1 / 6

Impact of Art. 5 of Directive 2004/113/EC on gender equality in insurance products

Impact of Art. 5 of Directive 2004/113/EC on gender equality in insurance products. 9 September 2009. Private funded pensions products. Trend to move away from public PAYG systems to private funded pensions systems Problem

vanig
Télécharger la présentation

Impact of Art. 5 of Directive 2004/113/EC on gender equality in insurance products

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Impact of Art. 5 of Directive 2004/113/EC on gender equality in insurance products 9 September 2009

  2. Private funded pensions products Trend to move away from public PAYG systems to private funded pensions systems Problem • => Use of gendered tables result in increasing gender gap in pension outcome Recommendation • => Use of unisex tables in all insurance/pensions products will help achieve better gender equality (recommended by ILO)

  3. Complementary health insurance • Complementary health insurance are essential in some countries Problem • => Use of gendered tables result in increased fees for women • => Women are disadvantaged compared to men in jobs where employer pays for complementary health insurance for their staff Recommendation • => Use of unisex tables in all complementary health insurance products will help achieve better gender equality • => example of countries which have moved to unisex tables show that it is possible

  4. Why should exception clause in Art. 5 be removed • => Implementation of Art. 5 contradicts Council Conclusions of April 2009. • => Gendered tables do not take account of impact of today’s lifestyles on longevity of women contributing today (unfair treatment based on obsolete data) • => Nor do gendered tables take account of other equally significant factors such as race or social status (a black female worker’s life expectancy is lower than a white collar white man’s) • => Race is not accepted as a valid proxy to justify differences of treatment in insurance products. Why is gender?

  5. To summarize • AGE would like to raise two key questions: • One technical: • Validity and relevance of gendered mortality tables used by insurers • One political: • Since shift to private pensions is encouraged by public authorities and the EU, and complementary health insurance have become an essential product to access quality healthcare and are often part of the employment package in several countries, is it politically acceptable to allow insurers to continue discriminate against women? Insurers are not allowed to discriminated on the ground of pregnancy / maternity. Why on other gender issues?

  6. Rue Froissart 111 • 1040 Bruxelles - Belgique • tél. : +32.2.280.14.70 • fax : +32.2.280.15.22 • info@age-platform.org • www.age-platform.org

More Related