The UDR claims that the special pension reform project developed by the Government does not meet all the principles of the PNRR milestone, being not a reform, but a “vicious way of preserving benefits.”

“This is not a reform, it is a perverse way to preserve privileges,” says Christian Guinea, coordinator of the UDR’s public policy department.

According to the USR, there are six reasons why no special pension is canceled and no special pension is brought into the contribution line:

• No special pension is cancelled. Neither deputies, nor parliamentarians, nor employees of the Accounting Chamber, nor clerks, nor IAE or aviation personnel. All these categories have contributory pensions and no basis for special pensions other than legal privileges created at a particular time. Everyone stays.
• The special pension is not adjusted to the contributions. This provision in the PNRR was intended to reproduce the principle of contributions (relation to net income over a longer period of time) if employees had no contributions (military, police, SRI, SIE part-time workers) or if they have a pension over what they (the magistrates) contributed. This does not happen. What is a special pension when paid remains a special pension, the benefits are very little embellished. Even attempts to agree with the principle of contribution and at least gradual liquidation.
• The common situation where your pension exceeds your last salary remains relevant. For example, at magistrates, the current fixed formula has been replaced by one where the employee can choose the 12 consecutive highest paid months and the value is updated to current salary – essentially an invitation to inflate the amounts for each special pensioner.
• The proposed law does not mention the special pensions of people’s deputies (additional) and mayors (the law is in force, postponed, not repealed), which remain intact. According to the PNRR, no new category of special pensions can be created. However, the Government’s draft preserves the pensions of local elected officials in the existing laws, so they will be paid after the end of the current suspension.
• PSD – PNL changes through a single law, anyone who considers themselves aggrieved attacks the CCR, CCR judges (the aggrieved themselves) reject the procedure because they do not respect bicameralism. This is such a scenario, deliberately prepared by the government in order to fail the reform of special pensions at the hands of KKR.
• The text contains implementing rules without mentioning the deadline for their adoption, as it should be provided by law. After the law is passed and the PNRR stage is officially announced, the ministries that (all) opposed these reforms will have to develop implementation rules without a deadline. If they don’t, nothing will change and there will be no legal consequences.

​The reaction of the UDR takes place in the context of the Government’s work on the project of special pensions. Thus, judges’ pensions will be recalculated so that none of them exceeds the average income for 12 consecutive months of activity, according to the Special Pensions Amendment Act. In addition, the retirement age is increased to 65, given that the law now provides for 60 years for magistrates.

• 5 fundamental changes to the law on special pensions: from recalculation of pensions in payment to raising the retirement age