scholarly journals Narodziny systemu ubezpieczeniowego świadczeń emerytalnych w rolnictwie na przełomie lat 80. The birth of the system insurance of retirement benefits in agriculture at the turn of the 1980s.

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-77
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Maciejewska
Keyword(s):  
Retirement Benefits

Niniejsze opracowanie ma na celu przedstawienie zasad przyznawania emerytur rolniczych i ustalania ich wysokości w okresie od 1 stycznia 1978 roku do 31 grudnia 1989 roku. Ten zakres dat nie został wybrany przypadkowo, ponieważ cechą charakterystyczną rozwiązań dla rolników w ww. latach było uzależnienie prawa do świadczenia od faktu wytwarzania produktów rolnych oraz ich sprzedaży jednostkom gospodarki uspołecznionej. Stąd też system emerytalny nie miał charakteru powszechnego i wyłącznie socjalnego, lecz był ograniczony do towarowych producentów rolnych sprzedających swoją produkcję państwu. Rozwiązania wprowadzone w tym przedziale czasowym miały sprzyjać przebudowie rolnictwa. Cele związane z przekazaniem gospodarstwa zmierzały w ujęciu historycznym od socjalizacji własności rolniczej (do 1989 roku), przez niezależne od uwarunkowań ustrojowych założenia poprawy socjalno-bytowej rolników indywidualnych, do zmiany struktury obszarowej na wsi i wspierania zmiany pokoleniowej w rolnictwie. W podsumowaniu przedstawiono najważniejsze wnioski płynące z badań.

Accounting Discretion, Horizon Problem, and CEO Retirement Benefits

2009 ◽  
Vol 84 (5) ◽  
pp. 1553-1573 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Kalyta
Keyword(s):  
Firm Performance ◽  
Earnings Management ◽  
Discretionary Accruals ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Horizon Problem ◽  
Accounting Choices ◽  
Fortune 1000 ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT: Empirical research on the impact of managerial retirement on discretionary accounting choices is inconclusive, with most studies finding no evidence of earnings management in the pre-retirement period. I argue that income-increasing accounting choices in final pre-retirement years are particularly appealing to managers whose pension depends on firm performance in these years. Using primary data on retired CEOs of Fortune 1000 firms, I investigate the impact of CEO pension plans on discretionary accruals. Consistent with the prediction, I find evidence of income-increasing earnings management in the pre-retirement period only when CEO pension is based on firm performance. I also report evidence of negative abnormal market reaction to CEO retirement in firms with performance-contingent CEO pensions.

scholarly journals Women and Superannuation: Work Until You Drop?

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo (Chau) Vu ◽  
James Doughney
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Authority ◽  
Australian Bureau ◽  
Retirement Income ◽  
Paid Work ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Policy Initiatives ◽  
Paid Employment ◽  
Significant Barrier ◽  
Part Time ◽  
Australian Bureau Of Statistics

Superannuation is becoming an increasingly important source of retirement income. However, women in Australia face a significant barrier in accumulating superannuation entitlements because of their positions in the paid and unpaid workforce. When in paid work, women occupy lower positions, have more career breaks due to care responsibilities and have more part-time and casual employment. Many women, of course, do not work outside the home, and a smaller proportion of women engage in paid employment than do men. Consequently women have lower incomes, less wealth and less generous retirement benefits. Our analysis of the Survey of Employment Arrangements and Superannuation and other Australian Bureau of Statistics data, together with data published by the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority, reveals that dramatic policy initiatives will be needed to improve women’s access to retirement resources. Such policies do not apply only to superannuation but must address women’s positions in the paid workforce and their care responsibilities.

PRINCIPLE OF (NON) CUMULATION, THAT IS, ABOUT THE CONFLUENCE OF THE RIGHT TO A RETIREMENT PENSION FROM THE GENERAL AND MILITARY SYSTEMS

2021 ◽  
Vol specjalny (XXI) ◽  
pp. 707-716
Author(s):  
Justyna Czerniak-Swędzioł
Keyword(s):  
Social Insurance ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
General System ◽  
Social Solidarity ◽  
Pension Insurance ◽  
Social Insurance System ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Retirement Pension ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
The Right

Professional soldiers have their own social security system, separate from the general social insurance system, which provides social protection in the event of long service, total incapacity to serve and the death of the breadwinner (pension benefits). At the same time, a professional soldier can accumulate and receive two pensions from different systems, ie universal and reserve. However, the principle of accumulation of benefits based on the applicable provision is dedicated to a narrow group of entitled persons. The principle of non-cumulation is considered to be the basic and dominant one. It is an expression of the principle of risk solidarity in force in social insurance law and is not inconsistent with the constitutional principle of equality expressed in Art. 32 of the Polish Constitution. In the event of the overlapping of the right to several benefits specified in the Act, the pension authority is obliged to pay only one (higher) benefit, even if this right results from various acts, and the possibility of combining benefits must be clearly indicated in the provisions of law. Separation of the insurance and supply system allows each of these systems to fulfill separate obligations towards professional soldiers, not related to the general system. Maintaining the principle that for the same period of retirement pension insurance, two retirement benefits cannot be awarded simultaneously (Article 5 (2a) (2a) of the Pension Act). The exception to the principle of non-accumulation (ie the principle of collecting one benefit) in the case of a professional soldier remaining in service before January 2, 1999 is not determined by the date of admission to service, but the lack of the possibility to calculate the military pension taking into account the “civil” retirement age. The convergence of the right to benefits (from the general and military pension) with the parallel occurrence of these events is contrary to the constitutional principle of social justice. It is not socially just to deprive an insured person who has met the statutory requirements of the right to benefits solely on the basis of social solidarity. In such situations, a significant part of the retiree’s professional life is not reflected in the amount of received retirement benefits.

LEGAL AND TELEOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROTECTIVE FUNCTION OF PROCEDURAL NORMS OF SOCIAL INSURANCE

2021 ◽  
Vol specjalny (XXI) ◽  
pp. 729-740
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Szlachta-Kisiel
Keyword(s):  
Social Insurance ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Sociological Perspective ◽  
Specific Procedure ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Protective Function ◽  
Trial Procedure ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
Procedure Model

Determining the protective function of the norms of the pre-trial procedure in cases of pension and retirement benefits based on the aim and scope of the norms is not only possible but also necessary for a wider understanding of social insurance. The legal and teleological context plays the role of a determinant of the aim of a legal norm desired by the legislator and allows for the indication of exemplary institutions which, established by the legislator, perform a protective function. When norms are being examined through the prism of the psychological theory of law they show that social security law is a psychological phenomenon and should be subjected to a multidimensional study that will reveal the intended aim of the legislator. The protective function is also performed by a specific procedure model with the precisely defined boundaries of the function. From the sociological perspective, an undesirable goal is also important, unintended by the legislator, which is caused by the norms fulfilling the protective function, and which is visible from the conducted analysis.

What are the duties (if any) of retirement funds boards which are requested by employers to withhold members’ retirement benefits?

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (4) ◽  
pp. 818-843
Author(s):  
Clement Marumoagae
Keyword(s):  
Pension Funds ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Retirement Benefits ◽  
Retirement Funds

This article evaluates an extraordinary remedy created by the legislature in s 37D(1)(b)(ii) of the Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956. This provision enables employers, who are able to satisfy retirement funds boards that they have suffered economic harm at the hands of their employees’ who are members of such retirement funds, to be compensated from liable members’ retirement benefits. It is demonstrated in this article that, by and large, the practical application of this section has been driven by the courts and the adjudicator, both of whom have interpreted this provision to include aspects that are not explicitly included in it, such as the retirement fund’s power to withhold benefits at the request of employers. It further demonstrates that there are several critical duties that are not explicitly described in any of the provisions of the Pension Funds Act which courts (and other tribunals) have held must be observed by boards when considering withholding members’ retirement benefits. In this article, these duties are critically evaluated with a view to recommending necessary amendments to s 37D(1)(b)(ii) of the Pension Funds Act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document