Jaminan sosial di Amerika pertama kali diundangkan pada tanggal 14 Agustus 1935 yang pada awalnya dikenal dengan nama OASDI program (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance). Undang-undang jaminan sosial tersebut disetujui setelah terjadinya depresi ekonomi di Amerika di awal tahun 1930an. Awalnya, UU Jaminan Sosial Amerika tidak mencakup asuransi sosial kesehatan (Medicare). Program Medicare dalam sistem jaminan sosial di Amerika baru masuk 30 tahun kemudian, yaitu di tahun 1965 sehingga nama lain kini dikenal dengan OASDHI (H diantara D dan I sebagai singkatan dari Health). Program OASDI, tanpa kesehatan, pada hakikatnya mirip dengan program pensiun kita dimana peserta memperoleh manfaat uang tunai ketika mencapai usia pensiun, ahli waris peserta yang memenuhi syarat menerima manfaat jika peserta meninggal, dan apabila peserta menderita cacat. Menjelang UU Jaminan Sosial di Amerika diberlakukan, usulan untuk membuat program ini sukarela juga sudah diajukan dengan alasan pelanggaran atas hak kebebasan. Namun demikian, pilihan tersebut tidak diadopsi dalam UU karena bukti-bukti menunjukkan bahwa program sukarela tidak efektif. Sebenarnya Amerika termasuk terbelakang dalam mengembangkan jaminan sosialnya dibandingkan dengan Jerman dan Inggris (Rejda, 1988).
Direktur Perencanaan Strategis dan TI BPJS Ketenagakerjaan, Sumarjono, meninjau pelayanan di Kantor Cabang BPJS Ketenagakerjaan Salemba, Jakarta, Rabu (4/5). Kunjungan tersebut dilakukan dalam rangka memperingati hari buruh.(Liputan6.com/Fery Pradolo)
Dalam hal penyelenggaraan jaminan sosial bagi penduduknya, Indonesia jauh tertinggal. Negara lain yaitu Jerman dan Inggris telah memulai programjaminan sosial ini sejak puluhan bahkan ratusan tahun lalu.
Direktur Utama Badan Penyelenggaraan Jaminan Sosial (BPJS) atau BPJS Ketenagakerjaan Agus Susanto mengatakan, di negara-negara maju, penyelenggaraan jaminan sosial bagi setiap penduduknya merupakan tanggung jawab negara. Oleh sebab itu, di negara-negara tersebut telah sejak lama dibangun sistem jaminan sosial yang kuat.
"Jaminan sosial itu hak dasar manusia yang sifatnya universal, basic human right. Dan ini konsen seluruh bangsa di dunia. Seluruh negara di dunia sangat concern dengan jaminan sosial," ujar dia di Hotel Pullman, Jakarta, Selasa (31/1/2017).
The Central Provident Fund (CPF) bertindak di tempat jaminan sosial nasional. Pada dasarnya, CPF adalah skema tabungan wajib yang diperkenalkan pada tahun 1955 untuk membantu menutup biaya hidup bagi penduduk Singapura setelah pensiun / penghentian pekerjaan.
Uang yang disimpan dalam Rekening Biasa CPF dapat digunakan untuk membantu membayar untuk kepemilikan rumah, pendidikan dan investasi. Rekening Khusus dimaksudkan untuk usia tua dan kontinjensi tujuan dan pensiun untuk membeli produk-produk keuangan yang terkait dengan. Sebagian dari yang dikenal sebagai Medisave CPF juga dapat digunakan untuk membantu membayar biaya perawatan rumah sakit dan asuransi kesehatan (yang dikenal sebagai MediShield). CPF skema yang berlaku untuk semua orang Singapura dan Singapura Permanent penduduk; asing yang berada di Work Pass tidak diharuskan untuk memberikan kontribusi dana ini. Namun, ketika seorang asing mengambil tempat tinggal permanen di Singapura, orang asing akan diharapkan untuk berkontribusi pada skema CPF.
Abstrak: Jaminan sosial adalah isu kritikal dalam perekonomian yang berfungsi sebagai pengganti penghasilan pekerja yang hilang
karena sakit, kecelakaan kerja, PHK, kematian dan pensiun. Jaminan sosial di Malaysia yang dikelola secara terpisah antara pekerja swasta dan pegawai publik sejak pendiriannya tahun 1950an telah merefleksikan adanya tata-kelola perlindungan para-pekerja yang baik, yang terdiri dari 4 pelembagaan yaitu simpanan wajib pekerja (EPF), lembaga kemalangan sosial (Socso), lembaga pensiun pegawai sipil dan lembaga tabung angkatan tentara (AFSB). Termasuk aplikasi 5-prinsip Good Corporate Governance (GCG). Tujuan penelitian adalah untuk membahas operasionalisasi jaminan sosial. Metodologi yang digunakan adalah metode deskriptif, fokus pada telaah konsep LO, ISSA dan sistem Malaysia. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk analisis badan-badan penyelenggara jaminan sosial yang dikelola secara terpisah dan untuk membahas apakah dapat diterima secara universal dalam era globalisasi. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa operasionalisasi jaminan sosial untuk status peserta yang berbeda di Malaysia seharusnya terpisah, karena perbedaan sumber pembiayaan antara program-program jaminan sosial untuk pekerja swasta dan pegawai publik yang pada hakekatnya mengindikasikan adanya perbedaan karakteristik masing-masing.
Kamp pengungsi Suriah di Turki. (dogruhaberarapca.com)
Menteri tenaga kerja dan jaminan sosial Turki, Faruk Çelik, mengatakan bahwa pemerintah akan memberikan kartu identitas pengungsi Suriah yang memungkinkan mereka untuk mendapatkan pekerjaan.
Hal tersebut dinyatakannya dalam sebuah konferensi pers, Rabu (8/10/2014), di Ankara bersama menteri keuangan, menteri perindustrian dan teknologi, menteri perdagangan dan bea cukai, dan menteri pembangunan. Para menteri itu menyampaikan perencanaan pembangunan jangka menengah 2015-2017.
Çelik menyampaikan, “Para pengungsi Suriah yang memiliki paspor atau memiliki izin tinggal di Turki, mereka tidak boleh dipersulit untuk mendapatkan izin bekerja. Parlemen Turki juga telah menetapkan undang-undang imigrasi. Undang-undang itu akan menurunkan peraturan yang mengharuskan dikeluarkannya kartu identitas para pengungsi. Dengan kartu itu, para pengungsi akan bisa bekerja.”
Saat ini terdapat 1.5 juta pengungsi Suriah yang berada di Turki, belum ditambah dengan pengungsi dari Irak. Dari jumlah itu, 200 ribu orang pengungsi terakhir masuk ke Turki karena menyelamatkan diri dari ancaman ISIS.
Sebelumnya, saat merayakan Idul Adha bersama para pengungsi, Erdogan mengatakan, “Eropa hanya menonton. Demikian juga UNHCR yang hanya bisa berbicara. Ketika dibutuhkan kerja nyata mereka tidak terlihat sama sekali. Adapun kami, bangsa Turki hingga kini sudah mengeluarkan US$ 4 miliar (Rp 50 triliun) untuk para pengungsi. Bahkan setengah US$ 0.5 miliar (Rp 6 triliun) telah kami kirim dalam bentuk bantuan logistik bagi rakyat Suriah yang terjebak di dalam Suriah.” (msa/dakwatuna/yenisafak)
Hillary Clinton campaigned at the Mug ‘n Muffin in Stone Ridge, Va., on Monday.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times
For months during the Democratic presidential nominating contest, Hillary Clinton has resisted calls from Senator Bernie Sanders to back a single-payer health system, arguing that the fight for government-run health care was a wrenching legislative battle that had already been lost.
But as she tries to clinch the nomination, Mrs. Clinton is moving to the left on health care and this week took a significant step in her opponent’s direction, suggesting she would like to give people the option to buy intoMedicare.
“I’m also in favor of what’s called the public option, so that people can buy into Medicare at a certain age,” Mrs. Clinton said on Monday at a campaign event in Virginia.
The Medicare program covers Americans once they reach 65. Beneficiaries pay premiums to help cover the cost of their coverage, but the government pays the bulk of the bill. Mrs. Clinton’s suggestion was that perhaps younger Americans, “people 55 or 50 and up,” could voluntarily pay to join the program.
She made the remarks as she continues to face a determined challenge on the left from Mr. Sanders, forcing her to essentially fight a two-front war as she seeks to turn her attention to Donald J. Trump and the general election. While Mr. Sanders trails by a substantial number of delegates, his effect continues to be felt in the race as he pressures Mrs. Clinton to adopt more progressive positions.
“Bernie Sanders’s campaign is having an effect on Hillary Clinton’s policies,” said Steve McMahon, a Democratic political consultant from Purple Strategies. “From a progressive point of view, that’s exactly what was hoped for and that is exactly what is happening.”
The idea of allowing people to buy in to Medicare has been discussed in policy circles and in Congress for decades. Mrs. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, floated a similar proposal in 1998, including it in hisState of the Union address that year. The strategy has been embraced by many advocates of single-payer health care as a way to move more Americans into the existing government system. An incremental expansion of Medicare was the hoped-for strategy of Medicare’s original authors.
But it is a new idea in Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. She has called for a range of health policy overhauls to preserve and expand the Affordable Care Act. She has proposed expanding financial protections for people with high health care costs and expanding subsidies to help middle-income people buy their own insurance. She also has proposed a package of policies to lower the price of prescription drugs.
But more recently, she has moved further. In February, she began discussing the possibility of a “public option,” a government-run insurance plan available to people shopping on the existing marketplaces. That idea was considered when the Affordable Care Act was being debated in Congress, but it was ultimately removed from the law.
Mrs. Clinton’s latest suggestion regarding Medicare, first reported by Bloomberg News, takes another step by proposing that Americans still in their prime working years be given the opportunity to obtain the same government insurance that is provided on a universal basis to their older peers.
“The politics in the short term are good,” said Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “Medicare is a popular program — people don’t know too much about health reform, but people know about Medicare.”
Before the Affordable Care Act, people older than 55 tended to have difficulty buying their own insurance, because insurance companies saw them as bigger risks. Since the health law passed, insurance plans have been banned from discriminating against people based on health history, but they can charge premiums that are three times as much as younger adults are charged.
Moving more older adults into the Medicare program could have the effect of lowering insurance costs for younger people, as Mrs. Clinton suggested. But the exact dynamics would depend on how the program was structured.
Mrs. Clinton did not say, for example, whether lower-income Americans choosing Medicare would receive help paying their premiums, as they do when they buy private plans on the new marketplaces in the Affordable Care Act. Without such subsidies, Medicare might be an affordable option only for wealthy or very sick customers. In 2008, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a Medicare buy-in program for 62- to 64-year-olds would cost about $7,600 a person.
Medicare tends to cover a wider range of doctors and services than commercial plans, but it also has more holes — it has no limit on how much patients can be asked to spend out of their own pockets, for example. That means conventional Medicare would have different benefits and financial protections than private plans that are available to the 50-to-65 population.
“It’s not a bad concept to be playing with and thinking about,” said Linda J. Blumberg, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, a left-leaning policy research group. “But there are some complexities that need to be ironed out.”
Taking a more progressive stance on health care could serve Mrs. Clinton in a general election matchup against Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee. He has offered a range of views on the subject. While he says that he wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, he also has called for a system that would ensure that all Americans have health coverage.
Mr. Sanders is pressing on in his campaign and hopes to influence the party’s platform at the July convention even if, as expected, he does not become the nominee. He has already pulled Mrs. Clinton to take more progressive stances on several issues, including supporting a higher minimum wage and opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and the Keystone XL pipeline.
Although Mr. Sanders viewed Mrs. Clinton’s latest health care proposal as progress, he said on Tuesday that it was not sufficient.
“Secretary Clinton’s proposal to let the American people buy into Medicare is a step in the right direction, but just like her support for a $12 minimum wage, it is not good enough,” Mr. Sanders said in a statement that described her idea as “Medicare for some.” (http://www.nytimes.com/)
Up to 22,000 families have appealed to social protection centers for targeted social assistance in various districts of Azerbaijan as of Jan. 26, Salim Muslimov, minister for labour and social protection of population, told reporters Jan. 26.
“We sent our representatives to districts starting from last week,” Muslimov added. “They are considering the appeals on the spot. For example, some 1,183 families appealed for the targeted social assistance in the Yardimli district only.”
“The most important issue in this area is to increase transparency. This will be ensured through the introduction of an e-system of appeals for the targeted social assistance,” he said.
“Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has recently signed an order on allocation of 20 million manats to finance the targeted social assistance,” added the minister. “This order will strengthen the social protection of low-income families.”
“At present, 5.1 percent of the families are receiving the targeted social assistance,” he said. “This figure will increase up to six percent thanks to additional 20 million manats.”
Greece’s social security system has been well overdue for a major overhaul for years. Adverse demographics, generous pensions and a protracted economic decline have made it imperative. Undoubtedly, any solution entails a good deal of political and social cost. However, it will be a mistake for a heavily indebted country in desperate need of growth to try to tackle the problem by shifting the burden to current employees and future pensioners.
The government has forwarded its proposal for addressing the shortcomings of the pay-as-you go pension system to the international lenders and is awaiting their response. For its part, it has tried to come up with 1.8 billion euros in savings this year without cutting main pensions, but leaving open the possibility of doing so for auxiliary pensions over 170 euros. It is noted though that it reduced main pensions 2 percent and auxiliary pensions 6 percent across-the-board last fall by raising healthcare contributions.
Although it is hard for anybody like us to put numbers on the proposal, it is clear that it is trying to restructure the system by means that minimize the political cost. It is trying to avoid cutting the current pensions until 2018 and is relying instead on other measures such as increasing social security contributions and putting a tax on banking services to come up with the revenues.
In doing so, it has scored a victory by having the heads of some employers’ organizations consent to a “reasonable” hike in social security contributions for companies and employees. It is a clear reversal of the 2.9 percent reduction in social security contributions two years ago that is credited by many for boosting employment and salaries.
We have long argued that hikes in social security contributions have a damaging effect on international competitiveness, labor productivity, employment and growth potential. This is more so for export-oriented and small and medium-sized companies. Contributions are indeed low and could be raised in the public sector and for farmers.
The lack of employment opportunities and the high social security contributions, combined with income and property taxes and the unsatisfactory level of public services, contribute to the intergenerational divide and create disincentives for young educated people to stay in Greece. This brain drain has a detrimental effect on the country’s growth potential in the medium term.
The numbers of the social security system tell us what has to be done. One should start with budget subsidies to social security funds which play a significant role in achieving fiscal consolidation, arresting debt dynamics and eventually lightening up the debt burden. A simple glance at the figures gives the whole picture.
The state budget subsidized the social security funds with about 5.4 billion euros, or 4 percent of GDP early this century. Today, the budget finances them with about 10.5 billion euros, or 6.1 percent of GDP. Taxpayers paid around 19 billion euros, or 8.2 percent of GDP in 2009, the year before the country was bailed out.
Had the budget subsidized the social security funds with the same amount spent in the early years of the 21st century, the country’s public debt would have been lower by 110 billion euros or more according to our calculations. It is noted that the general government consolidated debt was estimated at around 337 billion euros by the European Commission at the end of 2015. In other words, about a third of the public debt would have been wiped out if state funding for social security funds had stabilized around the level of 2001.
Unfortunately that did not happen. Successive governments provided unjustified pension increases and other benefits to many in a bid to win votes, with the opposition parties at the time demanding even greater hikes. Moreover, they encouraged early retirement schemes to deal with overstaffed state-controlled organizations and companies because they could not lay them off.
It is not surprising that the total pension bill would have been some 8 billion euros lower per annum if all retirees received their pensions after the age of 65 according to our calculations. Expenditure on pensions would have been 3.8-4 billion euros lower if everybody retired after the age of 62. Greece spends about 28.5 billion euros on pensions, or 16.5 percent of GDP annually, down from 32 billion in 2009.
It is fair and makes economic sense to start rationalizing the budget subsidies to various social security funds. It is not right for taxpayers to pay a per capital subsidy of about 16,000 euros annually to Public Power Corporation’s 37,000 pensioners and 11,000-12,000 euros to the 46,000 pensioners of OTE telecom, now controlled by Deutsche Telekom, some of whom are in their 50s or women who have been getting a pension after working for only 15 years in the past. This contrasts with an annual subsidy of some 2,000-3,000 euros to the pensioners of IKA, the country’s largest fund.
We have said before the country could save 500-600 million euros by halving the subsidy to the PPC and OTE funds. It could also produce more savings by putting an appropriate cap on the total amount received from all pensions. More than 330,000 people receive three main pensions or more. This would be justified because Greece is an indebted country and pensions are in general higher than they would have been if calculated based on lifelong social security contributions, paid mostly in drachmas.
It is true that fixing the social security system is a big task. However, it will be unfortunate if the solution does not focus on rationalizing spending and producing savings by penalizing future pensioners.
Social Security benefits are the payments workers can collect in retirement based on having a work record that qualifies them for benefits. SSI was created to provide an income for those don’t have enough of a work record to qualify for Social Security.
Q: What is the number of quarters needed in each age group to qualify for Social Security disability? Also, what is the difference between Social Security and SSI benefits?
A: Social Security explains this clearly on its website at this link: socialsecurity.gov/planners/disability/dqualify2.html. It explains the number of quarters of work needed at different ages to qualify for disability.
One of the important things is that a young person can qualify for disability with few work credits. This is important because some conditions, such as schizophrenia, emerge relatively early in life when the person may have minimal work experience.
Many people with physical or mental impairments find it virtually impossible to build a larger work record. That’s why the rules call for different quarters at different ages.
Social Security benefits are the payments workers can collect in retirement based on having a work record that qualifies them for benefits. The benefit is calculated using a complicated formula that includes the workers’ 35 highest-earnings years. The formula is tilted so that lower-wage workers receive proportionately more for their earnings than higher-wage workers.
But some people don’t have enough of a work record to qualify for Social Security benefits. Supplemental Security Income, or SSI, was created to provide an income for such people. To qualify for SSI, recipients must have minimal assets or income from other sources.
Q: My husband is 73, I’m 70, and due to helping three adult children with medical and legal issues, we are $100,000 in debt. I am employed full time, making $78,000 a year, with no plans to retire. My husband gets minimal Social Security, a small pension, and sporadically works a low-paying part-time job.
We make more than the minimum payment on the credit cards. But we cannot make a dent in this debt. What can we do?
A: One thing you can do is find out if your children can, or will, help. If their circumstances permit it now, they should step up and help you extinguish the debt.
In the meantime, regardless of how your children respond, you should be looking ahead to what your expenses will be when you finally need to retire and no longer earn $78,000 a year.
That means start figuring out how you might reposition your home equity by downsizing, renting or taking out a reverse mortgage home equity line of credit. Another option might be to take out a home equity line of credit and pay off all the debt. This would give you a lower interest rate and, most likely, an interest-only loan for a period of time.
With limited home equity, modest Social Security benefits and no other savings, you might also consider personal bankruptcy — or at least a visit to an attorney who specializes in bankruptcies. There is a point where bankruptcy is the only way. You aren’t there yet, but you would be if you were both on Social Security.
:strip_icc():format(webp)/liputan6-media-production/medias/1224152/original/075722300_1462360949-20160504--BPJS-Ketenagakerjaan-Jakarta--Fery-Pradolo-01.jpg)
