Preferential Pension for Exhauster Operators Under List No. 1 in Ukraine
A person’s entitlement to a pension depends on their age and the length of their insurance record. As a general rule, a person must reach the statutory retirement age and have the required insurance record. However, Ukrainian legislation recognises that certain occupations differ from others due to their complexity and specific working conditions. Employment in such occupations may qualify as preferential service and entitle a person to retire earlier.
For example, employees working at crushing, roasting, beneficiation, pelletising and charge-preparation plants (workshops) processing metallic and non-metallic minerals containing 2% or more crystalline (free) silicon dioxide in the dust fall within List No. 1 approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. Exhauster operators are among the occupations covered by these provisions.
The duties of an exhauster operator include operating exhausters and auxiliary equipment, including feeding mechanisms, gate devices, interlocking systems, secondary communication circuits and drives, oil pumps, viscose filters and other equipment under the supervision of a higher-qualified operator. In addition, such employees participate in equipment repair and maintenance.
Conditions for Retirement
Under Ukrainian pension legislation, such employees may be entitled to an old-age pension on preferential terms upon reaching the age of 50. Men must have at least 25 years of insurance record, including at least 10 years of employment in preferential working conditions under List No. 1. Women must have at least 20 years of insurance record, including at least 7 years and 6 months of employment under List No. 1.
Common Problems When Applying for a Preferential Pension
The employment record book is one of the principal documents examined when determining a person’s entitlement to a pension. In some cases, due to errors made by the employer, entries in the employment record book may lack the necessary details, stamps or other information required to establish that a particular period qualifies as preferential service. In such circumstances, it may be necessary to obtain clarifying certificates from the employer.
However, the Pension Fund of Ukraine may refuse to grant a preferential pension on the grounds that the applicant has failed to provide a clarifying certificate, even where the employment record book has been properly completed in accordance with the applicable requirements. Such an approach may violate the rights of the future pensioner. A clarifying certificate should generally be required only where the entries in the employment record book are insufficient to establish that the relevant period qualifies as preferential service.
Where the Pension Fund refuses to recognise the relevant periods of preferential service, it may be necessary to challenge its decision in court. The legal positions developed by the Supreme Court provide important guidance in such disputes. In its judgments of 20 February 2018 in case No. 234/13910/17 and 7 March 2018 in case No. 233/2084/17, the Supreme Court addressed similar issues and indicated that formal deficiencies in documents should not, as a general rule, constitute grounds for restricting a person’s pension rights.
Furthermore, in its judgment of 24 May 2018 in case No. 490/12392/16-a, the Supreme Court expressed the position that an employee cannot be held responsible for the correctness and completeness of accounting and employment-related documentation maintained by the employer.
Therefore, obtaining a preferential pension largely depends on the proper documentation of employment periods in the employment record book and, where necessary, the availability of clarifying certificates. At the same time, if the Pension Fund refuses to recognise the relevant preferential service or grant the pension, the applicant retains the right to challenge such a decision in court.
