Preferential Pension for Quarry and Mine Workers under List No. 1 in Ukraine

Many people in Ukraine are employed in jobs involving particularly harmful and difficult working conditions covered by List No. 1, which may entitle them to an old-age pension on preferential terms. This category includes, in particular, certain work involving the extraction of minerals in mines, waste dumps, quarries and open-pit mines.

The legislation does not necessarily limit this category to a single occupation. It may include miners, foremen, fitters, electrical fitters, drivers, mine surveyors and other employees, provided that they perform qualifying mineral extraction work in open-pit mines, quarries, mines or waste dumps at a depth of 150 metres or more.

One example is the occupation of a mine surveyor working in a quarry or mine. Their duties may include carrying out surveying work within assigned sections of the quarry or mine, establishing control networks for surveying mine workings, preparing mine surveying and graphical documentation, and performing other specialised surveying tasks.

What are the conditions for granting an old-age pension on preferential terms to employees working full-time in open-pit mines, quarries, mines and waste dumps involving mineral extraction at a depth of 150 metres or more?

The principal advantage of a preferential pension is the possibility of retiring at a reduced retirement age. Employees whose work qualifies under List No. 1 may generally be entitled to an old-age pension on preferential terms from the age of 50. Men generally need at least 25 years of insurance record, including at least 10 years of qualifying List No. 1 employment. Different statutory service requirements apply to women in accordance with the applicable pension legislation.

How can employment in quarries, open-pit mines and other mineral extraction operations be confirmed?

The employment record book is one of the primary documents confirming a person’s employment history. For a period of work in a quarry, open-pit mine or mine to be recognised as preferential service, the relevant entry should contain sufficient information reflecting the nature and conditions of the work. For example: “Employed as a motor vehicle driver working full-time in a quarry at a depth of 150 metres or more.” The reference to work at a depth of 150 metres or more may be particularly important when determining whether the relevant period qualifies as preferential service under List No. 1.

However, there are situations where the employment record book does not contain all the information necessary to establish the preferential nature of a particular period of employment. In such circumstances, Ukrainian legislation provides for the use of clarifying certificates issued by employers or their legal successors. Such documents may confirm both the period of employment and the specific nature and conditions of the work giving entitlement to a preferential pension.

In practice, the Pension Fund of Ukraine may refuse to grant an old-age pension on preferential terms where the applicant has not provided the requested clarifying certificates. However, a person may be unable to obtain such documents even though their employment record book has been properly completed and contains sufficient information concerning the qualifying work.

Ukrainian court practice provides important guidance in such situations. Where a properly completed employment record book contains sufficient information confirming the nature and conditions of the qualifying employment, the absence of an additional clarifying certificate should not automatically prevent the relevant period from being recognised as preferential service.

Therefore, particular attention should be paid to the accuracy and completeness of entries in the employment record book so that they properly reflect the nature and conditions of the work performed. Where the employment record does not contain sufficient information, additional clarifying certificates may be required. If the Pension Fund refuses to recognise qualifying List No. 1 employment despite sufficient evidence, its decision may be challenged before an administrative court.