retirement pathways which
workers in arduous and hazardous jobs follow in the 35 countries under scrutiny. Section
3.1 identifies the policy measures used in the different countries, and the number of
workers that have access to them. Section 3.2 describes the main characteristics of the
retirement pattern of WAHJ: the focus is on the effective retirement age of WAHJ, as
compared with that of ordinary workers. Section 3.3 provides information on the level of
income of WAHJ: we focus on pension benefits, comparing the benefits provided to WAHJ
(through special schemes, special rules of early and/or disability benefits) with the pension
benefits provided for ordinary workers. Section 3.4 discusses the more recent trends in the
retirement patterns of WAHJ.
3.1 Retirement patterns of workers in arduous and hazardous jobs
This section assesses the implementation of the end-of-career policy mix for WAHJ. An
important caveat applies though: as discussed in Section 1.1.1, in many countries empirical
evidence and relevant statistical data are very limited. Very few studies provide systematic
and complete information; when data are available, these are often incomplete regarding
at least some WAHJ categories. Consequently, we provide tables with a focus on a selection
of countries, i.e. those that provide more or less systematic information. As discussed in
Section 2.1, in some countries special pension schemes are the main tool to regulate the
retirement pathway of WAHJ (AT, BG, FI, FR (as of 2017), EE, ES, PL, and SI). Other
countries provide special pension schemes only for some categories (e.g. CZ, DE, IS, NO).
Table 5 gives an overview of the countries for which information on the number of
beneficiaries is available; some of them provide special schemes for WAHJ in general (AT,
BG, FR, FI (as of 2017), EE, ES, LT, LU, PL), others only for some occupations (e.g. CZ,
DE, IS, NO).
The significance of special pension schemes for WAHJ depends on the specific occupational
groups (e.g. miners in Poland), on the interaction with the general social protection rules
and the economic situation In Austria, for instance, special schemes for WAHJ are
increasingly important, as a consequence of the more stringent conditions to access early
retirement schemes. The number of WAHJ can be significantly affected by economic
downturns in certain sectors (e.g. RS).
27
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0030.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
Table 5:
Number of beneficiaries in a selection of countries with special
pension schemes for WAHJ
Country
AT
Main retirement pathways and number of beneficiaries
Heavy labour pensions: 10,860 pensioners in 2016. Special retirement
pension after heavy night work: 1,566 pensioners in 2015. Early retirement:
62,865 pensioners in 2016.
Professional pension funds: 264,763 beneficiaries in 2015. WAHJs receiving
pensions for old age and service from the public pension fund: 91,734
persons in 2015.
Superannuated pensions or pensions with favourable conditions: about 5%
of all new retirees (including incapacity for work pensioners).
Miners with a “major disability” pension represent 6% of total disability
pensions and 1.2% of the total pension costs; seafarers only 1.4% of the
total disability pensions but 1.5% of the total cost of pensions.
About 500,000 workers in arduous and hazardous conditions.
2 % of all old-age pensioners.
Pre-retirement scheme (“pré-retraite”, which is part of the unemployment
scheme) for night and shift work. It accounted for 413 beneficiaries at end
of 2015.
About 1/3 of all public sector employees exit the labour force via the disability
scheme before turning 62. Early retirement scheme for about 30,000 seamen
and fishermen represent less than 1% of the total work force and below 2 %
of the private sector work force.
206,000 ex-miner pensioners. 13,700 bridging pensioners.
45,871 insurees in the compulsory Supplementary Pension Insurance Fund on
20 April 2016.
BG
EE
ES
FR
LT
LU
NO
PL
SI
Table 6 provides information on WAHJ pensioners in the countries providing separate
pension rules for this category of workers. These special rules were used to provide easier
exit paths to retirement, with a loose link with the existence of hard working conditions. It
can be estimated that WAHJ pensioners represent between 5 and 8% of all pensioners in
the countries under scrutiny (Table 6) with the exception of Greece.
28
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0031.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
Table 6:
Number of beneficiaries in a selection of countries with separate
rules for WAHJ in the general schemes
Country
EL
Main retirement pathways and number of beneficiaries
227,718 WAHJ pensioners in 2015, i.e. 27.94% of the total number of 815,046
old age and disability pensioners covered by the main Social Insurance Fund (IKA)
for salaried private sector workers, or 10.1% of the total number of 2,258,463
old age and disability pensioners.
4,200 current miners who are expected to take up the WAHJ rules in the second
half of 2016.
88,189 WAHJ pensioners. The yearly share of WAHJ new pensioners in the total
number of new pensioners ranges between 6 and 8%.
The number of new annual benefits prior to 2011 varied between 1,500 and 3,900
(including miners and artists)
44
that is 1.0-2.0% of all new pensions over this
period. Early retirement at 55 has practically stopped; it has significantly
decreased below 60; and older workers increasingly stay in the labour market.
Special provision for long-term seafarers to retire at age 60, but this is used by
very few individuals.
811 WAHJ pensions beneficiaries in the private sector in 2016
The number of newly-granted old-age pensions for WAHJ in absolute figures has
been is going down from 1,326 persons in 2009 to 233 in 2015, as well as the
share of such pensioners among all new pensioners – from 3.5% in 2009 to 1.4%
in 2015. There were 74,024 persons in 2015 who received disability pensions.
11% of the total number of pensioners used the “risk-related early retirement”
scheme in 2014. Out of 2,541 “risk-related early retirements” in 2014, 71% were
old-age pension beneficiaries, 24% were family pension beneficiaries (survivor
pensions) and 5% were disability pension beneficiaries.
18,800 WAHJ pensioners out of 1.9 million old-age pensioners. The vast majority
of WAHJ pensioners exited the labour market through early retirement schemes
tailored to them (86.9%), one out of four WAHJ pensioners overall. Only 5.7%
WAHJ pensioners retired through the pathway of the statutory old-age pension.
Approximately 0.36% of the total employed population (30,000 persons), working
mainly in the health, mining and energy sectors, are considered as exposed to
difficult work conditions, while these jobs are expected to become jobs with
normal working conditions by 2018. No data is available for the category of special
working conditions.
In December 2014 127,638 pensioners were retired under the WAHJ scheme
(23% female pensioners); i.e. 7.3% in the total number of pensioners
45
.
In 2015 1.165 or 10.3% (1.165 or 15.8% for men and 218 or 2.8% for women)
of WAHJ pensioners of the total new old age pensioners
The number of registered workers classified as WAHJ under a service contract
was 66,928 as of July 2012. While this number represents a very tiny fraction of
the more than 20 million employed, estimates of the actual number run as high
as 1.5 million. The huge discrepancy is due in part to employers’ desire to avoid
the higher social security contributions that they are required by law to pay for
employees officially registered as WAHJ.
CZ
HR
HU
IS
IT
LV
MK
PT
RO
RS
SI
TR
44
Central Administration of National Pension Insurance
https://www.onyf.hu/m/pdf/korai%20nyugdjak%20szolgidvel.pdf).
45
PIO Fund, Annual Statistical Bulletin 2015.
29
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0032.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
Other countries have activated yet different pathways. In those countries with no or
narrow
46
special provisions for WAHJ, pathways of these workers are governed by general
pension schemes. This is the case for Sweden with the key role played in the past by early
retirement programmes. In Lithuania, the number of early retirement pension recipients
increased by more than 60% since 2008, and in 2016 accounts for about 2% of all old age
pensioners. In other countries WAHJ exit the labour market mainly through unemployment
benefits (BE, LU, UK), disability benefits (CH, FI, SK) and other policy instruments such as
leaves and partial retirement, sickness benefits, and occupational injury benefits. For
instance, in Ireland workers with hard working conditions are likely to use Illness benefits
and Invalidity pensions to exit the labour market (see Table 7).
Table 7:
Number of beneficiaries in a selection of countries without special
provision for WAHJ
Country
DK
Main retirement pathways and number of beneficiaries
By the end of 2015 only 427 persons had applied for Seniority Disability
Pensions (SDP). 105,000 pensioners on disability pension. 80,000
pensioners on voluntary early retirement (VERP).
In 2015 about 25% of new retirees used the disability path. At the
beginning of the 2000s, about 30% of new retirees used the various early
pension routes, 40% used the disability pathway, and the remaining 30
percent were granted an old age pension. In 2014 the early exit routes
were closed, and 30 % of new pensioners were granted a disability pension.
At the end of 2014 there were 57,024 recipients of Illness Benefit and
54,223 recipients of Invalidity Pension.
Disability pensioners make up 10.4% of people of working age. WAHJ are
a relatively small part of this group.
2,089 Invalidity Pensions by the end of 2015 (5.7% of 36 680 employees)
Early retirement pension recipients increased by more than 60% since
2008, and in 2016 they account for about 2% of all old age pensioners.
From 1985 to 2008 the proportion of early retirees in the population aged
30-64 increased from 8 to 12 percent, but with great variations in inflow.
However there has been a strong decline during the last ten years, both
trends generally reflecting policy changes.
Increase in older claimants of Employment and Support Allowance since
2011. Also an increase in the proportion of JSA claimants. This trend is
likely to continue for women as their retirement age has been increased.
ESA claims increased from 579,000 in 2010 to 2.23 million in 2014/15.
FI
IE
IS
LI
LT
SE
UK
3.2 Effective Retirement age of workers in arduous and hazardous jobs
The national experts’ reports provide some information about the age when WAHJ actually
withdraw from the labour market. Most countries have not developed systematic
monitoring of the exit of WAHJ from the labour market. It should be stressed that in some
countries, pensioners continue to work (e.g. EE, LT, LV, RS). For instance, in Estonia, more
than half of the people who receive WAHJ pensions and about one quarter of old-age
pensioners also continue to work. Table 8 summarises the information on the retirement
age from the best-well-documented countries.
46
A narrow scope in terms of WAHJ categories or timing of the scheme.
30
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0033.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
Table 8:
Effective retirement age of WAHJ compared with the effective
retirement age under ordinary old age schemes: selection of countries
Country
AT
CZ
EE
Effective retirement age for
WAHJ
60.5
55/54 (miners 2015/2017)
62/58 (Superannuated pensions)
56/55 (level 1)
60/60 (level 2)
59.1 seafarers
57.5 miners (male)
51.7 invalidity
61.9 part-time
61.7 unemployment (data for 2011)
58.1 (level 1)
60.3 (level 2)
50 (miners, and specific performance
age related professions)
54.5
50 (miners, and specific performance
age related professions)
62.8 disability benefits
64 sickness benefits
2015: 58 male
57 female
57.5/55.5 (assuming maximum
active service increment of five years
is achieved)
Effective retirement age under
ordinary old age schemes
63.2
62/59 (men/women 2014)
63/62
ES
FI
63.5 (male)
63.7
LV
PT
RS
61.5
63.5% of all workers retire after the
age of 60
65.0 (male), 61 female
SE
SI
TR
64.6
60 male
58 female
60/58 (male/female)
Two categories of countries can be distinguished in which the average effective retirement
age of WAHJ is lower than the effective retirement age of workers who are covered by the
general old age pension scheme. The first category primarily comprises countries having
special pension provisions for WAHJ (separate rules and/or schemes) which provide lower
pensionable ages for WAHJ (see Sections 2.1 and 2.2). In this category the effective
retirement age for workers in arduous and hazardous jobs is on average 3 to 4 years lower
than for ordinary workers (AT, EE, ES, LV, PT). In Spain, for example, male coal miners
retire on average at the age of 57.5 while for male workers covered by the general old age
scheme retire at 63.5. WAHJ rules for miners working at great depths provide a guaranteed
pension 8 years prior to the SPA in the Czech Republic. However, a new law voted in 2016
extends this even to 10 years prior to the SPA, from October 2016.
In the second category of countries, there is not a large difference between the effective
retirement age of WAHJ and that of ordinary workers. This applies to two cases: a)
countries which do not provide any specific pension provisions tailored to WAHJ; and b)
countries which have pension provisions for WAHJ but where pensions’ income is
inadequate (e.g. EE, RS).
47
With regard to the first case, in Sweden for instance, workers
access retirement through old age and sickness schemes at the same age while workers
with disability have an earlier exit (about 20 months earlier). With regard to the second
case, the reason for the very similar career path is the inadequacy of pension benefits:
workers in arduous and hazardous jobs have special rights but they stay in the labour
market because they need to improve old age protection and to receive an adequate
47
Their adequacy is primarily measured by pensions’ ability to prevent poverty, to replace the earnings people
had before retiring and to ensure a living standard on par with younger age groups (European Commission 2015,
Vol. I).
31
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0034.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
income. For instance, in Serbia the average contribution record of workers is about 34
years, while that for the workers who belong to the special scheme for WAHJ is 32 years.
3.3 Income situation of the retired workers in arduous and hazardous
jobs
This section provides a comparative reading of the income situation of workers in arduous
and hazardous jobs compared with “regular” workers. The information provided in the
national experts’ reports varies: most of the experts refer to average absolute benefits (in
the national currency), very few used replacement rates, while others provide a qualitative
assessment.
Table 9 distinguishes between three groups of countries. The first group comprises
countries where WAHJ enjoy more favourable conditions (e.g. higher benefits) than the
average pensioners or the pensioners covered by the general old age scheme. These
include some Southern European countries (PT and EL), Continental countries (e.g. AT and
LU) and Eastern countries (e.g. BG, CZ, HR). However, the higher level of benefits for
WAHJ needs to be assessed with some caution because higher pensions are often related
to higher contributions (see Section 2): workers (in EL, MK, RS) and their employers (in
EL, ES, HR, MK, PT, RO, RS, SK, TR) pay higher contributions than the ordinary workers
and their employers. In addition, these benefits are often paid for a period of time after
retirement that is much shorter as a consequence of lower life expectancy than for other
occupational categories (e.g. CZ, HR, NO).
Table 9:
Retirement benefits for WAHJ compared to those for ordinary
pensioners
Higher benefits than
general pension
schemes
AT, BE, BG, CZ, EL, HR, LU,
MK, PT, RS, TR
Lower benefits than
general pension
schemes
CH, CY, DE, IS, IE, IT, LI,
LT, MT, NO, SE, SK, UK
Average benefits or
mixed situation
DK, EE, ES, FI, HU, LV, NL,
PL, RO, SI
In a second group of 13 countries benefits of WAHJ (special old age schemes, disability
benefits, early retirement, etc.) are below the average benefits of ordinary workers. This
is the case for Germany where benefits from the “reduced earning capacity pension” are
very low. In Lithuania the average amount of early retirement pension is 185 EUR, or 73%
of the average old age pension. In some cases, this low level of pensions is the result of
the application of the general rules for accruing pension benefits. In Italy, WAHJ are
entitled together with ordinary workers to the application of the Notional Defined
Contribution (NDC) rules for the calculation of pensions. The NDC system is applied to the
new entrants in the labour market after 1995. The NDC system applies actuarially neutral
coefficients to calculate pensions. These coefficients increase with retirement age. For
these workers, retiring five years prior to the pensionable age roughly implies a 20%
reduction of pension benefits. In the UK, if a WAHJ retires before the pensionable age they
would expect a lower pension.
The third group includes countries where the income situation of the WAHJ who exit the
labour market is largely the same of other workers. This is for example the case for
Romania, where the pension benefits received by a former WAHJ (through a legally reduced
age and contributory period) is comparable with the benefit received by an ordinary
pensioner. In some other countries the situation of WAHJ is mixed: for some categories,
retirement conditions are more favourable than those for ordinary workers; for other
categories they are less favourable. In Slovenia, average new pensions for WAHJ were
somewhat higher for men, and lower for women when compared to ordinary workers. This
is the case for old age (1.6% higher for men, 15.2% lower for women) and disability (1.1%
higher for men and 7.1% lower for women). In Spain special retirement conditions for
miners lead to pension benefits that are much higher than the general old age entitlements
32
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0035.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
(54% higher than the average pension), while sea workers have a considerably less
favourable situation.
3.4 More recent and ongoing developments in the retirement patterns
of WAHJ
Recent developments in the retirement pattern of WAHJ are consistent, at least in some
countries, with the reduction of the number of workers that have access to special rules
for WAHJ (e.g. EE, SK). This is partly related to the reforms tightening access to retirement,
or to economic changes and the more limited role of these occupations in the country’s
economy. In Greece, the percentage of WAHJ pensioners (out of the total number of old
age and disability pensioners) covered by all social insurance funds, has only slightly
declined, from 10.5% to 10.1%, between 2009 and 2015. By contrast, there has been a
significant decline of WAHJ pensioners covered by the main social insurance fund for
salaried private sector workers (IKA): from 37.5% to 27.9%. Changes in early retirement
rules introduced in Poland in the 2000s resulted in a reduction in the number of people
receiving early retirement transfer as well as an increase in the employment rate in the
age group 55-64.
In very few countries (e.g. CZ, TR), special rules for WAHJ have been relaxed and/or
expanded (resulting, in some cases, in a growing number of beneficiaries). In Italy the
number of WAHJ that will have access to special pension rules is expected to broaden as
of 2018 because of the implementation of new rules (Annex 5).
The general tendency in many countries is towards increasing effective retirement age and
tightening conditions to access schemes that allow for an earlier exit from the labour
market. This is mainly the consequence of policy mixes that are more oriented towards
prolonging working life through tightening eligibility conditions, and only in few countries
through measures improving employability and working conditions (e.g. DK, FI, FR, NO).
In other countries, rehabilitation has been the focus, so the symptoms are being treated
rather than preventive actions being taken (e.g. SE). In the UK the tightening of the
conditions for unemployment and disability schemes has increased employment rates for
older workers. In Belgium the strategy of allowing a reduction in weekly working hours for
older workers, maintaining income, in the health and social care sector, was also a
retention strategy for a sector confronted with physically and mentally stressful jobs and
confronted with presumed or real shortages.
In conclusion, recent reforms have largely contributed to reducing the opportunities for
early exit from the labour market, even in the case of WAHJ. Data in some national experts’
reports indeed show increased employment rates for older cohorts of workers and a more
limited number of pensioners leaving the labour market early. Yet, quantitative data still
represent a caveat in assessing WAHJ pathways and especially adequacy of income. In
some countries, there has been an increase of the number of claimants of special WAHJ
benefits, which has however been counterbalanced by a reduction in the number of
disability and early retirement claimants. In general, WAHJ receive low levels of benefit
(pensions below the average level of general old age and disability benefits) or benefits
similar to ordinary workers, but for a shorter period of time (given their lower life
expectancy). This has led many WAHJ to postpone retirement and/or combine pensions
with income from labour.
33
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0036.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 1: PRESENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL POLICY
NETWORK (ESPN)
A. ESPN Network Management Team and Network Core Team
The European Social Policy Network (ESPN) is managed jointly by the Luxembourg Institute
of Socio-Economic Research (LISER) and the independent research company APPLICA, in
close association with the European Social Observatory.
The ESPN Network Management Team is responsible for the overall supervision and
coordination of the ESPN. It consists of five members:
NETWORK MANAGEMENT TEAM
Eric Marlier
(LISER, LU)
Project Director
Email: [email protected]
Hugh Frazer
(National University of Ireland Maynooth, IE)
Independent Experts’ Coordinator and Social Inclusion Leader
Email: [email protected]
Loredana Sementini
(Applica, BE)
Communication/events and IT Coordinator
Email: [email protected]
Bart Vanhercke
(European Social Observatory, BE)
Overall Social Protection Leader
Email: [email protected]
Terry Ward
(Applica, BE)
MISSOC Leader
Email: [email protected]
The ESPN Network Core Team provides high level expertise and inputs on specific aspects
of the ESPN’s work. It consists of 14 experts:
NETWORK CORE TEAM
The five members of the Network Management Team
and
Rita Baeten
(European Social Observatory, BE),
Healthcare and Long-term care
Leader
Marcel Fink
(Institute
for Advanced Studies, Austria),
MISSOC Users’ Perspective
Andy Fuller
(Alphametrics),
IT Leader
Anne-Catherine Guio
(LISER, LU),
Quantitative Analysis Leader, Knowledge Bank
Coordinator and Reference budget
Saskia Klosse
(University of Maastricht, NL),
MISSOC and International Social
Security Legal Expert
David Natali
(University of Bologna [IT] and European Social Observatory [BE]),
Pensions Leader
Monika Natter
(ÖSB, AT),
Peer Review Perspective
Stefán Ólafsson
(University of Iceland, IS),
MISSOC Users’ Perspective
Frank Vandenbroucke
(University of Leuven [KU Leuven]),
Decision-making
Perspective
34
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0037.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
B. ESPN National independent experts for social protection and social
inclusion (Country Teams)
AUSTRIA
Marcel Fink
(Institute
for Advanced Studies)
Expert in Social inclusion, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Monika Riedel
(Institute
for Advanced Studies)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Marcel Fink
BELGIUM
Ides(bald) Nicaise
(Research
Institute for Work and Society – HIVA, KULeuven)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Jozef Pacolet
(Research
Institute for Work and Society – HIVA, KULeuven)
Expert in Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Ides Nicaise
BULGARIA
George Bogdanov
(Hotline
ltd)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email: [email protected]
Lidia Georgieva
(Medical University Sofia)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Boyan Zahariev
(Open Society Foundation)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: George Bogdanov
CROATIA
Paul Stubbs
(The
Institute of Economics)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Ivana Vukorepa
(University
of Zagreb)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Siniša Zrinščak
(University
of Zagreb)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Paul Stubbs
35
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0038.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
CYPRUS
Christos Koutsampelas
(University of Cyprus)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Panos Pashardes
(University
of Cyprus)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Mamas Theodorou
(Open
University of Cyprus)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Panos Pashardes
CZECH REPUBLIC
Robert Jahoda
(Masaryk University)
Expert in Pensions
Email: [email protected]
Ivan Mal�½
(Masaryk
University)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Tomáš Sirovátka
(Masaryk
University)
Expert in Social inclusion (and Long-term care)
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Tomáš Sirovátka
DENMARK
Jon Kvist
(Roskilde University)
Expert in Social inclusion, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Kjeld Møller Pedersen
(University of Southern Denmark)
Expert in Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Jon Kvist
ESTONIA
Helen Biin
(Praxis)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Andres Võrk
(Praxis)
Expert in Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Andres Võrk
36
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0039.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
FINLAND
Laura Kalliomaa-Puha
(Social Insurance Institution of Finland - Kela)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Olli Kangas
(Social Insurance Institution of Finland - Kela)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Olli Kangas
FRANCE
Gaël Coron
(EHESP
French School of Public Health)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Gilles Huteau
(EHESP
French School of Public Health)
Expert in Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Blanche Le Bihan
(EHESP
French School of Public Health)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Michel Legros
(EHESP
French School of Public Health & National Observatory on
Poverty and Social Exclusion)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Michel Legros
GERMANY
Gerhard Bäcker
(University of Duisburg/Essen)
Expert in Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Walter Hanesch
(Hochschule Darmstadt – University of Applied Sciences)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Walter Hanesch
GREECE
Yiannis Sakellis
(Panteion University of Political and Social Sciences)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Menelaos Theodoroulakis
(Research Institute of Urban Environment and Human
Recourses)
Expert in Pensions and mental healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Dimitris Ziomas
(Greek National Centre for Social Research – EKKE)
Expert in Social inclusion and Long-term care
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Dimitris Ziomas
37
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0040.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
HUNGARY
Fruzsina Albert
(Hungarian
Academy of Sciences Center for Social Sciences and Károli
Gáspár University of the Reformed Church)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Róbert Iván Gál
(Demographic
Research Institute, Central Statistical Office and TÁRKI
Social Research Institute)
Expert in Pensions and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Fruzsina Albert
ICELAND
Tinna Ásgeirsdóttir
(University
of Iceland)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Stefán Ólafsson
(University
of Iceland)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Kolbeinm H. Stefánsson
(University
of Iceland and Statistics Iceland)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Stefán Ólafsson
IRELAND
Sara Burke
(Centre for Health Policy and Management, Trinity College Dublin)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email: [email protected]
Mary Daly
(University of Oxford)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Gerard Hughes
(School of Business, Trinity College Dublin)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Mary Daly
ITALY
Matteo Jessoula
(University
of Milano)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Emmanuele Pavolini
(Macerata
University)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Filippo Strati
(Studio
Ricerche Sociali - SRS)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Filippo Strati
38
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0041.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
LATVIA
Tana Lace
(Riga
Stradins University)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Feliciana Rajevska
(Vidzeme
University of Applied Sciences)
Expert in Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Feliciana Rajevska
LIECHTENSTEIN
Patricia Hornich
(Liechtenstein-Institut)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
Wilfried Marxer
(Liechtenstein-Institut)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Wilfried Marxer
LITHUANIA
Romas Lazutka
(Vilnius University)
Expert in Pensions and Social inclusion
Email: [email protected]
Arūnas Poviliūnas
(Vilnius University)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email: [email protected]
Laimute Zalimiene
(Vilnius University)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Arunas Poviliunas
LUXEMBOURG
Jozef Pacolet
(Research Institute for Work and Society, Catholic University Leuven)
Expert in Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Hugo Swinnen
(Independent social policy researcher)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Hugo Swinnen
39
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0042.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
FYR of MACEDONIA
Dragan Gjorgjev
(Institute of Public Health and Public Health Department at the
Medical Faculty)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Maja Gerovska Mitev
(Institute of Social Work and Social Policy, Faculty of Philosophy,
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Maja Gerovska Mitev
MALTA
Anna Borg
(University
of Malta)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Mario Vassallo
(University
of Malta)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Mario Vassallo
NETHERLANDS
Karen M. Anderson
(University
of Southampton)
Expert in Pensions and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Marieke Blommesteijn
(Regioplan
Policy Research)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Katrien de Vaan
(Regioplan
Policy Research)
Expert in Healthcare and support
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Marieke Blommesteijn
NORWAY
Axel West Pedersen
(Institute
for Social Research)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Anne Skevik Grødem
(Institute
for Social Research)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Marijke Veenstra
(Norwegian Social Research - NOVA)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Axel West Pedersen
40
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0043.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
POLAND
Agnieszka Chłoń-Domińczak
(Warsaw
School of Economics – SGH and Educational
Research Institute)
Expert in Pensions and Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Agnieszka Sowa
(Institute
of Labour and Social Affairs and Centre for Social and
Economic Research, CASE Foundation)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected].
Irena Topińska
(Centre
for Social and Economic Research, CASE Foundation)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Irena Topińska
PORTUGAL
Isabel Baptista
(Centro
de Estudos para a Intervenção Social - CESIS)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email: [email protected]
Pedro Perista
(Centro
de Estudos para a Intervenção Social - CESIS)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email: [email protected]
Céu Mateus
(Division
of Health Research, Lancaster University, Furness College)
Expert in Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Heloísa Perista
(Centro
de Estudos para a Intervenção Social - CESIS)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
Maria de Lourdes Quaresma
(Centro
de Estudos para a Intervenção Social - CESIS)
Expert in Long-term care and Pensions
Email: [email protected]
National coordination: Isabel Baptista
ROMANIA
Dana Otilia Farcasanu
(Foundation Centre for Health Policies and Services)
Expert in Healthcare (insurance and policies)
Email:
[email protected]
Luana Pop
(Faculty
of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Daniela Urse (Pescaru)
(Faculty
of Sociology and Social Work, University of
Bucharest)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Valentin Vladu
(Community
Care Foundation)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Luana Pop
41
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0044.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
SERBIA
Jurij Bajec
(Faculty of Economics)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Ljiljana Stokic Pejin
(Economics Institute Belgrade)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Ljiljana Stokic Pejin
SLOVAKIA
Rastislav Bednárik
(Institute
for Labour and Family Research)
Expert in Pensions and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Andrea Madarasová Gecková
(P.J. Safarik University in Kosice)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Daniel Gerbery
(Comenius
University)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Daniel Gerbery
SLOVENIA
Boris Majcen
(Institute for Economic Research)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Valentina Prevolnik Rupel
(Institute
for Economic Research)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Nada Stropnik
(Institute
for Economic Research)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Nada Stropnik
42
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0045.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
SPAIN
Ana Arriba Gonzáles de Durana
(University of Alcalá)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Francisco Javier Moreno Fuentes
(IPP-CSIC)
Expert in Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Vicente Marbán Gallego
(University
of Alcalá)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Julia Montserrat Codorniu
(Centre of Social Policy Studies)
Expert in Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Gregorio Rodríguez Cabrero
(University of Alcalá)
Expert in Social inclusion, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Gregorio Rodríguez Cabrero
SWEDEN
Johan Fritzell
(Stockholm
University and Karolinska Institutet)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Kenneth Nelson
(Stockholm University)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]
Joakim Palme
(Uppsala
University)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Pär Schön
(Stockholm
University and Karolinska Institutet)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Johan Fritzell
SWITZERLAND
Giuliano Bonoli
(Institut de Hautes Etudes en Administration Publique - IDHEAP)
Expert in Social inclusion, Healthcare, Long-term care and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Philipp Trein
(University of Lausanne)
Expert in Healthcare and Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Giuliano Bonoli
43
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0046.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
TURKEY
Fikret Adaman
(Bogazici University)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Dilek Aslan
(Hacettepe University)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Bekir Burcay Erus
(Bogazici
University)
Expert in Social inclusion and Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
Serdar Sayan
(TOBB
Economics and Technology University)
Expert in Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Fikret Adaman
UNITED KINGDOM
Fran Bennett
(University
of Oxford)
Expert in Social inclusion
Email:
[email protected]; [email protected]
Jonathan Bradshaw
(University of York)
Expert in Social inclusion and Pensions
Email:
[email protected]
Caroline Glendinning
(University
of York)
Expert in Long-term care
Email:
[email protected]
Alan Maynard
(University
of York)
Expert in Healthcare
Email:
[email protected]
National coordination: Jonathan Bradshaw
44
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0047.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 2: COUNTRIES’ OFFICIAL ABBREVIATIONS
A. EU countries
EU countries prior to
2004, 2007 and 2013
Enlargements (EU-15)
BE
DK
DE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
LU
NL
AT
PT
FI
SE
UK
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Ireland
Greece
Spain
France
Italy
Luxembourg
The Netherlands
Austria
Portugal
Finland
Sweden
United Kingdom
EU countries that
joined in 2004, 2007
or 2013
2004 Enlargement
CZ
Czech Republic
EE
Estonia
CY
Cyprus
LV
Latvia
LT
Lithuania
HU
Hungary
MT
Malta
PL
Poland
SI
Slovenia
SK
Slovakia
2007 Enlargement
BG
Bulgaria
RO
Romania
2013 Enlargement
HR
Croatia
In EU averages, countries are weighted by their population sizes.
B. Non-EU countries covered by the ESPN
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (MK), Iceland (IS), Liechtenstein (LI), Norway
(NO), Serbia (RS), Switzerland (CH), Turkey (TR).
45
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0048.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 3: SPECIAL PENSION SCHEMES FOR WAHJ
Country
AT
Special pension schemes for
WAHJ
1) Heavy labour pension.
2) Special retirement pension for
those who worked heavy night work.
Unemployment benefit scheme with
employers’ supplement for arduous
jobs
Pension schemes for:
1)
First category of WAHJ.
2)
Second category of WAHJ.
Pensionable age
1) 60 years.
2) 57 years for men and 52 years for
women.
58 years
BE
BG
CZ
DE
EE
Special scheme for miners.
1) Old-age statutory pension for
long-term employed miners.
2) Old-age statutory pension for
seafarers.
1) Old-age Pensions Under
Favourable Conditions.
2) Superannuated Pension scheme.
1) 55 years target for both genders
in 2037 (as of 2016 gradual increase
by 2 months for men and 4 months
for women per year2) 60 years
target for both genders in 2037 (as
of 2016 a gradual increase by 2
months for men and 4 months for
women per year).
57 years
1) 60-62 years.
2) 56 years.
1) 5-10 years before the
SPA
(63 in
2016 for both genders).
2) 10-25 years required working in
arduous and hazardous conditions;
for some occupations not earlier than
5 years before the SPA.
1) 60 years.
2) 55 years.
N/A; 38 years of contributory period
in arduous and hazardous conditions.
1) 55 years.
ES
FI
FR
HU
IS
LT
LU
NO
PL
1) Coalminers’ scheme.
2) Sea Workers’ scheme.
“Years-of-service” scheme (as of
2017).
1) “Compte de prévention de
pénibilité”.
2) Early retirement package for
asbestos workers.
1) General WAHJ scheme for workers
in over 700 professions is being
phased out from 2015 (no new
eligibilities can be established)
2) Special schemes for miners and
ballet dancers.
Seamen’s pension scheme.
Compensation for special working
conditions scheme.
Early retirement shift and night
workers scheme (paid by the
unemployment system).
1) Seamen’s pension scheme.
2) Fishermen’s pension scheme.
1) Bridging pension schemes.
2) Miners’ pension schemes.
Supplementary occupational pension
for WAHJ.
1) Depending on SPA as a function of
time served as WAHJ (gender
differences).
2) Depending on length of
contributory period (25 years).
60 years.
SPA (gender differences).
57 years.
SI
1) 60 years.
2) 60 years.
1) 55 years (women) and 60 years
(men) (general rule).
2) 50-55 years.
Ranging between 52 and 56 for men
and women
46
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0049.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 4: Compensating the absence of specific WAHJ provisions
Country
BE
Early exit options other than pension provisions
specifically targeted at WAHJ
Unemployment benefit with employer supplement (RCC)
Time credit for WAHJ (part-time employment)
Reduced weekly working hours for older workers, maintaining income in
the large sector of health and social care
Invalidity insurance
Early retirement scheme
Early retirement benefit (from the voluntary individual funded schemes
“third pillar”)
Early retirement pension
Reduced earnings capacity pension
Sickness and injury benefits
Disability pension
Flexi job
Voluntary early retirement pay scheme (VERP)
Work incapacity pensions (until 2015)
Work ability allowance (from 2016)
Disability pensions
Disability pensions
Illness benefits
Disability pensions
Occupational injury benefits
Disability pensions
Part-time jobs
Early retirement
Compensation for lost capacity of work
Early retirement
Pre-retirement (unemployment scheme)
General Old age pensions (special rules)
Disability pensions
Combination of retirement (with full pension) and employment (full salary)
Early exit through a loophole initially intended for persons working in
“manual” jobs, an escape clause is being used by persons who by that age
would have paid enough social security contributions to qualify for a full
pension.
Flexible leave arrangements and part-time retirement
Early retirement (set through sectoral collective agreements)
Ordinary old age pensions
Disability pensions
Special schemes (with earlier pensionable age) for specific groups
Disability pensions
Work-accident and sickness insurance programmes
Early retirement
Disability pension
Disability pension
Jobseeker’s Allowance
Employment Support Allowance
CH
CZ
DE
DK
EE
FI
HU
IE
IS
LI
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL
NO
RO
SE
SI
TR
UK
47
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0050.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 5. Recent trends in the retirement pattern of WAHJ in
selected countries
Country
AT
BE
Trends
Increased number of HLP and decline in early retirement.
Complete abolition of early exit via unemployment for older workers not available
for work and early retirement system of unemployment benefit with an employer
supplement for age category 50-54, substantial reduction for the age group 55-59
and reduction for age group 60+.
Gradual increase in the retirement age for WAHJs starting in 2016. Even with the
reform WAHJs will be able to retire 5 or 10 years earlier than ordinary workers.
The number of retired WAHJs is decreasing.
The new law decreases retirement age for miners (WAHJ) 7 years below SPA
(originally was 5 years). Further on, miners may utilise the standard early
retirement rules, which would decrease their retirement age to even 10 years
bellow the SPA (originally 8 years).
Decline in the number of disability pensioners.
Decline in the number of new WAHJ pensioners in the last ten years, reflecting the
changing occupational structure of the economy.
In 2014, the majority of male new WAHJ pensioners from (62% or 1,769 persons)
were granted a full pension as WAHJ; 32% (or 913 persons) of male new
pensioners from AHJ were granted an early full pension as WAHJ; a small minority
(6% or 171 persons) of male new WAHJ pensioners were granted a reduced
pension; as regards female new WAHJ pensioners the vast majority (97.8% or
1,019 persons) were granted a reduced pension as WAHJ.
In the period 2009-15, in absolute terms there has been some stability. As a
percentage of the total population of old age and disability pensioners, there has
been a decline from 10.5% to 10.1% or in terms of the total number of old age
and disability pensioners covered by the main Social Insurance Fund (IKA) for
salaried private sector employees there has been a significant decline from 37%
to 27%.
The 2014/2013 year-on-year variation in the number of retirement pensions for
seafarers shows a drop of 13.83%, while the number of pensions for coal miners
has risen 9.92%.
The WAHJ system is being phased out. Since 2015 no new eligibilities can be
accumulated. Eligibilities collected before 2015 can still be converted to preferential
retirement age subject to the original conditions.
At the end of 2014 there were 57,024 recipients of Illness Benefit or 8 per cent
less than the 61,845 recipients at the end of 2005. At the end of 2014 there were
54,223 recipients of Invalidity Pension or 7 per cent less of the 58,352 recipients
at the end of 2005.
Projected increase of beneficiaries (from 811 in 2016 up to 3 084 in 2023) due to
broader definition of WAHJ since 2018.
Limited use of early retirement system.
Special transitional rules for workers who entered the labour market before 1996.
The number of workers involved in the scheme is going to decline.
Subsidised early retirement through the AFP-scheme was abolished and replaced
with an actuarially neutral system of drawing benefits from age 62. The reform has
led to a significant increase in labour force participation.
Changes in early retirement rules that were introduced in Poland after 2004,
particularly the 2009 reform of early retirement, resulted in a reduction in the
number of people receiving early retirement transfer as well as an increase in the
employment rate in the age group 55-64.
In the future, due to the shorter period of contribution payments, those who
receive bridging pensions or teachers’ compensation benefits can expect lower
pension levels.
BG
CZ
DK
EE
EL
ES
HU
IE
IT
LU
LV
NO
PL
48
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0051.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
RO
RS
SE
SI
TR
ES
UK
Projected decline of beneficiaries of special WAHJ pensions, resulting from a more
restrictive definition of WAHJ work conditions.
An increase in the pensionable age for women in arduous and hazardous jobs,
due to the general increase in the SPA (the general SPA for women is scheduled
to reach 63 years in 2035).
The last amendments introduced in 2014 tightened the conditions for WAHJ early
retirement at 54 years and 4 months if a worker has spent 2/3 of his/her
employment in the jobs listed as arduous and/or hazardous; an exception has
been made for the jobs which carry the highest extension of the insurance period
(6 months), for which retirement is admissible at 50 years of age.
Newly granted disability pensions have decreased substantially for persons aged
30-64. Although the absolute numbers are lower, they have simultaneously
increased for persons below 30 years of age, for men and women alike, where
psychological diagnoses account for the great majority of cases.
The 2012 pension reform introduced additional retirement restrictions for WAHJ
increasing contributory period, increased and unified the minimum pensionable age
for both genders, abolished the reduced occupational pension and limited the
minimum occupational pension. The last amendments for the existing Pension and
disability insurance act increased the lowest occupational pension amount and
introduced solidarity reserves.
Following the major mine accident of 2014 in Soma, the eligibility conditions for
retirement (pensionable age and active service term increment) for workers
employed in underground works were modified through with particular reference
to miners. The pensionable age was reduced and the rules on active service term
increment were improved.
The 2014/2013 year-on-year variation in the number of retirement pensions for
seafarers shows a drop of 13.83%, while the number of pensions for coal miners
has risen 9.92%.
ESA claims have been increasing but JSA claims have been falling in line with
unemployment.
49
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0052.png
Retirement regimes for workers in arduous or hazardous jobs
A study of national policies
ANNEX 6. References
Brys, Y. (2016),
Het concept “zware beroepen” in de pensioenwetgeving van enkele
Europese landen, Le concept de “métiers lourds” dans la législation de pensions de certains
pays européens,
Centre d’Expertise des pensions, Kenniscentrum pensioenen, Bureau
fédéral du Plan, Federaal Planbureau, Available
online.
d’Addio, A.C. Boulhol, H., Lundberg, K. and Reilly, A. (2015),
Contribution to the EU
Adequacy report 2015,
Interim report on penibilite schemes in the EU, OECD, February.
ESIP (2016),
Career management, rehabilitation and early retirement in strenuous jobs
(“Hard Jobs”), European Social Insurance Platform, Final report. Available
online.
ETUC et
al.
(2014),
Better Understanding ‘Arduous Occupations’ within the European
Pension debate. Final Report.
Available
online.
European Commission (2012),
White paper. An Agenda for Adequate, Safe and Sustainable
Pensions,
COM (2012)55. Available
online.
European Commission (2015),
The 2015 Pension Adequacy Report: current and future
income adequacy in old age in the EU,
Volume I and II, Available
online.
Ilmarinen, J. (2006),
Towards a longer worklife. Ageing and the quality of worklife in the
European Union,
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Ministry of Social Affairs and
Health, Helsinki.
Ilmarinen, J. (2012),
Promoting active ageing in the workplace,
Report, European Agency
for Safety and Health at Work.
Maltby, T. (2011), “Extending Working Lives? Employability, Work Ability and Better
Quality Working Lives”,
Social Policy & Society,
Vol.10, N°3, pp. 299–308.
OECD (2011), Pensionable Age and Life Expectancy, 1950-2050, in
Pensions at a Glance
2011: Retirement-income Systems in OECD and G20 Countries,
OECD Publishing. Available
online.
Pestieau, P. and Racionero, M. (2016), “Harsh occupations, life expectancy and social
security”,
Economic Modelling,
58, 194–202.
Zaidi, A. and Whitehouse, E. R. (2009),
Should Pension Systems Recognise "Hazardous
and Arduous Work"?,
OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 91,
OECD Publishing. Available
online.
50
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0053.png
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS
Free publications:
• one copy:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
• more than one copy or posters/maps:
from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);
from the delegations in non-EU countries
(http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm)
or calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (free phone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may
charge you).
Priced publications:
• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
Priced subscriptions:
•
via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union
(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).
 BEU, Alm.del - 2018-19 (1. samling) - Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 264: Spm. om reglerne for pensions- og tilbagetrækningsordningerne, til beskæftigelsesministeren
2040740_0054.png
KE-04-16-806-EN-N
doi: 10.2767/978434