That level is far above what is seen in the 38 member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In Greece, the country with the highest share, special pensions account for 11% of the total. Of the 38 countries analyzed, 27 grant special pensions, while 11 do not offer early retirement.

The figures come from the study Aposentadorias Especiais: Tendências Internacionais e o Caso Brasileiro (Special Pensions: International Trends and the Brazilian Case), by Rogério Nagamine Constanzi, a researcher at the Institute for Applied Economic Research (Ipea). The survey shows that internationally, the trend has been to restrict or eliminate special pensions, amid doubts about their effectiveness.

In Brazil, these rules have contributed not only to earlier retirements but also to a rise in benefits granted through the courts.

“The standard argument for allowing early retirement based solely on the inability to continue a career in a specific job has lost strength over time. Many OECD countries have eliminated or restricted access to special or early retirement for dangerous or strenuous jobs.

“Labor-market policies should seek to prepare workers for career changes at some point, so they can remain employed until the minimum retirement age. In the Brazilian case, there is a need for more efficient active labor-market policies,” the study says.

Economists interviewed by Valor support adjustments to special regimes in a new pension reform to slow the pace of spending on retirement and survivor benefits.

In Brazil, special pensions under the RGPS include those for rural workers, teachers, workers exposed to harmful agents, and insured persons with disabilities. In the public-sector pension system, known as the RPPS, they include those granted to teachers, workers exposed to harmful agents, insured persons with disabilities, military personnel, and police officers.

Rural pensions

Nagamine’s study shows that, if rural pensions alone are considered, special pensions accounted for 35.6% of total scheduled RGPS retirements in December 2024. If pensions granted for exposure to harmful agents and those for teachers are also included, the share rises to 38.7%. That percentage would be even higher if pensions for people with disabilities were included.

“Out of a total of 20.2 million scheduled pensions under the RGPS, about 7.2 million were rural pensions, almost all based on age. In fact, considering only age-based pensions, rural pensions accounted for 54.4% of the total in December 2024. If all pensions are considered, including disability pensions, the rural share falls to one-third (32.4% of the total),” the study says.

The survey also shows that in the state-level RPPS, the estimate for 2022 was that elementary-education teachers accounted for about four out of every 10 retirees, or 42%. “All of these figures reinforce the diagnosis that special or early pensions in Brazil have a high level of coverage compared with the international landscape,” Nagamine writes in the study.

The weight of special pensions for basic-education teachers in state and municipal public-sector pension systems stands out because the benefit is uncommon in OECD countries, where it was found in only six: Belgium, Colombia, Costa Rica, Estonia, Italy, and Poland.

This high degree of differentiated treatment in retirement has fueled debate, especially internationally, over whether the measure is really effective or whether it would be more appropriate to establish better working conditions through health and safety regulations, limiting exposure to risk factors and encouraging social partners to adopt measures in that direction.

Of the OECD’s 38 member countries, for example, in 15—or 39.5% of the total—there is no special pension, or it is limited to police officers, firefighters, or military personnel. “In Brazil, there is a history of broad coverage for special pensions without there necessarily being a basis in solid evidence,” the study says.

Pressure for reform

The survey also says it is necessary to take into account that the risks involved in certain occupations or sectors are not fixed over time—new risks or new occupations may emerge—and that the labor force shifts, for example, from agriculture and industry to the services sector. “There is a possibility that, due to technological progress, hardship will continue to decline, because strenuous or arduous work tends to be progressively replaced by technology,” the study says.

Nagamine also notes that the debate over whether the characteristics of a certain type of work justify early or special retirement compared with the general rule is complex and sometimes involves political power or corporate interests that can lead to unfair treatment. In OECD countries, for example, there has been a movement to restrict this type of benefit.

“In theory, early retirement would be a way to compensate workers in occupations or activities that, in the medium and long term, tend to reduce life expectancy. For that reason, the criteria should not be limited to wear and tear at work, but should encompass the potential negative effects of working conditions on health,” the study says, adding that the complexity of the issue is worsened by the growing focus on psychological problems caused by stress at work.

The study also says that in Brazil the average duration of these benefits has increased as a result of longer life expectancy among recipients of special pensions. The average duration of this type of benefit rose from about 14.1 years in 2000 to 29.2 years in 2021.

For Luís Eduardo Afonso, a professor at the School of Economics and Administration at the University of São Paulo, “exceptions are, as a rule, bad.” “They are a form of differentiated treatment for a group that managed to make its pressure power count,” the expert said. In the pension reform enacted in November 2019, military personnel were left out, and some categories kept more favorable retirement conditions than the general rule.

Otávio Sidone, a federal civil servant, Social Security specialist, and doctoral student at the University of Brasília, said special regimes need to be continually assessed so that any subsidies to the public debate can be made clear.

Arnaldo Lima, the economist in charge of institutional relations at Polo Capital, added that special pension regimes, besides carrying a high cost for public finances, encourage early retirement. “They should only be preserved when there is objective proof of risk or hardship, with extra financial compensation in the labor market, and not in Social Security.”

He also said the growing number of benefit claims going through the courts, especially in rural areas, is a concern. “In rural areas alone, 30% of benefits depend on court rulings. The solution involves binding administrative precedents, standardized criteria, and greater digitization. Litigation often stems from a lack of legal clarity,” he said.

*By Edna Simão — Brasília

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/