The Ministry of Health in the Czech Republic has raised objections to the proposed increase in the retirement age, a key element of the pension reform put forth by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. The suggested reform aims to link the retirement age to life expectancy, gradually increasing without a predetermined limit. For instance, individuals born after 1981 could potentially retire after reaching their 67th birthday, as outlined in the reform documents.

Criticism from the Ministry of Health centers around the belief that the continuous extension of the retirement age overlooks the health conditions of the population over 65, making it challenging for them to sustain the required work performance in the later years. This sentiment aligns with concerns voiced by unions, who are also critical of the reform. One of the union’s main concerns is the lack of resolution regarding early pensions for demanding professions, coupled with insufficient analyses supporting the increase in retirement age.

Marian Jurečka, the head of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, defends the pension reform, emphasizing its goal to stabilize deficits in the pension system. During the presentation of the proposal, Jurečka highlighted the changes intended to ensure decent pensions not only for current pensioners but also for future generations.

However, concerns extend beyond health-related challenges. The Office for Foreign Relations and Information, a civilian intelligence service, has highlighted potential issues related to the retirement age increase. Under current laws, the service relationship for individuals in this office concludes at 65, and there are apprehensions about officers ending their service without qualifying for a service allowance but having to wait for their entitlement to an old-age pension.

Further criticism comes from the Czech Statistical Office, which questions the methodology proposed by the Ministry of Labour for calculating the retirement age. The proposed law fixes the calculation methodology to a procedure from 2015, leading to the use of two different life expectancies. This discrepancy raises concerns about the accuracy and fairness of the retirement age determination under the proposed reform.

Article by Prague Forum