La aplicación indebida de las normas sobre el cálculo de las pensiones jubilares de los trabajadores en los juzgados de Guayaquil y en la Corte Provincial del Guayas en los años 2013-2017
Fecha
2018-01
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad de Guayaquil Facultad de Jurisprudencia Ciencias Sociales y Políticas
Resumen
Como tema del estudio de caso se presenta LA INADECUADA APLICACIÓN DE LAS NORMAS LEGALES EN RELACION AL PAGO DE LA PENSIONES JUBILARES (PATRONALES) y como problemática del trabajo es el error en la interpretación de la regla segunda del artículo 216 del Código de Trabajo que expresa que la pensión jubilar mensual no podrá exceder de la remuneración básica unificada del último año, ni menos de 30 dólares. Al error que se hace referencia, es a la remuneración básica unificada, salario individual que ha percibido el trabajador en sus últimos años se labores, estipendio que es confundida por parte de los juzgadores con la remuneración mínima básica unificada del trabajador, aquella que anualmente se modifica o se mantiene. Es está la interpretación errónea que realiza el operador de justicia a la hora de liquidar una jubilación patronal, provocando una pensión jubilar patronal injusta y contraria a la norma legal pertinente.
As subject of the case study presents the inadequate application of the standards legal in relation to the payment of the pension Jubilee and as issue of labour is the error in the interpretation of the second rule of article 216 of the labour code to express that the pension retirement monthly do not exceed the unified basic remuneration of the last year, no less than $30. The error referenced is unified basic salary, individual wage that the worker has received in his last years is work, stipend that it is confused by the judges with the unified basic minimum remuneration of the worker, one that annually modifies or maintains. . It is the misinterpretation that performs the operator of Justice when it comes to liquidate an employer retirement, provoking a pension retirement causing a pension retirement employer unfair and contrary to the relevant legal standard.
As subject of the case study presents the inadequate application of the standards legal in relation to the payment of the pension Jubilee and as issue of labour is the error in the interpretation of the second rule of article 216 of the labour code to express that the pension retirement monthly do not exceed the unified basic remuneration of the last year, no less than $30. The error referenced is unified basic salary, individual wage that the worker has received in his last years is work, stipend that it is confused by the judges with the unified basic minimum remuneration of the worker, one that annually modifies or maintains. . It is the misinterpretation that performs the operator of Justice when it comes to liquidate an employer retirement, provoking a pension retirement causing a pension retirement employer unfair and contrary to the relevant legal standard.
Descripción
Palabras clave
INADECUADA, NORMAS, PENSIONES, ERROR