There are several issues that, currently, are discussed in the issue of pension. One of them is whether the widow’s pension should continue, arguing some people who, this benefit, originated because then the woman was not incorporated into the labor market as now (this pension was born in 1967), so it came to provide him with a source of income. For others, it is still important, since it also comes to counteract the loss of income in the family home.
All this was discussed a few months ago in a program of ‘And now Sonsoles’, where he highlighted the testimony of Charo, a 79 -year -old pensioner who was not happy with the amount he had been charging, being a beneficiary of two different pensions. On the one hand, it charged 1,400 euros of widowhood and, on the other, 900 euros of retirement pension. Thus, adding both, charges about 2,300 euros per month.
You may be interested
A woman manages to increase the widowhood pension to 3,315.80 euros, after the Social Security denied her to add her husband’s contributions while working with suspended retirement: the supreme supports it
María José (64 years old) retired, works part -time to complete her pension: “I don’t want to charge a salary greater than 1,000 euros per month”
Although, for many, it is a high figure, it was unhappy, denouncing that it had reduced 200 euros receiving the widow’s pension at 79 years. Charo, stated that widow’s pensioners are a vulnerable collective: “We are a group of people who, apart from having lost our other half, that creates a loneliness too. And if that is accompanied by a not good remuneration, the problem is fat.”
“My husband quoted his entire working life to collect a salary and they pay me 52% of that salary”
Charo’s criticism focuses on the widow’s pension, claiming that “my husband quoted his entire working life to collect a salary and they pay me 52% of that salary.” Before her words, the presenter of the aforementioned program, Sonsoles Onega, asked if she considered that she charged little, affirming her that yes: “I want the fair,” he claimed.
They also asked him why they practiced that cut in the widowhood pension: “I would like to know, 48% do not know who stays with him. If he were alive now, he would continue to charge his complete salary. Why not me? And not only that, but of my pension I have reduced 200 euros because a cap that I do not know what that stop is,” I protested. In this line, he denounced that there was a ‘stop’ when receiving the pension, but not when paying: “Here in this country there is no top to pay the light, the water, the phone, the housing, the food … for that there is no stop,” he said.
As for the debate of whether the widow’s pension has become obsolete, and that no longer makes sense because the woman works, Charo made it clear: “I understand it, but I do not share it.” Returning to his situation, he claimed that “if he disappears I have to live with the pension that I have left, I can’t live here, who can live in this country with 1,200 euros?” He asked.
Given this, the presenter replied that there are many people living in Spain with 1,200 euros. And not only pensioners, but also young people who are what they charge for salary working full -time, a collaborator pointed out. About this, Charo defended that he does not live, he “is evident.”
Finally, he wanted to claim that that of pensioners is a group with an important age and that “the few years of life we have to have them covered, I do not have to make numbers when I have worked all my life to have a normal social status.”