Why have the unions announced actions?
The actions are the result of a discussion that has been going on for several years now and the end of which is not yet in sight. Ever since it was agreed in the pension agreement in 2019 that early retirement should become an important part of the new system to be set up, the precise details of such a scheme have been the subject of discussion.
Employers’ organizations and trade unions were instructed to look into this together with the cabinet. Pending agreements, a temporary measure was introduced in 2021, the Early Retirement Scheme (RVU). This still applies, but will expire at the end of 2025. Discussions about a new arrangement have been at a standstill since December. The unions want clarity quickly so that employees with demanding jobs can be sure that they can take early retirement in the future.
About the author
Hessel von Piekartz is a political reporter for de Volkskrant. He writes about public health, pensions and social security.
What exactly does the temporary arrangement entail?
In short, the scheme makes it more attractive for employers to allow employees approaching retirement age to retire earlier. The relaxation gives them the option to offer employees a tax-favorable benefit three years before the state pension age.
This tax-favorable monthly amount amounts to a maximum of the AOW benefit. Without the scheme, the employer would have to pay 52 percent tax on that amount, a kind of penalty for early retirement. The idea is that the departing employee can use the money to bridge the years until his actual retirement, possibly with his own supplement.
What’s the problem then?
Although the current arrangement offers advantages, not everyone is happy with it. According to the unions, the exempt amount is not nearly enough for many people to make ends meet. The way to supplement that amount, for example by bringing forward the pension benefit slightly, is also not ideal. After all, anyone who does this reduces the pension benefit over the long term.
And then there is the age-old debate about who is and is not entitled to early retirement. The pension agreement included early retirement to spare older employees in particular from physically demanding work. But in practice this has been extended more broadly and many more sectors and professions can use it.
Why is there no new regulation yet?
The classic contradictions between employee and employer organizations seem to be standing in the way once again. Trade unions would prefer to see a broader (fiscal) arrangement for heavy professions or at least the maintenance of the current arrangement. Employer organizations, in turn, want to ‘prevent a new culture of early retirement’ and would prefer to see as few staff as possible leave early in a tight labor market.
The employers are therefore pushing for ‘appropriate measures so that as many people as possible can continue to work healthily until retirement’. But the unions do not consider this realistic for some people because the work is too hard. It does not help that there is still no consensus on the definition of heavy work, even after years of discussions. According to the unions, this should be decided by collective labor agreement, but employers see much more in agreements per company because they believe the differences are large.
What now?
At the end of last year there was a stalemate that still continues. The unions are now expressly looking to outgoing Minister Carola Schouten (Pensions) for a solution. “We believe that this is a political responsibility,” says NPB chairman Nine Kooiman, on behalf of the joint police unions. “We’ve been waiting forever.”
To reinforce the message, the police unions are calling on their members not to issue fines for minor violations, such as cycling without lights. Unions FNV, CNV and VCP have also sent the minister an ‘ultimatum’. If she does not take further steps before May 15, strikes may follow.
But it seems unlikely that the minister will come up with a concrete proposal in the short term. She has announced that she wants to sit down with employers and employees again. A date for this is still unknown.
The question is how much that yields. The fact that the parties are still far apart was evident from the reaction of the employers’ organizations, which called the announced actions of the unions ‘premature’. They felt that the unions ‘do not take constructive consultation and agreements seriously’.
