Dissertation_Paula Aleksandrowicz_12 ... - Jacobs University
Dissertation_Paula Aleksandrowicz_12 ... - Jacobs University Dissertation_Paula Aleksandrowicz_12 ... - Jacobs University
Table 2: Crucial pension reforms in Germany since 1972 Year of passing Regulations 1972 ´flexible retirement age´ at 63 for long-term insured and at 62 for severely handicapped persons 1984 pre-retirement scheme for persons aged 58+ (valid till the end of 1988) 1989 curtailment of all early exit options (with the exception of the early old-age pension for the severely handicapped) and introduction of pensions deductions from 2001 1989 early retirement scheme in the part-time model 1992 introduction of the partial pension (when earning above a specified threshold before having filled standard retirement age, the pensioner sees his/her pension reduced by 1 / 3, by half or by 2 / 3) 1996 early retirement scheme in the blocked model 1996 shortened phasing-out periods of options to retire before 65 without permanent benefit reduction 1999 (stopped by the next coalition), 2000 introduction of pension deductions for premature receipt of the old-age pension for severely handicapped and of the disability pension abolition of the disability pension for persons incapable to work in their own profession closing of the early retirement scheme for new entrants from 2010 2001 stipulation of a cap on the insurance premium at 20% (2020), resp. 22% (2030) introduction of a basic, means-tested security scheme for older persons introduction of incentives for voluntary old-age pension provision and for occupational pension schemes 2004 raising of the eligible age for the old-age pension after unemployment or participation in the early retirement scheme from 60 to 63 years 2007 raising of the retirement age to 67 starting from birth cohort 1947 (to be completed by 2029) Source: Steffen (2008b); own modifications. In contrast to the goal of job promotion that motivated later retirement legislation, those early attempts at lowering the exit age were driven by ideas of work-life balance and humanisation of working life (Keller 1997: 194). Ebbinghaus (2002: 165-167) recognises in those early policies an expansion of social rights and an expression of concern for the health status of burdened occupational groups and of women. Later, he argues, the opportunity to shed labour and to release unemployment has become an unintended consequence of those policies and the reason why the social partners and the government held on to it. Another milestone on the way to early retirement was the introduction of the early retirement scheme in the blocked model in 1996 (Altersteilzeit; in the following: ATZ or early retirement scheme). It was a continuation of the less popular pre-retirement scheme (Vorruhestand) and of the early retirement scheme in the part-time model. It was introduced as an emergency measure to lower unemployment which had risen to high levels in the 1990s. In that model, the employee may participate in partial retirement for two till five years, six years, if the firm is covered by a respective collective agreement, and up to ten years in the public sector. In the ´work phase´, the employee works his/her usual weekly hours, and in the ´free-time phase´ (after half of the partial retirement period has passed), he/she still stays an employee of the firm, but enjoys free-time. The rationale behind the introduction of ATZ had been to stop the former early retirement practices and to enable a gradual transition to retirement. As most participants in 45
the early retirement scheme, and firms alike, prefer the blocked model 13 , the governmental objective has not been fulfilled. Another motive behind the introduction of (blocked) ATZ was to enable a knowledge transfer between younger and older workers. 14 Furthermore, the government had hoped to decrease unemployment by enabling firms to hire young workers as a replacement for ATZ retirees. That objective accounts for the high popularity of the blocked model in German firms. Compared to other European countries (Hinrichs/Aleksandrowicz 2005), Germany started relatively early to adjust the pension system to demographic developments and to attempt a reversal of the trend to early retirement incurred by preceding legislation. Worries that a shifting age structure would lead to a raising of the contribution rate to statutory pension insurance resulted in the pension reform of 1989, which went into effect in 1992. In an inter-party compromise, it was agreed that, with the exception of the severely handicapped, in 2012 all provisions to retire before age 65 without benefit reduction shall phase out. Beginning in 2001, retiring earlier should imply a permanent reduction of 3.6 per cent for each year below the standard retirement age. With the same reform, an incentive to defer the pension receipt was introduced by granting a permanent 0.5 per cent bonus per month of deferral. Before, workers could postpone their retirement at a 7.2 per cent bonus, which was however only granted for up to two years and therefore not very attractive (Casey 1998: 18). The political consensus on pension reform broke in the forefront of the next law, the Growth and Employment Promotion Act passed in 1996 and effective from 1999. In the context of active ageing, the most important change were shortened phasing-out periods of options to retire before age 65 without permanent benefit reduction. This bill meant a decisive departure from the previously held conception that sending older workers into voluntary early retirement was an acceptable way to prevent rising unemployment figures of young and middle-aged workers. The Pension Reform Act of 1999 (legislated in 1997 by the CDU/CSU-FDP government) also contained some controversial elements: In order to raise the actual age of 13 A survey of personnel and works councils of 1999/2000 showed that 47% of private companies and 20% of public offices allowed only for the blocked model of part-time retirement (Klammer, 2003: 43); 90% of workers utilise that model (Teipen/Kohli 2004: 102). 14 As Stück (2003) found out in his empirical studies on the take-up of part-time retirement in firms in Bremen, new workers seldom occupy the same position as the person in part-time retirement, so there is no real knowledge transfer taking place. 46
- Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1
- Page 7 and 8: 5.2. Determinants at Establishment
- Page 9 and 10: List of Tables Table 1: Crucial pen
- Page 11 and 12: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ATZ - Alterst
- Page 13 and 14: older workers, and to preserve thei
- Page 15 and 16: Germany and Poland were chosen as c
- Page 17 and 18: under the factual minimum standards
- Page 19 and 20: Figure 1: Firm-level decisions and
- Page 21 and 22: Figure 2: Decisions and actions wit
- Page 23 and 24: about by profit considerations in t
- Page 25 and 26: concomitantly, the related opportun
- Page 27 and 28: - retirement ages/age limits (Kohli
- Page 29 and 30: In Poland, there exist no in-depth
- Page 31 and 32: workers (´problem group´) and tre
- Page 33 and 34: the view to structural factors and
- Page 35 and 36: The authors sought to analyse wheth
- Page 37 and 38: imposed in Germany, despite being b
- Page 39 and 40: 2.4. Explanations at Collective Bar
- Page 41 and 42: 2.5. Conclusions The depicted theor
- Page 43 and 44: the development of qualitative meth
- Page 45 and 46: concrete, context-based knowledge (
- Page 47 and 48: I had originally intended to focus
- Page 49 and 50: I chose the software MAXqda for thi
- Page 51 and 52: strategy´, resp. ´muddling throug
- Page 53 and 54: Figure 3: Country-specific analytic
- Page 55: 3.2.1. Overview of Changes in Pensi
- Page 59 and 60: pathway, the flexible and partial p
- Page 61 and 62: was utilised already since the late
- Page 63 and 64: 3.2.2. Overview of Changes in Labou
- Page 65 and 66: criteria of what jobs are they are
- Page 67 and 68: With regard to the legal and collec
- Page 69 and 70: Figure 4: Inflows of men into the p
- Page 71 and 72: of the average retirement age by on
- Page 73 and 74: Figure 8: Employment rates of older
- Page 75 and 76: Institutional changes have also had
- Page 77 and 78: environment, prevention of health i
- Page 79 and 80: urdens of the workforce and suggest
- Page 81 and 82: ased on social insurance and their
- Page 83 and 84: Moreover, “pensions of persons wo
- Page 85 and 86: granted to unemployed women aged 58
- Page 87 and 88: not promote a prolongation of worki
- Page 89 and 90: education vouchers for workers 45+
- Page 91 and 92: force had a low work ethos, low wor
- Page 93 and 94: Figure 9: Annual numbers of recipie
- Page 95 and 96: pensioners decreased by 41 per cent
- Page 97 and 98: Figure 11: Employment rates of olde
- Page 99 and 100: preferred way of exit due to easy a
- Page 101 and 102: espective constituency and inhibits
- Page 103 and 104: Figure 12: Fulfilment of Stockholm
- Page 105 and 106: whom a separate pension system is m
Table 2: Crucial pension reforms in Germany since 1972<br />
Year of passing<br />
Regulations<br />
1972 ´flexible retirement age´ at 63 for long-term insured and at 62 for severely handicapped persons<br />
1984 pre-retirement scheme for persons aged 58+ (valid till the end of 1988)<br />
1989 curtailment of all early exit options (with the exception of the early old-age pension for the severely<br />
handicapped) and introduction of pensions deductions from 2001<br />
1989 early retirement scheme in the part-time model<br />
1992 introduction of the partial pension (when earning above a specified threshold before having filled<br />
standard retirement age, the pensioner sees his/her pension reduced by 1 / 3, by half or by 2 / 3)<br />
1996 early retirement scheme in the blocked model<br />
1996 shortened phasing-out periods of options to retire before 65 without permanent benefit reduction<br />
1999 (stopped by the<br />
next coalition),<br />
2000<br />
introduction of pension deductions for premature receipt of the old-age pension for severely handicapped<br />
and of the disability pension<br />
abolition of the disability pension for persons incapable to work in their own profession<br />
closing of the early retirement scheme for new entrants from 2010<br />
2001 stipulation of a cap on the insurance premium at 20% (2020), resp. 22% (2030)<br />
introduction of a basic, means-tested security scheme for older persons<br />
introduction of incentives for voluntary old-age pension provision and for occupational pension schemes<br />
2004 raising of the eligible age for the old-age pension after unemployment or participation in the early<br />
retirement scheme from 60 to 63 years<br />
2007 raising of the retirement age to 67 starting from birth cohort 1947 (to be completed by 2029)<br />
Source: Steffen (2008b); own modifications.<br />
In contrast to the goal of job promotion that motivated later retirement legislation, those<br />
early attempts at lowering the exit age were driven by ideas of work-life balance and<br />
humanisation of working life (Keller 1997: 194). Ebbinghaus (2002: 165-167) recognises in<br />
those early policies an expansion of social rights and an expression of concern for the health<br />
status of burdened occupational groups and of women. Later, he argues, the opportunity to<br />
shed labour and to release unemployment has become an unintended consequence of those<br />
policies and the reason why the social partners and the government held on to it.<br />
Another milestone on the way to early retirement was the introduction of the early<br />
retirement scheme in the blocked model in 1996 (Altersteilzeit; in the following: ATZ or<br />
early retirement scheme). It was a continuation of the less popular pre-retirement scheme<br />
(Vorruhestand) and of the early retirement scheme in the part-time model. It was introduced<br />
as an emergency measure to lower unemployment which had risen to high levels in the<br />
1990s. In that model, the employee may participate in partial retirement for two till five<br />
years, six years, if the firm is covered by a respective collective agreement, and up to ten<br />
years in the public sector. In the ´work phase´, the employee works his/her usual weekly<br />
hours, and in the ´free-time phase´ (after half of the partial retirement period has passed),<br />
he/she still stays an employee of the firm, but enjoys free-time.<br />
The rationale behind the introduction of ATZ had been to stop the former early<br />
retirement practices and to enable a gradual transition to retirement. As most participants in<br />
45