He Supreme Court has recognized the right of a Once worker to receive the complement of great disability together with his early retirement pension (2,726.85 euros) After estimating its resource against the National Institute of the Social security (INSS). The plaintiff, who suffers total blindness, had requested the complement of great disability alleging the need for assistance of a third person, but her request was initially rejected by Social Security, which argued that anticipated retirement for disability did not allow access to said complement .
This woman was an eleven employee since 1994, and had recognized an absolute permanent disability since 1992 due to a congenital bilateral myopia that resulted in total blindness. This employee worked until he could access anticipated disability, having the right to the Complete pension with a regulatory base of 2,456.05 euros, that is, 100%.
In 2017, the plaintiff requested the review of her inability to recognize the degree of great disability. The reason is, that he completely lost the vision of both eyes, because of this he needed the help of a third people for their daily activities.
Despite this, Social Security denied its application, arguing that its health status had not varied substantially since the granting of absolute disability in 1992 and that, therefore, the recognition of the great disability was not justified. In addition, he argued that, Having accessed in advance of disability, I could not request the complement of great disabilitysince the current regulations prevented the recognition of a permanent disability when the beneficiary was already retired, something that includes article 195.1 of the General Social Security Law.
According to the STS 4320/2022, the National Social Security Institute considered that the plaintiff did not meet the requirements to obtain the complement of great disability because she already received an early retirement pension with reducing coefficients. In its interpretation, anticipated disability retirement was equivalent to ordinary retirement, preventing access to permanent disability to any subsequent degree.
For the worker, this negative social security ignored the aggravation of her disability, which prevented her from performing essential activities without the help of third parties, so she decided to take her case to the courts.
Right to retirement and disability complement
The Social Court No. 2 of Zaragoza, gave the reason to Social Security, something that also happened before the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon (TSJA), failing that the worker had no right. In its resolution, the TSJA said that social security had correctly applied the current regulations, explaining that anticipated disability retirement did not allow access to the great disabilitysince it was a sretirement itor and not permanent disability.
Given the refusal of the TSJA, the plaintiff filed a appeal for the unification of doctrine before the Supreme Court, arguing that her case was similar to others in which the great disabilities had been granted to people in early retirement for disability.
The Supreme Court focused its analysis on sentences 172/2021 and 191/2021, who declared that preventing access to the great disability to those who retire in advance for disability constituted discrimination, something that happened with this Once worker.
Therefore, the high court determined that The worker had the right to the great disability, since she had not reached the ordinary retirement age and, therefore, your application should be analyzed according to the permanent disability requirements. In addition, it established that the interpretation of Social Security was restrictive and unjustified, since the regulations did not expressly exclude the possibility of accessing the great disability from an early retirement for disability.
Compatibility between retirement and great disability
With the ruling, the Supreme Court ordered that the previous sentence be annulled, it would be recognized to compatible the retirement pension with the great disability, so it will charge a pension of up to 2,726.85 euros per month. In addition, Social Security must pay the delays not received since I submit your application in 2017.
The Social Security Standard is clear and does not allow two pensions to be compatible under the same regime. However, this case was different, since the key is that the worker had not reached the ordinary age of legal retirementwhich means that his situation should be evaluated under the criteria of permanent disability and not as an ordinary retirement.