The law faculties of Catalonia voted last December 1 in favor, even divided, of the content of a question presented by Junts to Congress to reform the social security law. The initiative intends to compensate for the worsening denounced for years by educated people responsible for covering office work, free legal assistance: having worthy contributory pensions and putting an end to a model which meant that professionals who devoted themselves to office work found themselves with benefits on their jubilee which sometimes end up costing 300 euros.
Despite the aim of the enmienda, support was limited with only seven votes in favor of the 13 schools that make up the Consejo de la Abogacía Catalana. Five of them, including the Barcelona school and the Catalan mayor, opposed and others abstained, leading to an intense debate. The Colegio de la Abogacía de Tarragona is at the origin of the impetus for the enmienda, although collectives from other territories of Spain have also maintained a dialogue with all political groups in order to accept petitions that have the same meaning of improving the conditions of their jubilation. Together, he refused to talk about the initiative, which is awaiting a vote in Congress.
The old system of mutual social security linked to professional schools is at the origin of the situation which attempts to resolve the question presented to Congress. Lawyers and attorneys (also affected) are often self-employed people who, for decades, have trusted mutual societies to channel the funds that provide benefits after the jubilation. Contrary to what happened with other professional groups, lawyers were only able to decide in 1995 to contribute to mutual insurance, as until then, or to Social Security, at the risk of losing their contributions.
The ordinance presented today by Junts provides for the creation of an additional provision in the General Social Security Law that grants coverage to lawyers registered in law school offices throughout Spain with recognition equivalent to social contributions. For its calculation, the proposal uses a maximum coefficient, resulting from the division of the gross annual amount received by the office team between the interprofessional minimum wage (SMI) with a maximum of eight months per year. The lawyers are demanding a claim retroactive to 1995.
In any case, the proposal does not fully respond to the complaint of lawyers’ groups, who demand that their capital contributions to mutual societies be taken into account for full equivalence and that a process be permitted to pass all funds contributed to mutual societies through the RETA system (the social security system for self-employed workers).
“The proposal”, says the text, “seeks to correct this historical inequality, by establishing a system of recognition equivalent to contributions for those who have followed professional training, under conditions proportional to the income received and with a reasonable limit”. Consider that the same condition is offered to any employee of an essential public service. If you end up approving, you will be excluded from paying this payment when you receive payments above the SMI.
“With this provision we put an end to a historic grievance,” explains David Rocamora, dean of the Colegio de Tarragona. However, this measure was not unanimous in the sector. From his point of view, this denial arises from the fear that the schools must assume these payments, which Rocamora considers having to assume who is the employer of the office teams, the administration of Justice, and the fear that it slows down the realization of other claims that remain pending.
The current problem for lawyers is that the evolution of their mutual contributions has been very low and, with them, the result of their pensions. This is why the lawyers demanded that a measure allow them to convert the resources paid to mutual societies into contributions to the RETA (self-employed workers) social security scheme, so that they can opt for a higher contributory pension. The government chose this path because this path was the only one for those who could find themselves in a “vulnerable situation”, which did not please the collectives who led the protests in recent years. This alternative path takes place between the petitions of professional schools.
“I have nothing: I am 59 years old, 32 years in office and my pension is 387 euros,” laments Sevillian lawyer Ana Gil, one of the speakers of the #J2 collective (Jodidos). According to him, it is necessary to allow lawyers and representatives of mutual societies to withdraw from those who have made compulsory contributions over the years and to open the doors to Social Security as independent workers.
About The Author
