The union has received hundreds of calls from civil servants concerned about the future of the passive class regime and the regulation of their pensions.. In this way, CSIF yesterday showed the concern of this plant and thousands of officials after the change decreed by the Government, and for which the pensions of the designated passive classes will be managed by Social Security. In total, 657,118 benefits that are already being charged, to which must be added a figure of around 700,000 officials who will receive their pension under this scheme.
Suddenly, and by way of the Royal Decree Law, you get that legislative reform that the only thing that generates is a lot of concern in the officials who are in passive classes because they fear that there may be adjustments in Social Security that later affect them. We understand that this is a rather suspicious change, says Francisco Laman, from CSIF. What we fear is that this is a first step to introduce legislative changes, affects the representative of this union, the most representative in public administrations.
That of the passive classes is a system condemned to disappear since since December 31, 2010 no one enters it and only, mainly, the teaching officials, those of the Administration of Justice, Forces and Security Bodies of the State and a large part of the General State Administration (AGE), as long as they accessed their positions before that January 1, 2011.
The main advantage of this system is that officials can retire earlier. Specifically, from 60 years of age you can access retirement with 30 years worked, and if the number reaches 35, 100% of retirement is charged. On the other hand, pensions are, at the same income, lower than those of other officials.
CCOO: time to “approximate” conditions
And that is precisely what CCOO considers that can be modified with the change decreed by the Government. This union, in line with what they point out from the UGT, affirms that the change of membership of the Ministry of Finance to that of Social Security no change in benefits, retirement or how many, but it is convenient to address system improvements.
Minister Escriv has already advanced in his takeover, it is an opportunity to have a new interlocutor and approximate salary conditions, says Ral Olmos, from the CCOO Federation of Citizen Services. Olmos explains that, except for A1 level officials, the differences are very noticeable. “The regulatory credit [el equivalente a la base reguladora] of a tax technician or a primary school teacher who is in the module system is 33,200 euros, while in Social Security the base would be about 42,000 euros, “he exemplifies.
Fieldyou are already encountering various problems in the fruit harvesting campaignof bone that has already started in some regions of Spain. They had been denouncing the lack of work for the harvesting of the fruit for weeks, a problem that, despite the measures approved by the Government to alleviate it, has not been fully resolved, since the majority of people who have signed up are illegal immigrants.
In addition, in the areas where harvesting has already started, farmers report that speculative practices are taking place, andcontracts are not being made or the purchase prices of the product are not being established, as required by law.
A few weeks ago, the Government itself acknowledged that around 150,000 people were missing to cover the collection campaign, which has already started in Murcia and Andalusia and is now beginning in Aragn, La Rioja and Catalua.
The Executiveapproved a package of measures to mobilize the unemployedand that they could work in the field without losing their unemployment. But the problem, they explain from Coag, is that most of these workers are illegal immigrants.
From UPA they relativize the problem and explain that the temporeras, the majority of whom are Moroccans, are being mobilized, who picked up the strawberry and are diverting them to carry out other campaigns.Agrarian associations are collecting job applications and forwarding them to farmers who demand labor.
According to Coag, there is still no personal need. They ask that the movement of workers from one community to another be made more flexible, despite the state of alarm. The ministry does allow mobility but between nearby towns. The problem is that with the borders closed, many workers from other countries who come to Spain with an employment contract to do the pick-up, can no longer do so.
To this is added another problem. From Coag they denounce, like UPA, that “they are not making contracts with farmers or fixing prices.” The food chain law (which was passed just two months ago)forces intermediaries who buy fruit or any other agri-food product to make contractsto farmers or ranchers. This contract must reflect the price they pay for the merchandise.
However, as the organizations denounce, “it is not being followed, and the fruit is being delivered ‘as a result'”. That is to say: the farmers deliver the product but they are paid a posteriori, and “they don’t know when or how much they are going to charge.”
“It is reverting to speculative practices, trying to start with low prices. Or without setting a price, and then pay what is on the market.If you do not want to lose what you have collected, you have to enter through the ring, because they are perishable products that you cannot storeand you have to get it out as soon as you pick it up, “they point out from Coag.
To this is added thatthere is 15% less production than last year and that household consumption has increased,Despite the fact that in the hospitality industry, as bars and restaurants are closed, less demand is being made. Normally the producer sells the fruit to purchasing centers (they act as intermediaries), to the supermarket chains (with whom they already have agreed agreements) or to wholesalers who go to the markets (Mercabarna, Mercamadrid …) and sell, in turn , to the fruit bowls.
The costs for this collection will grow by 30%,Therefore, in the handling process, which is when the fruit that is not of sufficient quality is discarded and packed in bags or trays, these costs have increased due to the security measures that have had to be implemented to prevent contagion from coronavirus. These costs “either pass on to the final price to the consumer or are borne by the producer or shared among them a little,” they point out from Coag.
Exceltur worsens its forecasts after several ministers have raised the possibility that the sector will not return to activity until the end of the year
The coronavirusIt is giving the biggest blow to tourism since data is available, since the first Swede landed in our country.The sectorpredicts a catastrophic yearif, as some members of the Government have hinted, the activity does not start until the end of the year. Specifically, in this case,they calculate losses of 124,000 million euros, with a fall in activity of 80%.
Tourism is the engine of our economy, our oil,and it represents almost 13% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). With the hotels and bars closed and the movement restrictions that exist, both internally and internationally,the sector has been practically stopped since the alarm state was decreed.
The Alliance for Tourism Excellence, Exceltur, the largest lobby in the sector,It has worsened, after the extension of the state of alarm that was raised yesterday, the already catastrophic forecasts it made for this year.Draw two scenarios, with losses ranging from 92,556 million euros (in the most optimistic, with a recovery in activity in July) to 124,000 million euros, in the most pessimistic, if the sector is not activated until the end of ao.
Various industry associationsThey have criticized the statements made last Friday by the Minister of LaborYolanda Daz, implying that work activity may not recover until the end of the year. The Tourism Board has described its words as barbarous and reckless. Today, the Minister of Transport, Jos Luis Balos, has said instead that tourism is one of the Government’s priorities, but he has recognized that “there are no certain dates” and that the return to activity will depend on how the situation is evolving. .
Exceltur today has expressed its concern that the President of the Government, Pedro Snchez, yesterday, nor the Minister of Tourism, Reyes Maroto, have cleared “any horizon in time regarding the lifting of restrictions for the recovery of tourism.”
They are also concerned that the two leaders have not corrected the statements of the ministers of Consumer Affairs, Labor and Finance about the possibility that the activity will not return until the end of the year.
If we put ourselves in this third scenario (the activity will start in July …),“the sector will need after the summer, a rescue planemergency far superior to the current one to save, with fewer guarantees, a good part of a more deteriorated business fabric and its employment, “Exceltur points out.
They are concerned, in addition to the current break, about the uncertainties that exist: without a clear date to return to business and with the countries of the European Union without a coordinated plan.Some states have already raised the lack of confidence.Germany does this Monday, France on May 11. In some countries, such as Greece, bars and hotels are slated to open in June.
In Spain we only know that we are working on a de-escalation plan,It will begin progressively from May 10, which is when the last extension of the alarm state ends.
No plan in Europe
The fact that each country goes at a pace and given that travel restriction measures remain in force makes it difficult for international tourism to be reactivated soon. The Minister of Industry, Tourism and Commerce, Reyes Maroto, pointed out, in an interview with this newspaper, that the return to activity in the sector will take place in two phases: first, national tourism will be activated and, in a second phase with no horizon to the view, the international one. This recovery at two speeds is what Shuffle Exceltur.
“If all these adverse uncertainties come together, the internal and external tourist demand will radically contract, and it will cause, in parallel, an inverse rebound effect of contraction of supply and employment,” they point out in Exceltur.
They point out that there are already very touched areas, such as the Balearic Islands, highly dependent on foreign tourism, where “some entrepreneurs may not even open their stores until 2021, or only a small part of them, so as not to incur lossesolder, due to lack of flow “.
The recovery of international demand for Spain “will be subject to how the current restrictions on mobility between countries are being unblocked.” Also “those that govern a country like Spain”, which does not appear “among the most reliable countries in terms of possible risks of contagion”.
EU finance ministers meet Tuesday via teleconference to try to finalize the first major package of measures at the 27 level against the destructive effects on the coronavirus economy.After the fiasco of just a few weeks ago, the pressure to reach an agreement is immense, but the positions are still very opposed. The general lines, by now, are pretty clear. Nothing creative, unexpected, groundbreaking. The available means will be used, twisting them as much as possible. “There is plenty of scope for solidarity within existing instruments and institutions. We have to fully exploit these tools and remain open to doing more. A solid package is being created, “the Presidents of the Commission, the Council and the Eurogroup warned in a joint statement on Monday.
The main instrument will be the Mede, the bailout mechanism created during the Eurozone crisis. That it can give reinforced lines of credit (ECCL) for up to 410,000 million euros, and that according to Mario Centeno it will have a first line of defense of 240,000 million.The key is in exchange for what and if Italy will end up accepting it.
The rescue programs that the Mede granted last decade, including Spain, contemplate a Memorandum of Understanding, missions of the ancientTroika, very marked fiscal objectives from Brussels and consultations before each legislative decision.There is absolute consensus this time that the conditionality of these hotlines has to be very different, softer, but there is still no agreement on where to set the limit.
Italy and Spain demand that you have noconditionality. For the Netherlands it is incomprehensible and almost offensive that you want to use the Mede as a source of “cheap loans” without any kind of consideration. The South wants immediate money and perhaps even above the 2% of the GDP that is being studied by country. But the hardest (with Austria and Finland in the group) say not to speak, and that the more ambitious, the more you have to demand in advance. The rhetoric of the ministers and their teams are quite strong, they show discrepancies of draft, butfrom the institution estimate that there is understanding in 95% of the contentand that only 5% of the way to go is missing. The hardest, but less than the last time.
Conditions in two phases
In The Hague, for example, they propose a two-phase mechanism. A first one without demands and quick disbursements to face the pandemic, but thena second in which objectives are set, reforms that promote growth and some supervision. The passage from one to the other could perhaps be fixed when the medical pandemic ends, when the borders are reopened or with other clauses.
The battle is very open. Spain seems reasonably optimistic. That the ‘contract’ in exchange for very advantageous loans impliescommit to follow the lines of the so-called European Semester, and callsCountry Specific Recommendations, which are published every year and are in any case on the table,doesn’t seem crazy. The Eurogroup promises that “tailored suits” will be made, since legally one cannot avoid a document nor can the same pattern be used for all those who need assistance, and there is CJEU jurisprudence in this regard.
It will be a way of reassuringhawksand it can be argued that making reforms and complying with the recommendations is, of course, the will of each capital and always has been. And then make a more or less real case, as it has been going for decades. Guarantee that money is used well, to promote growth, and not be ‘wasted’, as they fear in the north. If it were simply that and the disbursements were immediate and not subject to the fulfillment of precise fiscal and legislative objectives, it would be assumed.The political damage, the stigma of the ‘rescue’, will be hard, but in no way would it resemble what was signed in 2012.
In any case, the low profile is surprising. For two weeks, the calls have been rainingnon papers, position papers and ideas from the countries. Germany, France, Netherlands. A clash of ideas at the highest level in the EU, red lines that circulate, leak, are also debated between academics and journalists, between lobbyists and officials.Spain, once again, flies voluntarily under the radar. Constantly in contact, in negotiations with all parties, but avoiding making their position public, its demands, its alternatives. Always aspiring to be what is known ashonest broker, mediator, facilitator of consensus. Difficult in general conditions, risky when there is so much at stake and you are one of the most affected. The Government, when asked, considers that its interests are defined in the President’s speeches and public appearances. A defeat by failure to appear. Other.
Maximum voltage in Italy
However, in Italy the tension is already explosive. For political reasons prior to the virus, the very idea of the Mede is toxic, to the point of getting into the hands of Parliament. The Law of Matteo Salvini has been using it for months against the Government, making recourse to these lines with conditions the Government can take ahead. That is why Giuseppe Conte’s position is fragile, unstable and changing.Everything hangs on a fine thread and any oscillation of the rest of the package was ruining it.
On Monday afternoon, before the cameras, Conte turned again, making any progress difficult. “The Mede, no. Eurobonds, surely I do. The Mede we have repeated that it is an absolutely inadequate instrument. Eurobonds, on the other hand, are a serious response, a solution, effective and adequate to the emergency we are experiencing,” he said.
From Rome they squeeze their partnerssaying that they can only accept this package if there is no obligation for macroeconomic adjustment and if they are also clearly included in the minister’s statement to their heads of government and state (who are the ones who must give the final go-ahead)references to a possible joint debt issue in the EU at some point. Either Eurobonds, or a Recovery Fund as suggested by France or the Commission, with its own and joint debt capacity.
Last week, the Eurogroup’s shopping list included an option within the Quick Financing Mede itself, with up to 80,000 million euros, but the sources consulted say that the idea is good but requires more work so it probably won’t be. part of the immediate package.
The package has another series of equally delicate elements. On the one hand, the use ofEuropean Investment Bank and its Pan-European Guarantee Fund, which could have up to 200,000 million loan capacity, backed by € 25 billion in guarantees from member states. The proposal took shape last week only, so concrete implementation details are lacking. But a priori there is broad support at the general level.
The third leg is the so-called Sure, the reinsurance mechanism introduced by Ursula von der Leyen last week. A fund for the Commission to go to market, and with guarantees of unused funds and guarantees also from the countries, can raise up to 100,000 million on these lines with hardly any conditionality to the partners most affected by unemployment. They want maximum liquidity for companies to keep jobs, even if public debt soars. There is some consensus as well, but the Netherlands insists that it be made very clear that it is a very short-term program with specific objectives. Others, on the other hand, want it not to have such a fast expiration date.
The fourth element is emergency initiatives. There is no need to create anything new, because there is an Instrument that has already been used on other occasions and it will be enough to refocus it.The Commission, digging through all the remains of the Multiannual Financial Framework, has proposed € 2.7 billion.Mark Rutte, last week, suggested a Fund with up to $ 10 billion to $ 20 billion in voluntary contributions to help the most affected countries at the health level, with medical supplies and for hospitals. New resources, a “gift” and not a loan.
The Eurogroup believes that perhaps the two ideas could be merged. The Dutch proposal is more ambitious, but making contributions through an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) is slow and requires national parliaments. Perhaps the structure of the Commission and the Multiannual Financial Framework (the EU Budget) could be used, which allows for quick voluntary contributions.
A plan and a Reconstruction Fund
Finally, another of the Gordian knots. The Commission promises to review the Financial Framework to adapt it to this challenge and with “investment levels never seen before”.Spain wants a Marshall Planfor reconstruction. Commissioners Gentiloni and Breton proposed something similar, a Fund with the capacity to issue term debt, for recovery yesterday in this newspaper. YFrance has articulated the best idea, offering a Solidarity Fund, to be renamed to Recovery, and to be an intermediate step. Not Eurobonds exactly, but a mess. Something that Germany rejects fully.
It is still a very sensitive issue politically in some capitals and the consensus in the question sources is that clearly more work is needed to see a concrete proposal. References are expected in the document or the ministers’ statement, but with little specificity. And precisely on how all the factors are linked depends on the final agreement.Nothing is closed until everything is closed. And as the head of the Mede, Klaus Regling, warns, in a tribune published these days, using new instruments is very slow and tiring. In the 2010 crisis, it took seven months for the Financial Stability Fund to issue its first bond in the markets, and it was done as quickly as possible. Today there is no such margin.
Despite the discrepancies, there is some confidence that the Eurogroup will leavea fairly agreed plan to pass to the leaders, who have no date for their next remote Summit.With more vague and open language in the most controversial parts, but that collects all the claims. Both for the conditionality of the loans, that bothopposing blocks define as “ideological blocks“As in the ambition necessary in the ‘reconstruction’ phase. In the end, after all, the usual dynamic is that: crisis, shock, chaos, tears and a ‘suboptimal decision for all. However, what is at stake is more beyond macro figures, the pandemic is hitting very different fibers and you can’t underestimate the reactions and the consequences.n the last European Council Spain and Italy were planted. And seeing what Conte says, it could perfectly happen again. Being precisely the most needy.
Wopke Hoekstra(Bennekom, 1975) has collected the witness from its predecessor,Jeroen Dijsselbloem, or from the finlandsOlli Rehnas one of the most detested politicians in southern Europe. The least kind face of austerity at the hardest moment. Following the unprecedented attacks by the Portuguese Prime Minister,Antonio Costa, the Dutch finance minister admitted “lack of empathy” a few days ago, and autocratic in an interview withTHE WORLD: “We have not done well”. It defends solidarity, exceptional measures and proposes an Emergency Health Fund, a “gift” and not a loan for the countries most affected. However, the eurobonds do not move an inch: “They do not solve the current problem and there is a risk that the risks within the Eurozone will increase in the long term.”
There is a wave of outrage in Europe towards your country, your government and yourself.
Seeing the reaction in some countries, we must be fair and admit that we have not done well. If what is left is only what we do not want, the Eurobonds, but not all the things that we do, we have to be fair and make ourselves self-critical. We do not believe that Eurobonds are the right answer, but there is a message of solidarity, of being in favor of more public spending, on the urgency and how to help to meet immediate needs. If only the first half of the message is heard and the second half, unfortunately, doesn’t come, it’s our fault. We haven’t done a great job of communication. You have to admit it.
Of communication. It is one of those excuses if people have been offended but in which nothing bad is admitted in the background?
Honestly: what I said, and what I wanted to say, in some European meetings, in my Parliament and in the Dutch press, what we want to express, the desire of the Dutch government and the sheer necessity in this situation, is that you have to show solidarity , but also make sure thatwe put the money where our mouth is [una traduccin imprecisa de una expresin que hace referencia a respaldar con acciones las palabras]. That is why we have asked the Commission to look at how more can be done. It is absolutely necessary that in many respects we give a greater response like the European Union.
You now propose a new Fund. Can you explain what it is?
The main thing for everyone, the most urgent, is the medical situation. There is tremendous respect in all countries for medical professionals, so we must act in the absence of supplies. What we are proposing is, in the very short term, an Emergency Health Fund, which we are willing to fund to a substantial degree to ensure that we can meet these immediate needs. We propose it at the Dutch Government level, but we also invite others to join us. We have suggested it, the answer has been positive, but it depends on them. It is important to me, and it is vital that it is clear, that it would not be a loan, something that must be repaid. It would be a donation, a gift, I don’t know the exact word in English[idioma en el que se hizo la entrevista]. It is real, fresh money that we make available.
I don’t know if they understand the anger in our countries when they talk about gifts. It is not about donations, but about using the instruments available in a political and economic Union.
I understand what it says. There is an urgent need to act and show solidarity in the face of the serious medical problem in many countries. There is no connotation, we just want to emphasize that it is not a loan, it should not be repaid later. That would be for me[moralmente]incorrect. There is a pressing need to be addressed day by day and we feel it is an obligation for us. Medical professionals are doing a fantastic job, there is a need for equipment. We can help with that and we hope that many will join.
You don’t want Eurobonds because it would be “crossing the Rubicon of a Transfer Union”. Why is that so bad?
Our position is clear: the mechanisms and tools that are proposed must provide real solutions for specific problems. Like the mentioned Fund. The discussion of Eurobonds is recurrent, but for us it is not entirely clear what will solve this situation. The ECB has taken very substantial steps. Eurobonds do not solve the current problem and there is a risk that risks in the Eurozone will increase in the long term. It is not a smart thing.
If you are correct in the approach, Eurobonds are used and were not necessary, they can generate risks or transfers. If they are wrong, there are no Eurobonds and the Eurozone or even the EU breaks down due to political discussion or disappointment. Would the bet have been worth it?
We must evaluate what is necessary. Many finance ministers, including myself, are ready for extraordinary and substantial steps, unprecedented things to create space[fiscal]at national level, but also at European level. In the end, our task is to navigate through these difficult waters by addressing short-term needs, but also building long-term resilience for the Eurozone. The situation we are in is only the beginning. We don’t want to sound negative, because we are not sure how long it will last, but it may take a few weeks or months. So it is very important to look at the resistance in the long term. The objective is to safeguard the integrity of the Union and the common currency.
What order of magnitude do they handle? The proposed Fund is a few billion euros and the Mede has a firepower of 410,000 in loans. But perhaps we are talking about billions and a reconstruction on a continental scale. Perhaps they are not underestimating the impact because they have been hit less than the south?
I honestly believe that at this time of the crisis it is very difficult for individual countries to assess what the damage will be. And the same thing happens at the level of the European Union as a whole. But it will be substantial for sure. Every day we see it. Stores and businesses are closed, families are in hospitals. My wife is a doctor and tells me terrible stories every day. All Europeans, although there are differences from country to country, are aware that we are dealing with something fundamental, but it is difficult to assess how big. My wish and our goal is that we reduce the impact as much as possible. The aim should undoubtedly be to lay the foundation for a recovery as quickly as possible. And so we fully agree on the solidarity measures. Solidarity is essential in all dimensions of this crisis.
The OECD warns that the impact of the coronavirus in the world isovercoming their worst economic forecastsand stresses that a coordinated effort by governments and central banks to overcome the crisis is urgent.
Earlier this month, at the launch of its interim forecasts, it had advanced that, according to its most adverse hypothesis, the coronavirus couldhalve the growth of the world economyin 2020 and place it at 1.5%, causing a recession in economies such as Europe or Japan.
“Now it seems thatwe have already advanced much furtherof the most severe scenario foreseen then, “said the secretary general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),Angel Gurra, in a new digital platform launched last night by your organization to group data and response policies.
In his opinion, it is required“a level of ambition similar to that ofMarshall plan, created by the OECD, and a vision similar to that of the New Deal, but now worldwide. “
Gurra stressed that this pandemic constitutes the third great economic, financial and social “shock” of the 21st century, after the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the global financial crisis of 2008.
Among its effects, the suspension of production in the affected countries, with collateral damage in the global supply chains, and a strong fall in consumption that joins the collapse in confidence.
The representative of the so-called “club of the rich countries” warned that although the strict measures that are being applied are essential to contain the virus, they push economies to “an unprecedented state of deep freezing, from which recovery will not be direct nor automatic “
The World Health Organization (WHO) announced this Friday that there are more than210,000 cases of COVID-19worldwide, while deaths have crossed the 9,000 barrier, according to the Efe agency.
Gurra stressed that in addition to acting to minimize the loss of life, a coordinated effort against the “great economic crisis” unleashed is also a priority, which will continue even when the worst health problem has passed.
The OECD Secretary General held recent statements such as the G7, which on Monday pledged to“do whatever it takes”through “close cooperation” to curb the economic and health crisis, but pointed out that it is insufficient.
Gurra urged support for healthcare staff and for healthcare regulatory agencies to work together to remove the bureaucratic hurdles holding back the development and delivery of vaccines and treatments, even for uninsured patients.
The OECD representative also asked governmentsreduce the requirements to access unemployment compensation, and warned central banks that a joint approach to monitoring and diagnosing rising tensions is better than “loose and inconsistent responses.”
The current Government reached a pact of legislature that includes, among other measures, the rise in marginal rates to high incomes in the state rate of Income Tax for Individuals (Personal Income Tax). With regard to the general taxable base, this increase will mean raising the marginal rate by two points from 130,000 euros and four points from 300,000 euros. In relation to the saving tax, the announced increase will be four points from 140.0