Female worker Nguyen Thi Thu Nguyet worked for Sam Yang Vietnam Company, which was later transferred to a partner and renamed Sam Ho Vietnam Company.
After terminating her contract with the old company, Ms. Nguyet received a one-time allowance (in 2003) and worked for the new company. In 2022, Ms. Nguyet quit her job. This time, her application for a one-time allowance was rejected by the Ho Chi Minh City Social Security for violating the regulations on receiving one-time social insurance benefits in the previous period, so she had to wait for instructions from the Vietnam Social Security.
Recently, many enterprises have been in a difficult situation due to lack of orders, having to stop production and lay off employees. Enterprises are not able to pay all their social insurance debts at once, but want to pay in installments, in which priority is given to paying a portion of the debt in advance to resolve benefits for some cases of employees in special difficulties such as pregnancy, raising small children, illness, old age, etc. However, this proposal was rejected by the social insurance agency, forcing them to pay the full debt at once to close the books for employees. The rigidity in this regulation not only causes the social insurance fund to lose revenue but also affects the legitimate and legal rights of employees, who have to suffer the consequences due to mistakes not caused by them...
These are typical examples of difficulties in resolving social insurance benefits for employees. Although the goal of preserving the social insurance fund is correct, many regulations in practical application have proven to be inappropriate, especially the rigidity that has created bottlenecks in resolving employee benefits. In many cases, employees' benefits are affected only because the enterprise does not comply with the law and resolves employee benefits flexibly, which, in the end, is reasonable, fair and has a way out.
In recent years, social insurance policies have increasingly entered social life. Social insurance agencies have made positive contributions, increasingly demonstrating the importance of a pillar in the national social security system. But good is good, it needs to be better. If we only pursue quantity and targets to fill the social insurance participation rate without paying much attention to the rights of beneficiaries, the efforts or numbers and targets do not fully convey the good meaning of the policy. Currently, the revised Social Insurance Law is being put forward for comments from all levels and sectors, which is also an opportunity to adjust social insurance policies to be more suitable, more feasible, and long-standing problems will be resolved.
While waiting for the new law to be promulgated, it is necessary to flexibly resolve arising issues, especially the rights of employees in enterprises that are late in paying or have outstanding social insurance contributions; and the rights of employees to one-time subsidies. Citing reasons for violations by enterprises, incomplete records, waiting for instructions from competent authorities, etc. is the easiest thing for the social insurance agency to do, but if the social insurance industry is flexible in looking at the problem, there will certainly be a more satisfactory way to resolve the rights of employees.
In the process of amending the Social Insurance Law, we must immediately remove the unreasonable points, not push the disadvantage to the employees; we must increase the attractiveness of the Social Insurance policy to attract more participants. This is an important time to make comments and adjust the Social Insurance Law to be more progressive and highly feasible.
Source link
Comment (0)