Most jurisdictions grant different and more beneficial treatment – usually in the form of early retirement – to workers in hard or hazardous jobs. There are several justifications for this norm, including: (i) compensating the worker for the hardship; (ii) protecting the worker from hazard; and (iii) applying the principle of equality in the distribution of costs and benefits of the social security system. This project analyzes these reasons for the norm by applying the proportionality test; therefore, it investigates to what extent it serves a legitimate legal goal, is able and necessary to achieve the goal, and is strictu senso proportional, [1] when compared to alternative policies. Compensation is only possible if the special benefit conferred to workers in hard or hazardous jobs is subsidized, and protection requires no subsidy, resulting in the inaptitude of the norm to achieve both goals at the same time. Moreover, a differentiated treatment is not necessary nor proportional for compensating or protecting the worker, as other branches of the social insurance system already have these functions. In the end, the only justified function of the norm is to achieve the principle of equality, by treating the unequal in proportion to their inequality. The project discusses several implications for the design and convenience of special pension benefits.
Team
Coordination:
Sergio Mittlaender
