Appointment of a pension on preferential terms according to list № 1 and list № 2

Age pension provision on preferential terms differs from pension provision on general terms. First of all, this applies to the provision of benefits when appointing a pension. They can consist in reducing seniority, age, or both seniority and age at the same time.

What legal norms regulate this issue?

List № 1 is Clause 1, Part 2, Art. 114 of the Law of Ukraine "On Mandatory Pension Insurance". Accordingly, List № 2 is item 2 of Part 2 of Article 114 of the same Law of Ukraine. This is a specific list of persons who were employed full-time in underground works, in works with particularly harmful and particularly difficult conditions. These lists detail all those categories of professions (positions) of employees who are entitled to preferential conditions of pension provision.

Why the PFU can refuse a pension on preferential terms?

Despite the fact that the rights of pensioners are enshrined in current legislation, the Pension Fund is far from always on their side. Some of the common reasons for refusals from the PFU are the following:

• the situation when the person has not reached retirement age at the time of application;
• there is a break between attestations of workplaces according to working conditions;
• there is no attestation of workplaces;
• no clarifying information was provided.

As for the retirement age, the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine dated January 23, 2020 № 1-р/2020 and the decision dated April 21, 2021 in exemplary case № 360/3611/20 are important here. In the specified exemplary case, the actions of the territorial body of the PFU regarding the resolution of the issue of granting a pension on preferential terms for employees employed full-time in jobs with harmful and difficult working conditions, namely:

the plaintiff, having reached the age of 50 and having the required length of service for on preferential terms, demanded appropriate pension provision. Instead, the PFU insisted on reaching the age of 55 in order to be eligible for a pension. The decision in exemplary case № 360/3611/20 was in favor of the plaintiff, which created a sufficient legal basis for further successful defense of pensioners in such categories of cases.

Issues of certification of workplaces

As for the attestation of workplaces, it is worth noting here that the legislator has assigned the duty of conducting the attestation of workplaces to the heads of enterprises, and therefore its untimely or incomplete implementation cannot deprive citizens of their constitutional right to social protection. This means that by abusing such a reason, the PFU violates the rights of pensioners.

Question of references

Regarding certificates, according to the norms of the current legislation, the provision of a clarifying certificate of an enterprise, institution or organization is necessary only in two cases:

• in the absence of a work book as such;
• in the absence of the necessary records in it, which determine the right to preferential pension provision.

Therefore, the requirement of certificates in cases where their provision is not provided for by law is an artificial complication of a pensioner's life. There are no legal grounds for this.

How we will be useful for you?

When you contact the Prikhodko&Partners law office, you receive high-quality assistance in matters of pension law - starting with counseling and ending with representation of interests in court. In many cases, it is the court that helps put the finishing touches on an important issue for a pensioner. We have good experience in this category of cases.