Social Security: To Whom and How?? [Archives:2002/04/Reportage]

Fadhl Ali Abdullah
The human social philosophy is based on the maximum significance which is supposed to be provided by the social security. The social security is divided into the following kinds:
1- Unemployment security
2- Casualty security
3- Health security
4- Death and disablement security
5- Senility security
According to the Law the insured employee has the right to relocate from one sector to another. In this case, security services are continuously reckoned according to the legislative regulation.
The article (73) for the year 1991 stipulates that in case of transferring or appointed again the person who makes use of Military Security Law or the Social Security work submitted to the regulation of this law, the Salaries and Social Funds and Military Retirements is adhere to exchange the employees’ insured share and the body that he works for, to insure senility, disablement and death security since the beginning of submitting to the law. This law is valid until the end of leaving service and the rights in this case are settled. Quick review of the law give us a conspicuous vision that the ensured person in any one of the three funds is treated when he is transferred from one sector to another and his services is reckoned as if it was in one fund.
As many of the public sector institutions have been privatized, many laborers have not yet have the order of their ensured shares from the general corporation for salaries to the social general corporation settled. Despite settling the issue between the General Corporation for Salaries and the Social General Corporation in a joint meeting attended by a number of dignitaries of both Corporations, some workers are still not paid. Both sides have agreed to exchange the payable ratio subscription specified by the two corporations. In this regard, a dictum was authorized by the Legal Affairs Minister on November 11 2000 stipulating that:
1- The General Corporation for Social Security and the General Corporation for Security and Salaries are both adhere to exchange share proceeds between them.
2- The stated regulations in Social Security Law do not entitle the General Corporation for Social Security to exchange the share proceeds with the General Corporation for Security and Salaries.
3- If the General Corporation for the Social Security does not exchange its share proceeds with the General Corporation for Security and Salaries it will breaching the rights of the ensured and conflicting with Law No. (26) for the year 1991 with regard to the Social Security.
According to what have been said earlier, the ensured who have been transferred from the public sector to the private sector must enjoy all the security privileges with regard to the law No. (26) for the year 1991. In addition to this, services of the ensured specially those who don’t reach the retirement age, as that of their workmates should be included.
With regard to availability or Corporation’s expert, the financial center of the Corporation should be reviewed at least every five years. This should be entrusted to one or more appointed experts and their bonus also should be selected by the Administrative Board, on the condition that the first review of the Corporation should be after the elapse of three years starting from the date of working.
The question, which poses itself is, why the Corporation is incapable of reviewing its accounts during this period. The Corporation’s role has been changed and received the laborers who changed from the public sector to the private sector in relation to the government’s orientation to the privatization program. The question is it something normal to deprive the ensured employees of enjoying their legal privileges on the plea of that the Corporation is negligent in reviewing its financial affairs. So where are the financial surplus of the Corporation? Why the Corporation has not been consulted with regard to the fund and the ensured? Why some of us have taken great interest to transfer the public corporation to a private one? It seems that we don’t care or pay any attention to the public institutions or their interests. This misunderstanding seems to be related to the conservative inclination, which is still preoccupying our minds. Although, we live in the third millennium, we are deeply captivated by our old-line habits. We are still lagging behind without paying any attention to changes occurring around us. These changes have been proved to be the best to the benefit of humans.
Consequently, the Law No. (26) 1991 pertaining to security and salaries stipulated that a health security fund should be established financed by the monthly subscriptions which is taken from the overall wages of the ensured and transferred to the treasure’s office. In addition to this, a special decree was issued dealing with health care after the Cabinet’s approval including all the detailed regulations for security, medical care and the subscribers’ ratio.
The fund’s task is providing health care for the ensured covered by the law, especially, those who work in public and government institutions. To my knowledge, the Executive Bylaw has been ready for a long period; the project is still as it is since the issuance of the law. In these sectors, we observe that people have been deprived of the medical care without justification. We also see with our own eyes that the retired person receives YR 7 thousand which is not enough to cover his/her medication. It is worthwhile mentioning that the per capits income is not equal to what he/she spends.
The Law No. (26) stipulates that the regulation is valid only for Yemenis employed abroad with regard to secure dotage, disablement and death security. This also is still as it was without any change. We don’t know what are the reasons for not applying laws concerning health insurance.
The question is why the government doesn’t apply the chapters of these laws and what are the hindrances that are causing the delay of their application? The last question is directed to the Parliament which discussed and approved these laws. It has not supervised or reviewed the execution of laws up to this moment. Why? The opposition parties have to urge for the application of those laws. This is an appeal to discuss and review not only the two aforementioned laws but also the laws, which are issued and remain inapplicable.



——
[archive-e:04-v:2002-y:2002-d:2002-01-21-p:./2002/iss04/report.htm]