Nr 1 (9) 2013

Social Pol­icy

OLD AND NEW SOCIAL RISKS

pobierz PDF/download in PDF

Table of Con­tents 1/2013 Eng­lish Edition

FROM THE EDITORS – Gertruda Uścińska, Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska

THEORY
SOCIAL RISK AS A PREREQUISITE FOR PROTECTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEME – Gertruda Uścińska
NEW SOCIAL RISK – Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska
SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOOR — PRACTICE, CONCEPT, STANDARD AND GLOBAL SOCIAL POLICY – Krzysztof Hage­me­jer

NATIONAL EXPERIENCES
HELATH INSURANCE IN BULGARIA – AN ACHIEVEMENT OR A DIFFICULTY? – Kras­simira Sred­kova
SURVIVOR’S BENEFIT IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM – Alek­san­dra Wik­torow
ELDERLY CARE IN HUNGARY – Dóra Lajkó
HAVE FINLAND ALREADY TACKLED THE NEW SOCIAL RISKS? – Laura Kalliomaa-Puha

LIST OF CONTRIBUTIONS

We rec­om­mend the papers

FROM THE EDITORS – Gertruda Uścińska, Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska (Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies, War­saw, Poland)
Social pro­tec­tion sys­tems and in par­tic­u­lar social secu­rity sys­tems due to chang­ing social needs and eco­nomic pos­si­bil­i­ties of meet­ing them con­stantly undergo trans­for­ma­tion. The prob­lems which these sys­tems face relate to the dilemma of growth in demand for social ben­e­fits and reduced abil­ity of their fund­ing. How­ever, social processes, such as age­ing pop­u­la­tion require sys­temic change that needs fund­ing.
The con­cept of social secu­rity is defined in Con­ven­tion No. 102 of the Inter­na­tional Labour Orga­ni­za­tion con­cern­ing min­i­mum stan­dards in the field of social secu­rity, adopted in Geneva on 28 June 1952. Based on this, the con­cept of the social secu­rity sys­tem was adopted orga­nized around the type of social risks (sick­ness, mater­nity, inva­lid­ity, fam­ily bur­den, old age, death of the bread­win­ner, acci­dent at work, occu­pa­tional dis­ease, unem­ploy­ment) and the ben­e­fits pro­vided for in the event of their real­iza­tion. Rules for enti­tle­ment to such ben­e­fits are estab­lished in the var­i­ous chap­ters – social secu­rity sec­tions. Each of those sec­tions deter­mines the scope of the legal pro­tec­tion pro­vided for the effects of real­iza­tion of a spec­i­fied social risk¹.
Con­ven­tion No. 102 is a legal act for the devel­op­ment of social secu­rity leg­is­la­tion, under­stood as legal norms set­ting out the rules, organ­i­sa­tion, financ­ing and their objec­tive and sub­jec­tive scope and the social secu­rity sys­tem. It also pro­motes the devel­op­ment of the right to social secu­rity, as belong­ing to each per­son cov­ered by the sys­tem. This right falls within the cat­e­gory of social human rights². We need to fully appre­ci­ate the pos­i­tive effect of this Con­ven­tion on both of these dimen­sions³.
How­ever, we must answer the ques­tion of whether the stan­dards laid down in Con­ven­tion No. 102 can still form the basis for the fur­ther devel­op­ment of social secu­rity sys­tems, which must be adapted to the chang­ing social, eco­nomic and legal con­di­tions of their oper­a­tion?⁴.
Another prob­lem, which should be noted is the fact that the cur­rent cat­a­logue of social risk as estab­lished in inter­na­tional law was not expanded, i.e. in the Con­ven­tion No 102. While the national legal sys­tems of EU coun­tries intro­duced ben­e­fits that can­not be linked with these risks. For exam­ple, ben­e­fits pro­vided to per­sons in order to ensure their long-term care are granted within the frame­work of the dif­fer­ent dis­ci­plines or branches of the social secu­rity sys­tem; often as part of ben­e­fits that cor­re­spond to the spe­cific risks indi­rectly deter­min­ing the need to receive long-term care. Old age, dis­abil­ity, death of the bread­win­ner, acci­dents at work and occu­pa­tional dis­eases, fam­ily care, dis­eases pose risks which in national sys­tems also con­tain a more or less explic­itly pro­nounced long-term care com­po­nent. This also applies to social assis­tance. More­over, in the Ger­man legal doc­trine appeared the con­cept of the sec­ondary social risks, which is under­stood in this way that the appear­ance of a risk calls for the need to meet the effects of another risk⁵. This con­cept can be applied to long-term care and the risk of depen­dency. This risk remains, in fact, in rela­tion to other risks, such as ill­ness, inva­lid­ity, acci­dents at work and occu­pa­tional dis­eases, pen­sion­able age, fam­ily bur­den and, in par­tic­u­lar, fam­ily ben­e­fits. This prob­lem was also called the need to work on the con­cept of new social risks.
Dis­cus­sions about the new social risks have been under way in the EU for sev­eral years. The prob­lem of the old and new social risks also applies to polit­i­cal trans­for­ma­tion coun­tries, such as Poland.
Mod­i­fi­ca­tion of the scope and nature of social risk and expand­ing the scope of legal pro­tec­tion of their effects con­sti­tute an impor­tant chal­lenge for social pol­icy. New risks, e.g. depen­dence require, depend­ing on the coun­try, activ­i­ties of dif­fer­ent organ­i­sa­tional and legal natures. They can rely on the estab­lish­ment of new insti­tu­tions or the use of exist­ing insti­tu­tional arrange­ments or pri­vate mar­ket ser­vices. This issue is dis­cussed by the Hun­gar­ian author in her arti­cle.
In turn, adapt­ing the insti­tu­tions respon­si­ble for the “old” risk, such as the loss of the bread­win­ner (survivor’s pen­sion) cre­ates a lot of prob­lems on the one hand related with the chang­ing socio-economic con­di­tions and with the need to adapt to the other new social con­di­tions on the other hand. In the case of a survivor’s pen­sion, it is inter alia about adapt­ing to the pro­found changes in the pen­sion sys­tem. These prob­lems are pre­sented in one of the texts in this issue.
We want this “Social Pol­icy” issue to start a debate on the old and new social risks. We believe that the con­cept of social risks and their trans­for­ma­tions gives an inter­est­ing per­spec­tive allow­ing for a bet­ter under­stand­ing and expla­na­tion of changes in the struc­ture and func­tion­ing of social insti­tu­tions, and espe­cially social secu­rity sys­tems. It seems that this dis­cus­sion will be use­ful in the debates on social pol­icy in Poland.
The texts that make up this “Social Pol­icy” issue are divided into two parts: con­cep­tual and descrip­tive. In the first part we present two arti­cles about “old” and “new” social risks. More gen­eral texts also include an arti­cle on the rec­om­men­da­tion of the Inter­na­tional Labour Organ­i­sa­tion on the min­i­mum secu­rity thresh­old. Con­sid­er­a­tions of the new rec­om­men­da­tion of the ILO No. 202 of 2012 reflect the process of change of social secu­rity. They con­cern actions at the national level, aimed at pro­tec­tion against poverty, regard­less of the level of national income and the devel­op­ment con­di­tion of the labour mar­ket.
In the sec­ond part, there are arti­cles exam­in­ing selected new and old social risks and their cor­re­spond­ing insti­tu­tional solu­tions. Its descrip­tion con­tains trends in this respect in some EU coun­tries. The text on health secu­rity, as well as the text on survivor’s pen­sion con­cerns old social risks. While health risks (sick­ness) is still treated as a per­sis­tent social risk, the risk of loss of the bread­win­ner takes on a dif­fer­ent char­ac­ter in a chang­ing social real­ity. We can even ask a ques­tion whether in the new socio-political real­ity, the survivor’s pen­sion should be main­tained in the pre­vi­ous form.
New social risks include long-term care and the text of the author from Hun­gary dis­cusses it. In turn, the text on trans­for­ma­tions in Fin­land is par­tic­u­larly inter­est­ing because this coun­try, owing to early con­sid­er­a­tion of new social risks in their insti­tu­tional solu­tions served (along with other Scan­di­na­vian coun­tries) as an exam­ple of good social pol­icy respond­ing to the chang­ing chal­lenges. The author of this text shows that in this coun­try there are fur­ther changes and new con­cepts are being cre­ated for new risks.
We hope that the analy­ses con­tained in this issue of “Social Pol­icy” analy­sis will con­tribute to the expan­sion and deep­en­ing of the debate on the impor­tant issues of the cat­a­logue of social risks and the scope of pro­tec­tion of social secu­rity sys­tems, or wider social pro­tec­tion in Poland.

REFERENCES

• These issues have been pre­sented in detail in G. Uścińska Ben­e­fits from social secu­rity in inter­na­tional and Pol­ish reg­u­la­tions. A com­par­a­tive study, War­saw 2005, p. 19 and next and the Euro­pean social secu­rity stan­dards and mod­ern solu­tions in Poland, War­saw 2005, p. 68 and next.
• A.M. Świątkowski, Social Rights Char­ter of the Coun­cil of Europe, War­saw 2006, p. 1 and next.
• F. Pen­nings, Social Secu­rity, s. 5 i n., www.transpennings.org [dostęp 28.04.2013]; M. Korola, F. Pen­nings, The Legal Char­ac­ter of Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Stan­dards, Euro­pean Jour­nal of Social Secu­rity 2008, Vol. 10, No. 2, p. 131 and next.
• More­over, such prob­lems are dis­cussed in the lit­er­a­ture on the sub­ject, see: T. Dijkhoff, Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Stan­dards in the Euro­pean Union. The Cases of the Czech Repub­lic and Esto­nia, Cam­bridge 2011.
• More on sec­ondary social risk in Ger­man law, see: R. Kreike­bohm, Zür Sys­tem­atik…, p. 318–322. The author says that the prob­lem of the sec­ond risk (sec­ondary risks) is pre­sented in the lit­er­a­ture as com­pli­cat­ing pro­tec­tion to the so-called first risks (pri­mary social risks). For exam­ple, when an unem­ployed per­son is ill or the sick per­son becomes dis­abled or the per­son enti­tled to a retire­ment pen­sion is ill. Sim­i­larly is the case with LTC; here the pro­tec­tion is referred to ill per­sons affected by dis­abil­ity, vic­tims of acci­dents at work and other social risks.

Gertruda Uścińska
SOCIAL RISK AS A PREREQUISITE FOR PROTECTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEME
This arti­cle presents recent research on the con­cept and scope of the risk of social (wel­fare) in social secu­rity sys­tems. It is agreed that these types of risks found in the lit­er­a­ture and in the exist­ing reg­u­la­tions. It entails an analy­sis of the types of social risks set out in inter­na­tional and Euro­pean instru­ments in this field . Defines the scope of legal con­se­quences of their occur­rence. Answers the ques­tion whether the direc­tory is an exhaus­tive list. Finally, the author answers the research ques­tion con­cern­ing the direc­tions of the changes that are tak­ing place in this area, and which are desirable.

Key­words: social risk, social secu­rity sys­tem, legal reg­u­la­tions, insur­ance pro­tec­tion, social secu­rity law

REFERENCES

• Goli­nowska S., Księżopol­ski M., Jończyk J., Rajkiewicz A., Szu­bert W. (1993), A new model of social pol­icy in Poland [O nowy model poli­tyki społecznej w Polsce], „Stu­dia i Mate­ri­ały”, issue 1, Warsaw.
• Jończyk J. (1993), New social order [Nowy ład soc­jalny], in: S. Goli­nowska, M. Księżopol­ski, J. Jończyk, A. Rajkiewicz, W. Szu­bert, A new model of social pol­icy in Poland [O nowy model poli­tyki społecznej], „Stu­dia i Mate­ri­ały”, issue 1, IPiSS, Warsaw.
• Jończyk J. (2001), The law of social secu­rity. Social and health insur­ance. Unem­ploy­ment and social assis­tance [Prawo zabez­pieczenia społecznego. Ubez­pieczenia społeczne i zdrowotne. Bezrobo­cie i pomoc społeczna], Kan­tor Wydawniczy Zakamy­cze, Kraków.
• Kolasiński K. (1995), Con­sti­tu­tional right to social secu­rity and the new social secu­rity sys­tem [Kon­sty­tucyjne prawo do zabez­pieczenia społecznego a nowy sys­tem ubez­pieczeń społecznych], „Państwo i Prawo” No 5.
• Kolasiński K. (1997), Labour and social secu­rity law [Prawo pracy i ubez­pieczeń społecznych], Toruń.
• Kreike­bohm R. (1999), Zur Sys­tem­atik der Erfas­sung sekundärer Sozial­teis­tungs­fälle im deutschen Sozial­recht, „Neue Zeitschrift für Sozialrecht”.
• MISSOC 2012, Social pro­tec­tion in the Mem­ber States of the Euro­pean Union of the Euro­pean Eco­nomic Area and in Switzer­land. Sit­u­a­tion on 1 May 2004, Mutual infor­ma­tion sys­tem on social pro­tec­tion, Euro­pean Commission.
• Uścińska G., Kazenas B., ed. (2002), Judg­ments of the Euro­pean Court of Jus­tice in the field of social secu­rity [Orzeczenia Europe­jskiego Try­bunału Spraw­iedli­wości w dziedzinie zabez­pieczenia społecznego], long ver­sion and short ver­sion, MLSP, Warsaw.
• Samuel L. (2002), Droits soci­aux fon­da­men­taux, Jurispru­dence de la Charte sociale européenne, 2e édi­tion, Edi­tions du Con­seil de l’Europe, Coun­cil of Europe Publishing.
• Spiegel B. (2005), EuGH und nationale Instanzen: EG-rechtliche Entschei­dun­gen mit Rel­e­vanz für den Bere­ich der sozialen Sicher­heit, Wien.
• Szu­bert W. (1987), Social Secu­rity. Out­line of the sys­tem [Ubez­piecze­nie społeczne. Zarys sys­temu], Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warsaw.
• Szum­licz T. (1994), Mod­els of social pol­icy [Mod­ele poli­tyki społecznej], „Mono­grafie i Opra­cow­a­nia”, War­saw School of Eco­nom­ics, Warsaw.
• Szum­licz T. (2005), Social Secu­rity. The­ory for Prac­tice [Ubez­piecze­nie społeczne. Teo­ria dla prak­tyki], Ofi­cyna Wydawnicza Branta, Bydgoszcz–Warsaw.
• Szur­gacz H. (1992), Intro­duc­tion to social wel­fare law [Wstęp do prawa pomocy społecznej], Uni­ver­sity of Wrocław, Wrocław.
• Świątkowski A. (1998, 1999, 2000), Euro­pean social law [Europe­jskie prawo soc­jalne], vol. I, II and III, Dom Wydawniczy ABC, Warsaw.
• Uścińska G. (2005), Euro­pean stan­dards of social pro­tec­tion and con­tem­po­rary Pol­ish solu­tions [Europe­jskie stan­dardy zabez­pieczenia społecznego a współczesne rozwiąza­nia pol­skie], IPiSS, Warsaw.
• Uścińska G. (2005), Social secu­rity ben­e­fits in inter­na­tional and Pol­ish reg­u­la­tions. A Com­par­a­tive Study [Świad­czenia z zabez­pieczenia społecznego w reg­u­lac­jach między­nar­o­dowych i pol­s­kich. Studium porów­naw­cze], Warsaw.
• Uścińska G. (2013), Social secu­rity of per­sons mov­ing within the EU [Zabez­piecze­nie społeczne osób przemieszcza­ją­cych się w UE], Lex Wolters Kluwer, Warsaw.
• Uścińska G. (in print), Dis­abil­ity ben­e­fits – inter­na­tional stan­dards [Świad­czenia inwalidzkie – stan­dardy między­nar­o­dowe], PSUS 2013, paper at the con­fer­ence 19–20 Chorzów

Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska
NEW SOCIAL RISK
This arti­cle is an intro­duc­tion to the con­cept of the „new social risks”. Whereas this con­cept is well known in the West­ern coun­tries debate it is almost absent in dis­cus­sions on social pol­icy in tran­si­tion coun­tries like Poland. “New social risks” were iden­ti­fied after the so called wel­fare state cri­sis fol­low­ing eco­nomic cri­sis of the mid 70-ties. While the old social risks did not dimin­ish the new ones emerged. The devel­op­ments that led to this emer­gence are pre­sented in the arti­cle as well as the new par­a­digm of social pol­icy that address the new social risks. Some exam­ples of social pol­icy in the con­text of new social risks are also shown.

Key­words: social pol­icy, social risks

REFERENCES

• Barr N. (2011), Eco­nom­ics of the Wel­fare State, Uni­ver­sity Press, Oxford.
• Cerami A. (2006), The Reform Chal­lenges to the Cen­tral and East­ern Euro­pean Wel­fare Regime, pre­sen­ta­tion at the con­fer­ence: „Trans­for­ma­tion of Social Pol­icy in Europe: Pat­terns, Issues and Chel­lenges for the EU-25 and Can­di­date Coun­tries”, 13–15 April in Ankara, Turkey.
• Czepulis-Rutkowska Z. (2011), National Report on Poland, w: K. Hirose (red.), Pen­sion Reform in Cen­tral and East­ern Europe: in times of cri­sis, aus­ter­ity and beyond, ILO, Geneva.
• Eug­ster B. (2010), Can old the­o­ries explain new social risks? An empir­i­cal analy­sis of 17 OECD coun­tries, paper pre­sented at the Joint NordWel/REASSESS Sum­mer School 2010: State, Soci­ety and Cit­i­zen, 15–20 August, Odense, Denmark.
• Euro­pean Com­mis­sion (2010), Europe 2020. A strat­egy for smart, sus­tain­able and inclu­sive growth, Bruxelles.
• Fer­rera M. (2013), From Pro­tec­tion to Invest­ment?, New Fron­tiers for the Euro­pean Social Model(s), pre­sen­ta­tion pre­pared for the 6th EU-India Joint Sem­i­nar on Employ­ment and Social Pol­icy, Brussels.
• Huber E., Stephens J.D. (2004), Com­bat­ing Old and New Social Risks, paper pre­pared for the 14th Euro­peanists Con­fer­ence, 11–13 March, Palmer House Hilton.
• Morel N. (2003), Pro­vid­ing cov­er­age against new social risks in Bis­mar­ck­ian wel­fare states: the case of long term care, a paper pre­pared for the ESPAnet inau­gural con­fer­ence: Chang­ing Euro­pean Soci­eties – the Role for Social Pol­icy, Dan­ish National Insti­tute of Social Research, 13–15 Novem­ber, Copenhagen.
• Opieka dłu­goter­mi­nowa w Polsce. Opis, diag­noza, rekomen­dacje (2010), opra­cow­anie przy­go­towane przez grupę roboczą ds. przy­go­towa­nia ustawy o ubez­piecze­niu od ryzyka niesamodziel­ności przy Klu­bie Sen­a­torów Plat­formy Oby­wa­tel­skiej, Warszawa.
• Pin­telon at al. (2011), The Social Strat­i­fi­ca­tion of Social Risks, CSB work­ing paper, No 11/04.
• Streeck W. (2009), Flex­i­ble Employ­ment, Flex­i­ble Fam­i­lies and the Social­iza­tion of Repro­duc­tion, MPIFG Work­ing Paper.
• Taylor-Gooby P. (2005), Wel­fare Reform and the Man­age­ment of Soci­etal Change, final report of the EU research project HPSE-CT2001-00078.
• Wratny J. (2013), con­tri­bu­tion at the con­fer­ence 4.10.2013.

Krzysztof Hage­me­jer
SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOOR — PRACTICE, CONCEPT, STANDARD AND GLOBAL SOCIAL POLICY
101th Ses­sion of the Inter­na­tional Labour con­fer­ence in June 2012 adopted new Rec­om­men­da­tion con­cern­ing national floors of social pro­tec­tion. The paper explains rea­sons which led to adop­tion of this rec­om­men­da­tion, whose main inten­tion is to secure pro­tec­tion to all those who in devel­op­ing coun­tries have no pro­tec­tion now – and in the first instance to the poor­est. Con­tents of the rec­om­men­da­tion are pre­sented focussing on the points where ini­tial posi­tions of gov­ern­ment, employ­ers and work­ers del­e­gates dif­fered and where con­ces­sions and com­pro­mises were nec­es­sary. It is also dis­cussed how the new rec­om­men­da­tion relates to exist­ing ILO social secu­rity con­ven­tions, and in par­tic­u­lar to Min­i­mum Stan­dards (Social Secu­rity) Con­ven­tion no 102.  In con­clu­sions, main chal­lenges to the imple­men­ta­tion of the Rec­om­men­da­tion in devel­op­ing coun­tries are pointed out, as well as its poten­tial rel­e­vance in devel­op­ing, includ­ing Euro­pean, countries.

Key­words: social pol­icy, social secu­rity sys­tem, inter­na­tional agree­ments, stan­dards, con­ven­tions of the Inter­na­tional Labour Organisation

REFERENCES

• Cichon M., Hage­me­jer K (2007), Chang­ing the devel­op­ment pol­icy par­a­digm: Invest­ing in a social secu­rity floor for all, „Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Review”, Vol. 60, No 2–3, p. 169–196.
• Dea­con B. (2013), Global Social Pol­icy in the Mak­ing: The Foun­da­tions of the Social Pro­tec­tion Floor, Pol­icy Press, London.
• De Schut­ter O., Sepul­veda M. (2012), Under­writ­ing the Poor : A Global Fund for Social Pro­tec­tion, Office of the UN High Com­mis­sioner for Human Rights, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Food/20121009_GFSP_en.pdf [accessed 2.2.2013].
• Ellis F., Dev­ereux S., White Ph. (2009), Social Pro­tec­tion in Africa, Edward Elgar Pub­lish­ing, London.
• Hage­me­jer K. (2010), Abso­lutne min­i­mum zabez­pieczenia społecznego [Absolute min­i­mum of social secu­rity], „Poli­tyka Społeczna” no. 9.
• ILO (2009), Rules of the Game: A brief intro­duc­tion to Inter­na­tional Labour Stan­dards, Geneva.
• ILO (2009a), Extend­ing Social Secu­rity to All: A review of chal­lenges, present prac­tice and strate­gic options, Geneva.
• ILO (2011), Social Pro­tec­tion Floor: For a fair and inclu­sive glob­al­iza­tion, Report of the Advi­sory Group chaired by Michelle Bachelet, Geneva.
• ILO (2012), Rec­om­men­da­tion no 202 (2012) con­cern­ing national floors of social pro­tec­tion, http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:R202 [accessed 20.12.2012].
• ILO (2012a), The Strat­egy of the Inter­na­tional Orga­ni­za­tion: Social Secu­rity for All. Build­ing social pro­tec­tion floor and com­pre­hen­sive social pro­tec­tion sys­tems, Geneva.
• ILO (2012b), Social pro­tec­tion floors for social jus­tice and a fair glob­al­iza­tion (raports IV2A i IV2B), Genewa,http://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/101stSession/reports/reports-submitted/WCMS_174694/lang-en/index.htm [accessed 1.2.2013]; http://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/101stSession/reports/reports-submitted/WCMS_174637/lang-en/index.htm [access 1.2.2013].
• ILO, IMF (2012), Towards effec­tive and fis­cally sus­tain­able Social Pro­tec­tion Floors, Geneva, Wash­ing­ton, http://www.socialsecurityextension.org/gimi/gess/RessShowRessource.do?ressourceId=30810 [accessed 1.2.2013].
• ILO, WHO (2009), A joint Cri­sis Ini­tia­tive of the UN Chief Exec­u­tives Board for Co-ordination on the Social Pro­tec­tion Floor, http://www.un.org/en/ga/second/64/socialprotection.pdf [accessed 1.2.2013].
• ILO (2011), Pro­vi­sional Record nr 24; 100th Ses­sion, Geneva, June 2011 Sixth item on the agenda: A recur­rent dis­cus­sion on the strate­gic objec­tive of social pro­tec­tion (social secu­rity) under the follow-up to the 2008 ILO Dec­la­ra­tion on Social Jus­tice for a Fair Glob­al­iza­tion. Report of the Com­mit­tee for the Recur­rent Dis­cus­sion on Social Pro­tec­tion, Geneva, http://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/100thSession/reports/provisional-records/WCMS_157820/lang-en/index.htm [accessed 2.2.2013].
• ILO (2012), Pro­vi­sional Record nr 14; 101th Ses­sion, Geneva, June 2012, Fourth item on the agenda: Elab­o­ra­tion of an autonomous Rec­om­men­da­tion on the social pro­tec­tion floor. Report of the Com­mit­tee on the Social Pro­tec­tion Floor, Geneva, http://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/101stSession/reports/provisional-records/WCMS_182950/lang-en/index.htm [accessed 2.2.2013].
• MOP, MPiPS (1996), Kon­wencje i Zalece­nia Między­nar­o­dowej Orga­ni­za­cji Pracy (1919–1994) [Con­ven­tions and Rec­om­men­da­tions of Inter­na­tional Labour Organ­i­sa­tion, vol­ume I: (1919–1966)], PWN, Warsaw.
• OECD (2009), Pro­mot­ing Pro-Poor Growth: Employ­ment and Social Pro­tec­tion, Paris.
• UNDP (2011), Suc­cess­ful Social Pro­tec­tion Floor Expe­ri­ences, Vol­ume 18 of Shar­ing Inno­v­a­tive Expe­ri­ences series, New York.
• Uścińska G. (2005), Europe­jskie stan­dardy zabez­pieczenia społecznego a współczesne rozwiąza­nia pol­skie [Euro­pean Stan­dards of social secu­rity and mod­ern Pol­ish solu­tions], IPiSS, Warsaw.
• Walker R., Chase E., Loedemel I. (2012), The indig­nity of the Wel­fare Reform Act; Child Poverty Action Group, http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/indignity-welfare-reform-act [accessed 2.2.2013].
• World Bank (2012), Resilience, equity and oppor­tu­nity – Social pro­tec­tion and labour strat­egy, Washington.

Kras­simira Sred­kova
HELATH INSURANCE IN BULGARIA – AN ACHIEVEMENT OR A DIFFICULTY?
Sick­ness is con­sid­ered one of the „old” social risks. In many tran­si­tion coun­tries the uni­ver­sal health care sys­tem was reformed and insur­ance sys­tem was intro­duced. This is the case of, among other coun­tries, of Bul­garia. In the arti­cle the new health insur­ance sys­tem is described. The crit­i­cal analy­sis of the sys­tem is also provided.

Key­words: social pol­icy, social secu­rity sys­tem, health care insur­ance, social insur­ance reform

REFERENCES

• Eichen­hofer Eb. (2007), Sozial­recht, 6. Aufl ., Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen.
• Зиновиева Д. (2002), Правна същност на НРД по ЗЗО., Административно правосъдие, № 3.
• Зиновиева Д., Гевренова Н. (2004), Националният рамков договор като източник на осигурителното право, Административно правосъдие, № 1.
• Мръчков В. (2010), Осигурително право, 5. Изд, С.: Сиби.
• Средкова Кр. (1999), В: Здравно осигуряване в България, С.: Труд и право.
• Средкова Кр. (2002), Националният рамков договор като източник на осигурителното право, Съвременно право, № 2.
• Средкова Кр. (2012), Осигурително право, 4. Изд, С.: Сиби.
• Средкова Кр. (2010), Основни принципи на новата правна уредба на координацията на системите за социална сигурност в ЕС, Съвременно право, № 3.

Alek­san­dra Wik­torow
SURVIVOR’S BENEFIT IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM
Death of the bread­win­ner is one of the „old” social risks. Ben­e­fit address­ing this risk is survivor’s pen­sion. Orig­i­nally it was a ben­e­fit for wid­ows and their chil­dren. Due to changes in fam­ily struc­ture and labor mar­ket changes the scope of ben­e­fi­cia­ries became wider cov­er­ing wid­ow­ers as well as — due to increas­ing divorce rate – more than one sur­viv­ing spouses.  Changes in other social secu­rity seg­ments like sick­ness insur­ance or old age pen­sion insur­ance should be coor­di­nated with survivor’s pen­sion sys­tem. In Poland it is not always the case and reforms address­ing these dis­crep­an­cies are necessary.

Key­words: social risk, survivor’s pen­sion, social secu­rity system

Dóra Lajkó
ELDERLY CARE IN HUNGARY
Def­i­n­i­tion of long term care is not yet clear in many coun­tries’ social secu­rity sys­tems. The long term care ben­e­fits and ser­vices do exist and are reg­u­lated under dif­fer­ent laws of pub­lic and pri­vate char­ac­ter. The arti­cle under­lines that both those in need of care as well as their fam­i­lies need social help. In Hun­gary the law con­cern­ing long term care is seg­mented and com­pli­cated. Resources ded­i­cated to long term care needs are not suf­fi­cient. Also eli­gi­bil­ity to ben­e­fits, due to var­i­ous rea­sons, are not equal. There is a room for improve­ment in orga­ni­za­tion of long term care for the elderly in Hungary.

Key­words: social risk, social assis­tance, social secu­rity sys­tem, elderly peo­ple, social pol­icy, family

REFERENCES

• Andorka R, (2006), Bevezetés a szo­ci­ológiába, Osiris Kiadó, Budapest.
• Bác­skay A. (2005), Gon­do­zási for­mák az idősel­látás­ban – a szo­ciális alapel­látás, Kapocs. IV. évfolyam, 6. Szám.
• Balogh Z., Bor­bás I., Lakó E., szerk. (2008), Az ápolás helyzete Mag­yarorszá­gon 2008, Egészségü­gyi Sza­kképző és Továb­bképző Intézet, Budapest.
• Bíró G., szerk. (1999), Szerződési alap­tí­pu­sok, Novotni Kiadó, Miskolc.
• Cseh-Szombathy L. (1971), A család szerepe az öregek ellátásában és életében, In.: L. Pál, Család és házasság a mai mag­yar tár­sadalom­ban, Közgaz­dasági és Jogi Könyvki­adó, Budapest.
• Gáthy V. (1998), Egy japán-magyar közös kutatási pro­gram­ról. I. A nem állami szervezetek szerepe az öregedő tár­sadalom­ban. (Eset­tanul­mány egy japán szövetkezeti tár­sulás­ról), Tár­sadalomku­tatás, 3–4. Szám.
• Gáthy V., Szé­man Z. (1998), Az idős­gon­do­zás néhány kérdése egy japán-magyar össze­ha­son­lító kutatás tükrében, Tár­sadalomku­tatás, 1–2. Szám.
• Iván L. (2006), A sik­eres öregedés rend­sz­er­szem­lélete, In.: I. Sán­dor, F. Gergely, Őszülő tár­sadal­mak. Debreceni Egyetem Egészségü­gyi Főisko­lai Kar kiad­ványa, Nyíregyháza.
• Lőrinc­sikné Lajkó D. (2007), Közeli hoz­zá­tar­tozó ápolásá­nak munka­jogi és szo­ciális jogi szabályai, Munkaü­gyi Szemle, 51. évfolyam, 7–8. Szám.
• Maltby T., Deuchars G. (2004), Age­ing and Social Pol­icy in the Euro­pean Union: A Con­tex­tual Overview, In.: J. Dol­ing, C. Jones Finer, T. Maltby, Age­ing Mat­ters. Euro­pean Pol­icy Lessons from the East, Ash­gate Pub­lish­ing Lim­ited, Great Britain, Bod­min, Cornwall.
• Soós Z. (2009), Reform után. A kistérségi közs­zol­gál­tatási reform hatá­sai a Téti kistérség szo­ciális szol­gál­tatási rend­sz­erére, Esély, 1. Szám.
• Turai T. (2002), Az életút végén. Szilá­gy­borzási öregek társadalom-néprajzi vizs­gálata, Ethno­graphia, 113. évfolyam, 1–2. Szám.
• Vékás L. (1997), Örök­lési jog, Eötvös József Könyvki­adó, Budapest. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/WHO_NMH_NPH_02.8.pdf [Date of down­load­ing: April 1, 2009].

WEBSITES

• ÉVA HAIMANN: Különb­ség az otthoni sza­kápolás és a házi segít­ségnyújtás között (Dif­fer­ence between home med­ical care and domes­tic care). 2006. 10. 24. http://www.lelekbenotthon.hu/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=169 [Date of down­load­ing: April 10, 2007]
• http://nurse.haziapolas.hu/Index.aspx?MN=NappaliFelugyeletiCsomag&LN=Hungarian [Date of down­load­ing: Octo­ber 14, 2013]
• http://nurse.haziapolas.hu/Index.aspx?MN=EjszakaiFelugyeletiCsomag&LN=Hungarian [Date of down­load­ing: Octo­ber 14, 2013]
• http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/WHO_NMH_NPH_02.8.pdf [Date of down­load­ing: April 1, 2009]

Laura Kalliomaa-Puha
HAVE FINLAND ALREADY TACKLED THE NEW SOCIAL RISKS?
When ana­lyz­ing „old” and „new” social risks many authors claim coun­tries dif­fer in terms of effi­ciency in address­ing those risks. Scan­di­na­vian coun­tries (rep­re­sent­ing social demo­c­ra­tic model accord­ing to Gosta Esp­ing Ander­sen typol­ogy) are gen­er­ally con­sid­ered, more than oth­ers, effi­cient in this respect. How­ever they still face social risks and their social insti­tu­tions are not per­fect. To this end new con­cept of “new new” social risks has been intro­duced. Fin­land is one exam­ple of coun­tries try­ing to address those risks. Among oth­ers, new tech­nics of dis­tri­b­u­tion of social ben­e­fits in this coun­try may be con­sid­ered as cre­at­ing “new new” social risks.

Key­words: social risk, social secu­rity sys­tem, social policy

REFERENCES

• Act on Care Ser­vices for the Elderly to ensure high stan­dard of qual­ity nation­wide (2012), Min­istry of Social Affairs and Health Focus-article 2012 in http://www.stm.fi/en/pressreleases/pressrelease/-/view/1839916#en [2.12.2012].
• Airio I. (2008), Change of Norm? In-Work Poverty in a Com­par­a­tive Per­spec­tive, Stud­ies in social secu­rity and health 92. Kela, Research Depart­ment, Helsinki, www.kela.fi/researh/publications.
• Forma P., Kallio J., Pirt­tilä J., Uusi­talo R. (2007), Kuinka hyv­in­voin­ti­val­tio pelaste­taan? Tutkimus kansalais­ten sosi­aal­i­tur­vaa koske­vista mielip­iteistä ja valin­noista, Sosi­aali– ja ter­veystur­van tutkimuk­sia 89. Kelan tutkimu­sosasto, Helsinki, [How to save the wel­fare state? A sur­vey of opin­ios and choices related to social pol­icy. With Eng­lish Sum­mary], www.kela.fi/researh/publications.
• Gen­der pay gap a major chal­lenge for gen­der equal­ity pol­icy (2011), Min­istry of Social Affairs and Health, Focus-article, http://www.stm.fi/en/focus/article/-/view/1585781.
• Hiil­amo H., Kan­gas O., Man­der­backa K., Mattila-Wiro P., Niemelä M., Vuorenkoski L. (2010), Hyv­in­voin­nin tur­vaamisen rajat. Näköaloja talouskri­isin ja hyv­in­voin­ti­val­tion kehi­tyk­seen Suomessa, [The lim­its to wel­fare. Prospects to eco­nomic crises and devel­op­ment of wel­fare state in Fin­land] Kelan tutkimu­sosasto, Helsinki, www.kela.fi/researh/publications.
• Haa­pio H., (2012), Sopimusten ja säädösten visu­al­isointi: Tie toimi­vampiin tek­stei­hin, [Visu­al­i­sa­tion of con­tracts and leg­is­la­tion: way to increase under­stand­ing], ”Kielikello” 2.
• Kansal­lista omaishoidon kehit­tämiso­hjel­maa valmis­tel­eva työryhmä, [Work­ing group on National Agenda for Infor­mal Care], http://www.stm.fi/vireilla/tyoryhmat/omaishoito.
• Kemshall H. (2002), Risk, social pol­icy and wel­fare, Open Uni­ver­sity Press, Buck­ing­ham – Philadelphia.
• Kotkas T. (2012), Basic fea­tures of Finnish social law, in: K. Nuo­tio, S. Melander, M. Huomo-Kettunen (eds),. Intro­duc­tion to Finnish Law and legal cul­ture. Forum Iuris, Pub­li­ca­tion of the Fac­ulty of Law Uni­ver­sity of Helsinki, p. 261–270.
• Kotkas T. (2010), Gov­ern­ing Health and Social Secu­rity in the 21st Cen­tury: Active Cit­i­zen­ship through the Right to Par­tic­i­pate, Law and Cri­tique (21) nr 2, p. 163–182.
• Kouvo A., Kankainen T., Niemelä M. (2012), Wel­fare ben­e­fits and gen­er­al­ized trust in Fin­land and Europe, in: H. Ervasti, J.G. Ander­sen, T. Frid­berg, K. Ring­dal (2012), The Future of the Wel­fare State. Social Pol­icy Atti­tudes and Social Cap­i­tal in Europe, Edward Elgar, Chel­tenham, p. 195–213.
• Kuiv­alainen S., Niemelä M. (2010), From uni­ver­sal­ism to selec­tivism: the ideational turn of the anti-poverty poli­cies in Fin­land, “Jour­nal of Euro­pean Social Pol­icy”, 20(3), p. 263–276.
• Nygaard-Andersen S., Ring­dal K. (2012), Wel­fare regimes and per­sonal risks, in: H. Ervasti, J.G. Ander­sen, T. Frid­berg, K. Ring­dal (2012), The Future of the Wel­fare State. Social Pol­icy Atti­tudes and Social Cap­i­tal in Europe, Edward Elgar, Chel­tenham, p. 17–45.
• Saarikallio-Torp M. (2010), Tran­si­tion from higher edu­ca­tion to work among Finns who grad­u­ated abroad, in: M. Saarikallio-Torp, J. Wiers-Jenssen (eds.), Nordic stu­dents abroad. Stu­dent mobil­ity pat­terns, stu­dent sup­port sys­tems and labour mar­ket out­comes, Stud­ies in social secu­rity and health 110. Kela Research Depart­ment, Helsinki, p. 69–83, www.kela.fi/researh/publications.
• Taylor-Gooby P. (2004), New Risks and Social Change, in: P. Taylor-Gooby (ed.), New Risks, New Wel­fare. The Trans­for­ma­tion of the Euro­pean Wel­fare State, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press, Oxford, p. 1–28.
• Tim­o­nen V. (2004), New Risks – Are They Still New for the Nordic Wel­fare States?, in: P. Taylor-Gooby (ed.), New Risks, New Wel­fare. The Trans­for­ma­tion of the Euro­pean Wel­fare State, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press, Oxford, p. 83–110.

LIST OF CONTRIBUTIONS

ZOFIA CZEPULIS-RUTKOWSKA – is a senior researcher in the Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies. Pre­vi­ously she worked as the direc­tor of the social pol­icy office in the chan­cellery of the Pres­i­dent of Poland, direc­tor of Inter­na­tional Coop­er­a­tion in the Social Insur­ance Insti­tu­tion (ZUS) and a lec­turer and vice dean in the Col­lege of Insur­ance and Bank­ing. Her research inter­ests cover social secu­rity sys­tems; par­tic­u­larly pen­sion and long term care sys­tems, social pol­icy mod­els in com­par­a­tive per­spec­tive and social pol­icy of Euro­pean Union. She pub­lished many arti­cles on above men­tioned subjects.

KRZYSZTOF HAGEMEJER – is a Chief of Social Pro­tec­tion Pol­icy, Gov­er­nance and Stan­dards Branch in the Social Pro­tec­tion Depart­ment of the ILO. He holds a Mas­ters degree in Econo­met­rics and a Ph.D. in Eco­nom­ics, both from War­saw Uni­ver­sity. Before join­ing the ILO in 1993, worked as assis­tant pro­fes­sor at the Depart­ment of Eco­nom­ics of War­saw Uni­ver­sity and adviser to the Pol­ish Min­is­ter Labour of and Social Affairs. From 1980 to 1991 worked as adviser to the National Com­mit­tee of the Inde­pen­dent Trade Union “Sol­i­darność”. Since 1993 actively par­tic­i­pates in the ILO field work on exten­sion of social secu­rity cov­er­age, par­tic­u­larly in Africa, and on pen­sion reforms (par­tic­u­larly in Europe). He writes on var­i­ous eco­nomic issues in social secu­rity, on prob­lems related to pen­sion ade­quacy and sus­tain­abil­ity, afford­abil­ity of basic social pro­tec­tion in devel­op­ing coun­tries and on social reforms in the tran­si­tion countries.

LAURA KALLIOMAA-PUHA – took her PhD degree in 2007 in law at Helsinki Uni­ver­sity. She has worked as an assis­tant and a researcher at the Fac­ulty of Law of Helsinki Uni­ver­sity and since 2004 at Kela Social Insur­ance Insti­tu­tion Research Depart­ment. She is inter­ested in social law – access to jus­tice, civil law tools in pub­lic law such as con­tracts and con­sumer pro­tec­tion, pre­ven­tive law espe­cially in elderly care as well as inter­na­tional trends and legal trans­plants in social law such as grow­ing amount of rules com­ing from the Euro­pean Union revolv­ing around social secu­rity. Her dis­ser­ta­tion was on munic­i­pal care con­tracts (Van­hoille ja sairaille sopi­vaa? Kela tutkimuk­sia 90, 2007) and her inter­est in con­trac­tu­al­ism is seen also in arti­cles in Finnish jour­nals and books such as Con­tracts as usual? – pros and cons of the new social sec­tor con­tracts. Tid­skrift utgiven av Juridiska Förenin­gen i Fin­land 2009; 145 (3–4): 343–350, Sopimuk­sel­lisuus sosi­aal­i­tur­vassa – uusia vaa­timuk­sia asi­akkaille ja lainsoveltajille.[Contratualism and social secu­rity – new demands to clients and pro­fes­sion­als] In Helenelund, Luoto, Mäntylä, Siikavirta (eds) Julk­ista – yksi­ty­istä; mil­lai­sissa rak­en­teissa? Acta Wasaen­sia No 2. Oikeustiede II Julk­isoikeus. Vaasa 2012, 421–432 or Ennakoiva ajat­telu van­hus­ten­huol­lossa. Yksilölli­nen omaishoitosopimus ennakoin­nin välineenä.[Preventive think­ing in elderly care. Indi­vid­ual care con­tracts] In Pohjo­nen (ed) Ex ante – ennakoiva oikeus, Tal­en­tum 2005, 168–195.

DÓRA LAJKÓ – dr Dora Lajko is a lawyer. She grad­u­ated from Szeged Uni­ver­sity and also have received her PhD in law there in 2011. Cur­rently she is assis­tant pro­fes­sor in the Szeged Uni­ver­sity. Her research inter­ests now focus on long term care. She pub­lished many arti­cles on that topic.

GERTRUDA UŚCIŃSKA – is a pro­fes­sor and mem­ber of the Depart­ment of Labour Law and Social Secu­rity at the Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies (ILSS), War­saw and of the Insti­tute of Social Pol­icy at the War­saw Uni­ver­sity. She spe­cialises in Pol­ish and Euro­pean social secu­rity law and has con­ducted a num­ber of com­par­a­tive stud­ies in the field. Head of and expert to a num­ber of research pro­grams con­ducted at uni­ver­si­ties and research insti­tutes in EU Mem­ber States. She is a national expert in the trESS project and the author of national reports on the imple­men­ta­tion of EU reg­u­la­tions con­cern­ing the right to free­dom of move­ment of work­ers and their fam­i­lies and the co-ordination of social secu­rity schemes. She has pub­lished a num­ber of books and papers con­cern­ing social secu­rity, social insur­ance and social pol­icy. She was a mem­ber of the work­group for the rat­i­fi­ca­tion of the Euro­pean Social Card of the Coun­cil of Europe. She has par­tic­i­pated in works on the rat­i­fi­ca­tion of ILO Con­ven­tion no. 102 on Min­i­mum Stan­dards in Social Secu­rity and was an expert in prepa­ra­tion works for the Pol­ish acces­sion to the Euro­pean Union. She cur­rently focuses on the Euro­pean social secu­rity law. Mem­ber of the Com­mit­tee of Labour and Social Pol­icy Stud­ies, Pol­ish Acad­emy of Sciences.

ALEKSANDRA WIKTOROW grad­u­ated from War­saw Eco­nomic Uni­ver­sity in 1973. She holds PhD in eco­nom­ics. She worked for the Insti­tute of Labor and Social Stud­ies in 1973–1993. Dur­ing 1991–1993 she was a deputy min­is­ter in the Min­istry of Labor and Social Pol­icy respon­si­ble for social secu­rity and work con­di­tions. She is also a lec­turer in Vis­tula col­lege since 1993 where she held var­i­ous posi­tions; vice dean (1993–1996),deputy rec­tor (1993–1996). Dur­ing 2001–2007 she was a pres­i­dent of Insti­tu­tion of Social Insur­ance (ZUS). Since 2011 she is a mem­ber of eco­nomic advi­sory board in the Prime Min­is­ter office. Since 2011 she is the ombuds­ment of the insured. Alek­san­dra Wik­torow pub­lished exten­sively on social pol­icy, stan­dard of liv­ing and social insurance.

KRASSIMIRA SREDKOVA – Pro­fes­sor in Labour Law and Social Secu­rity in Sofia Uni­ver­sity “St. Kli­ment Ochrid­ski” (Bul­garia), PhD. Lawyer in Sofia Bar Asso­ci­a­tion. Legal adviser to the great­est Bul­gar­ian employ­ers’ orga­ni­za­tion – Bul­gar­ian Cham­ber for Indus­try and Com­merce. Mem­ber of the Com­mis­sion for Labour leg­is­la­tion of the National Coun­cil for Tri­par­tite Coop­er­a­tion. Edi­tor in Chief of “Con­tem­po­rary Law”-Journal. Mem­ber of the Edi­to­r­ial Coun­cil of «The Jour­nal of Social Secu­rity Depart­ment. The­ory, Law, Prac­tice” (War­saw – Poland) and of the “News­pa­per of the Uni­ver­sity of Perm” (Perm – Rus­sia). ILO-expert and National Expert for Bul­garia of the “Euro­pean Labour Law Net­work”. Author of 238 mono­graphs, text­books, com­men­taries, arti­cles and other stud­ies in Bul­garia, Ger­many, Belorus­sia, Hun­gary, Poland, Rus­sia, Spain, Switzer­land, Ukraine, USA.

Table of Contents

« powrót