CRONICA — broadcast
20261010 150000 UTC
378 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] that takes you 10 months, tremendous, well, but that's where
[00:00:03] the government has, you know, to break the rules
[00:00:07] with audits, that it audits social works and that it audits
[00:00:11] everything, all the, let's say, health agents to
[00:00:15] ask within see why they charge people for insurance because it should be enough for non-monotributistas
[00:00:19] and so on, but retirees, there are many retirees who pay a lot of money
[00:00:23] for PAMI and so on, well, then for
[00:00:27] days, arbitrate the necessary means to cleaning they spend 130,000 pesos, for food 457,
[00:00:30] for services 177, which is increasing, for
[00:00:33] recreation 124,000 pesos, for clothing
[00:00:37] 63,000 pesos, transport 129, and for housing
[00:00:42] moratoriums needed them, because it you that 50% 60% of everything that 364, we are talking about a house, yes, the maintenance costs of the
[00:00:45] house, not a
[00:00:47] million, great, but moratoriums are what rental, the blended rate to calculate
[00:00:50] housing is between
[00:00:53] the people who retired rent, shared rent, maintenance of one's
[00:00:56] own property, for example, common expenses and something
[00:01:00] that has exploded in the last 10 years, which is the life of
[00:01:04] older people in
[00:01:08] of contributions, direct pensions for those not retired, pensions, they are real pigsties, there are some four or five blocks
[00:01:11] from the government house and a room
[00:01:15] with a shared bathroom are the old hotels that cannot be approved, a
[00:01:18] room with a shared bathroom is between
[00:01:20] day is speaking against 250 and 300,000, and if they don't
[00:06:40] we receive inquiries at 11. 22 77 2000
[00:06:44] 11 2277 2000 you can
[00:06:47] the week if you want, we have a team of people who help us
[00:06:51] this, who in some way help people, no,
[00:06:54] and the reality is that
[00:06:58] the things that they consulted us about, let's put the first case,
[00:07:01] come on, these are the success cases, first
[00:07:05] Manuel filed a readjustment lawsuit, he called us,
[00:07:08] he filed a readjustment lawsuit in 2017, he already
[00:07:12] collected two executions and now he's going to collect the third, he
[00:07:16] contacted us in 2022, so he filed a lawsuit
[00:07:20] in 2017, he never collected
[00:07:23] and well, nothing, so hey, I can't collect, I can't collect, well, he contacted
[00:07:27] us, we made him collect, we made him collect the first time, we made
[00:07:31] him collect the second time and now he's going to collect the third time, come on,
[00:07:34] pass, so the retirement
[00:07:37] benefit of this gentleman was
[00:07:40] $618,
[00:07:43] with the lawsuit he had won, his retirement benefit went from
[00:07:46] 618 to 1,200 and
[00:07:49] he has a retroactive payment of 17 million pesos, this
[00:07:53] is the court eight of social security of the
[00:07:56] social security chamber of Buenos Aires, this is very
[00:08:00] important, now we are going to see how you have to do to collect your retroactive payment because there are many
[00:08:04] people who won the lawsuit, maybe they won it in
[00:08:07] 2016, 2017, 2018,
[00:08:11] mainly the people who... let's say after 2015, 2016
[00:08:14] had
[00:08:17] they started to have a lot of problems for ANSES to pay them, of course, it had
[00:08:21] its paying period, then we will explain it well, but many people were left without
[00:08:24] collecting, so this happens, I filed my lawsuit but I didn't collect,
[00:08:28] well, and they bring us and in the end they have this, they have a lot of difference to collect and
[00:08:32] look at the difference, it goes from 6:18 to 1,200, double,
[00:08:35] and people who collected, there are also many people who collected, always look
[00:08:39] at the value of the PBU that says PBU judicial sentence. And
[00:08:43] there is a PBU value that is standard, if that PBU value is not modified,
[00:08:46] it means that there is a 90% chance that even if you
[00:08:50] collected the lawsuit, you have to collect more than what you are collecting, so if you want, you can
[00:08:54] consult them, yes, and there are people who also had their benefit changed, they also
[00:08:58] have to claim because it was adjusted incorrectly, of course, and then another
[00:09:01] issue that is not minor, which is due to the
[00:09:05] firm court rulings, so this
[00:09:07] 1,200 can exceed 2 million,
[00:09:11] look at that. Success
[00:09:13] that
[00:09:21] we also have, which is from Jorge, who calls us and
[00:09:24] tells us that OSEEC wants to disaffiliate him because he
[00:09:28] retired, this is very common, no, that social works do not want to
[00:09:31] take them, they have them as active for 40 years, when it comes time to
[00:09:34] retire, they open up the range, no, so
[00:09:37] we filed an injunction and quickly obtained a precautionary measure with the
[00:09:41] following resolution: Eh, come on, pass, so,
[00:09:45] look, in the car, the gentleman appears, well, here is the
[00:09:48] last name, eh, on his own behalf, requesting the issuance of
[00:09:52] a precautionary measure so that the social work of commerce employees, civil activities, OSECA,
[00:09:55] arbitrate the necessary means
[00:09:59] for him to continue with the medical assistance benefits provided to him and to
[00:10:02] maintain him as an affiliate to the same plan he had prior to obtaining
[00:10:06] the retirement benefit, why, what happens here, you retire
[00:10:10] and what do social works tell you, you are obligated to go to PAMI,
[00:10:13] which is a lie because the PAMI law does not say that and you are free to choose,
[00:10:17] so what is the problem, there is a list of social
[00:10:21] works that accept retirees, which is so small, and the majority that you are
[00:10:24] with... with your social work for 30 years, you have your
[00:10:28] doctors, your places of attention, they want to change
[00:10:31] it and it's resolved with the injunction, let's resolve it very quickly,
[00:10:34] so here I preserved the gentleman's name, I forgot
[00:10:38] to preserve the other one, I apologize, Jorge, anyway, we won, so
[00:10:42] of course, this is in the civil and commercial federal court number
[00:10:44] seven, finally it resolved that
[00:10:48] it ordered the social work OSECA to, within 3
[00:10:52] maintain and/or reaffiliate the... gentleman as a beneficiary of the
[00:10:56] health services provided by that entity and continue providing comprehensive
[00:10:59] medical assistance until the assistance is dictated, look what we talked about at
[00:11:03] the beginning of the program, no, that retirees are waiting for a court ruling for more than a
[00:11:07] year, this, for example, we smoothed over this mess for someone in 3 days, when the
[00:11:11] justice works well in the case of health, the justice works well, we
[00:11:15] have eh precautionary measures and coverage in
[00:11:18] 48, 24 hours, 72 hours,
[00:11:21] but it's true that in most cases it works very quickly.
[00:11:33] it takes 10 days and in the meantime something happened to you, you don't have coverage, you don't have coverage, that's why it's important
[00:11:37] to make these claims and also obviously if you already have your
[00:11:40] social work, your pre-paid that works well, keep it to maintain the
[00:11:44] providers, not have to go to another place eh bring me your medical history because I don't know you,
[00:11:47] there are a lot of issues that are maintained with this, do you allow
[00:11:51] me? It is worth highlighting
[00:11:54] because they directly lie to retirees
[00:11:57] that they have to go to Pami, to new
[00:12:01] retirees, of course, that is to say, it is a
[00:12:04] daily demand that I have because we are right around the
[00:12:06] corner from the social work and retirees come where
[00:12:10] they are told that they have to go to Pami yes or no, not only
[00:12:14] ANSES tells them but also the social works and the
[00:12:18] employer himself often tells them that Pami is not for them,
[00:12:21] that's why it's very important that the person who is about to retire
[00:12:25] seek advice prior to the retirement being issued, because
[00:12:29] many times it also happens that afterwards in
[00:12:32] Pami it is a little more difficult to get or make room for the
[00:12:35] injunction, very well, next, let's go, we continue, come on, we have to start
[00:12:38] flying, how to collect a sentence, this is key, no, that is, you
[00:12:42] have a firm sentence, how do you collect it, many people don't, they don't
[00:12:45] collect it, come on, let's go, so first
[00:12:49] eh, when you are in
[00:12:53] moment, the moment is when
[00:12:55] your lawsuit becomes final or at least partially final because
[00:12:59] there are lawsuits that are final, others that go to the
[00:13:02] court and one can try to make,
[00:13:05] try and it is usually achieved, to make a partial
[00:13:08] liquidation on the issues that were given to you until the
[00:13:12] court resolves the underlying issue that was not
[00:13:14] resolved, so eh what do you
[00:13:18] have to have yes or yes, first instance
[00:13:21] sentence, of course, because what happens, people tell us doctor I have
[00:13:25] a favorable sentence, can I collect? No, what you had may be a first
[00:13:28] instance sentence, and be careful when you follow it, because it says final
[00:13:32] sentence, of course, it says final sentence, so well, that's it,
[00:13:36] it's over, no, it's not over, exactly, why? Because there you go to the court of
[00:13:39] appeals, regardless of whether you won in everything you asked for, which
[00:13:43] usually doesn't happen, it also takes you to the court,
[00:13:46] so here you already have the two sentences, let's say, that are the
[00:13:50] common ones, first instance sentence, court sentence, if
[00:13:55] claim the issues for inflation, obviously you are going to end up in court,
[00:13:59] but eh, the usual step is that after this remains what is
[00:14:03] called a firm sentence that remains the payment and once it becomes
[00:14:06] firm, they give ANSES 120 days to
[00:14:09] pay, these 120 days are business days, that is,
[00:14:13] it's 6 months more or less in elapsed time
[00:14:17] and once this is fulfilled, you are already in a position to go to court and say they didn't
[00:14:20] pay me, I want to collect, I'm
[00:14:24] pay. Let's go with the next plate
[00:14:26] here.
[00:14:28] What do you have to do to collect your readjustment lawsuit? The term is business
[00:14:31] days. The lawyer has to present a liquidation, once these
[00:14:35] 120 days have passed, on day 121 they can present the execution
[00:14:38] request and the liquidation, and after a process, ANSES's accounts are
[00:14:42] garnished and collected. So, what happens?
[00:14:46] It is being said in many places, look, ANSES is not paying the
[00:14:50] lawsuits, but it's not that ANSES doesn't collect them, it's that ANSES doesn't
[00:14:53] pay them, the lawyers collect them.
[00:14:55] So, let's go back to the previous plate for
[00:14:59] a second, what do you have to have to collect, to say, I'm already
[00:15:03] in a position to collect, I want to collect, first instance sentence, court
[00:15:06] sentence and the payment term of these 120 days, of these 120
[00:15:10] business days, in case you go to court, today there is already the
[00:15:14] great advantage that eh the courts are
[00:15:18] the court and the first instance courts are
[00:15:21] accepting that partial executions are made, what is this?
[00:15:25] You don't have the 120-day term, but
[00:15:28] why? Because you are in court, so what does your lawyer have to do? Ask that
[00:15:31] file, you are going to say, pay me what I already have firm
[00:15:35] from court, what the court doesn't need to... rule on because it already ruled
[00:15:38] previously, let the court handle the rest, so you already collect
[00:15:42] the first part which is like the case we showed you before, for example a person who went
[00:15:46] from 600 to 1,200, that can be
[00:15:49] perfectly done with a partial execution and
[00:16:08] is that you don't have to stand still and you have to consult and if you collected the
[00:16:11] sentence also consult to see if what you collected is correctly
[00:16:15] liquidated or not, I would tell
[00:16:19] you collected, you collected incorrectly because the truth is that it liquidates
[00:16:22] incorrectly, it pays you incorrectly, it caps you, the caps are not
[00:16:25] met, sometimes not all, not all are very
[00:16:29] specialized in this, eh, let's go two questions, come on, well, here they tell us
[00:16:33] good morning, I am a widow, my husband had contributions but was not retired,
[00:16:36] can I collect a pension from him? I am retired and I collect the minimum,
[00:16:40] well, it depends, in pensions what is done is an evaluation
[00:16:45] what is done is an evaluation, an
[00:16:48] evaluation of contributions, to see if he was a regular or
[00:16:51] irregular contributor, what they do is they take your husband's contributions
[00:16:55] for the last 3 months and they will see if he had at least
[00:16:59] 18 months or 30 or 30 months you will have
[00:17:02] access to a pension, if within the last 5
[00:17:06] years you only have
[00:17:09] a year they will ask for 15 more years of contributions and the third
[00:17:12] evaluation is if he has 30 years and met all that, it's fine, if he didn't meet
[00:17:16] all that, then no,
[00:17:25] here, through WhatsApp, we also receive them on our website jubilarme.com.ar
[00:17:29] here Claudio, for example, asks us if his benefit can be
[00:17:32] readjusted, to know if your benefit can be readjusted, you would
[00:17:36] have to give us two things. When you retired and how much
[00:17:42] tell you if you can claim
[00:17:54] do to make a readjustment claim, I retired in
[00:17:57] 2021, well the same, we would need to know how much you are
[00:18:00] collecting to make the readjustment claim now, it's very easy, you just have to
[00:18:04] contact a professional, today since the law came out. You don't
[00:18:08] even have to go to ANSES because you don't need an administrative claim, the only thing you have
[00:18:12] to do is sign a power of attorney so that they can represent you specifically in
[00:18:16] the social security forum and with that you carry out your process and one day the lawyer
[00:18:20] will call you and tell you look Pepito is ready to collect your
[00:18:23] lawsuit, eh, it doesn't mean that you have to do paperwork, you don't have to
[00:18:27] sign cumbersome papers, it's just one
[00:18:57] the moratoriums for retirees
[00:19:00] are ending.
[00:19:17] But necessity kills
[00:19:19] doctrine.
[00:19:27] asks to buy years of
[00:19:28] contributions.
[00:19:56] you know that well, he has come many times here, no,
[00:19:59] and and and let's say
[00:20:03] he did was a retirement training and
[00:20:06] well, there is a report from Tony Conman that says that
[00:20:09] he went to ANSES to ask precisely because he did not
[00:20:13] have the necessary years of contribution and
[00:20:16] regularize, we here all the guests who come
[00:20:19] assume that the record is fine, no, if you don't
[00:20:23] say record, no, no, but if you, Mr. President, only have 5 years of
[00:20:26] contributions in principle, but well, yes, someone with a separate commercial
[00:20:30] activity, let's say, known, of course, of course, of course, and the truth is that we have
[00:20:33] a lot of respect for him, he has come many times here and we have
[00:20:37] treated him very well, we have debated and so on and the truth is
[00:20:41] that he is a true gentleman and what
[00:20:43] he did was nothing more and nothing less than put here the plate that
[00:20:47] the reality of Argentines, no, that... necessity kills
[00:20:50] doctrine, that is, the need to retire and well,
[00:20:54] he is not in favor of moratoriums
[00:20:56] or of being able to update this, but the reality is
[00:21:00] that he needs it and he didn't kill anyone either, that is, he went to
[00:21:05] the law, he didn't go as he should, but it calls
[00:21:08] attention that you see we say one thing, we say
[00:21:12] one thing with our mouths and with our hands we do others, no, yes, no,
[00:21:15] besides, let's go back, that's why when we say
[00:21:18] that eh those who are voting our
[00:21:21] laws, yes, no, you see there is something that is good, what is the
[00:21:25] wheeling and dealing and what is really objectivity, here there was no
[00:21:28] objectivity, someone who voted against
[00:21:32] tells you to be, except hey, look, what happens to me is one in a
[00:21:37] many retirees need and the ANSES numbers show it, 20% of
[00:21:43] historically will end up retiring, and women were left out of
[00:21:46] retirement, they changed their retirement age.
[00:21:58] Yes, ma'am, I'm going to be the devil's advocate, yes, yes, advocate, ultimately
[00:22:01] it would also be to avail oneself of a right that one currently has, of course
[00:22:05] it is, because otherwise it would also be like the case of a journalist who, for example, every
[00:22:10] or in favor of the modernization law and suddenly is
[00:22:14] demanding the payment of a final settlement for a dismissal, of course, ultimately,
[00:22:17] if I have a right, I can
[00:22:20] exercise it, if it seems so and I think it's good that we debate
[00:22:24] the lack of consistency regarding
[00:22:27] saying I vote for something and then I'm going to demand it, that's fine, but what you say
[00:22:31] is key and I think it's very correct, because the truth is that
[00:22:34] rights are for everyone and laws enable certain
[00:22:38] issues, these laws that enable you, no, let's say that you
[00:22:42] think differently does not mean that you can use the law, I can say I am
[00:22:46] against people who get into tax moratoriums, but if
[00:22:49] you owe, you can use it and it is legal to do so, that is, what
[00:22:52] Esper did is totally
[00:22:56] legal, it's just a moral issue not legal, of course,
[00:23:00] no, no, no, it's not questionable either because he has the right to do it, what happens is
[00:23:03] that what we want to say with this, is not to speak against
[00:23:07] Esper because I am not going to speak against Esper,
[00:23:09] it's eh, even if everyone
[00:23:13] says that the doctrine that people
[00:23:16] retire without contributions is fine, I want you to
[00:23:20] know that in Argentina what happens to
[00:23:23] Esper happens to everyone, so it's not just
[00:23:27] for those who think one way, probably
[00:23:30] Esper is right and my law is right that people have to
[00:23:34] retire with 30 years of contributions and the retirement
[00:23:37] fund would be healthy if all people who are on the books
[00:23:40] would go from being off the books to being on the books, ANSES would be
[00:23:44] super-profitable, yes, but for you know what is
[00:23:47] annoying, what happens is that reality kills fiction. No, what bothers
[00:23:50] me is the discourse, why? Because the discourse
[00:23:54] is under the discourse they lead people to
[00:23:57] oppose moratoriums that even discriminate
[00:24:01] against those who enter a moratorium because they call you a welfare recipient, you never
[00:24:04] worked, Esper never worked, he worked 5 years in his whole life, I don't
[00:24:08] think so, he is a person with, besides, with public
[00:24:11] academic activity with reports, I don't think he had
[00:24:15] only 5 years because be careful that the report does
[00:24:19] not show the contributions of self-employed or monotributistas that are not seen
[00:24:22] beyond that, for example, there is the case of Milei and his
[00:24:26] parents, yes, yes, his mother retired with
[00:24:29] a moratorium, she has said it publicly, so what I'm getting
[00:24:32] at is eh what was said, for example, in the discussion of the basic
[00:24:36] law when they tried to make this failed pension reform was
[00:24:39] that the retiree who contributed would have their pension increased.
[00:24:42] taking out the one who is making it so that the one who doesn't have contributions doesn't retire
[00:24:46] and let's say harming the one who didn't contribute, nobody contributed in... Argentina
[00:24:50] because you go to buy milk and you're contributing, you go to fill up gas, you're
[00:24:53] contributing, you contribute with a lot of things, so there's also the moral
[00:24:57] to say, I'll shut my mouth, if I'm against it I'll shut my mouth, but
[00:25:00] don't make a speech because then your mom
[00:25:04] has a moratorium, your friend has a moratorium, you need the
[00:25:08] moratorium, well put me the next one, so according to the note of esper requested
[00:25:11] to adhere to the benefit of law 2715 which
[00:25:15] allows regularizing the year of contribution to
[00:25:41] FAL and when one talks about the FAL one says what is the FAL for the
[00:25:45] one who used it in Malvinas well what is
[00:25:48] the FAL what is a Labor
[00:25:52] has been talked about a lot in recent months, because it's, let's say it's a
[00:25:56] big part of the topic of let's say this last
[00:25:59] labor reform and it takes on greater relevance. because it will enter into
[00:26:03] operation next month, clear, and many employers are, you see,
[00:26:07] it's said that retirees will lose, employers will win, they will fire
[00:26:51] saves every month to pay layoffs, what
[00:26:55] this does is obligate the company to have that saving, clear, why
[00:26:59] because many times what happens is that the company eh says a
[00:27:02] layoff, you see, it makes a layoff, then I don't have to pay you, well,
[00:27:06] it obligates to have a fund to pay layoffs,
[00:27:09] so far so good, that is, this FAL has to do with
[00:27:13] companies and worker layoffs, come on, who
[00:27:16] pays for it, well, the employer, who contributes to this labor
[00:27:19] assistance fund, the employer contributes according to the size of the company, SMEs
[00:27:23] contribute 2.5% of the total of salaries and large
[00:27:26] companies 1%, what is done is an
[00:27:30] account is opened and that money will be deposited. which will later be capitalized in addition
[00:27:34] to what but wait because one says that
[00:27:37] this why do SMEs pay 2.5% and large
[00:27:41] companies 1%, they are always benefited right, here
[00:27:44] we are going to see, Sebastian will also explain that this actually benefits the SME that it is
[00:27:48] 2.5% and not 1% because obviously it has fewer
[00:27:51] employees, it has less capacity of less wage bill so it will
[00:27:55] take much longer to fill the
[00:28:01] the... contributions to the SIPA which is the fund,
[00:28:05] let's say, the Argentine Integrated Pension System,
[00:28:09] pensions, pensions and pensions, what would be
[00:28:11] contributions are deducted for the FAL, that is, that
[00:28:15] percentage, since it does not cost companies more, it
[00:28:18] favors the small company that it is 2.5% and not
[00:28:22] 1%, because it's not that it pays an additional 2.5%, but
[00:28:25] that they retain it from the
[00:28:28] contributions, who does this screw over, well,
[00:28:36] is zero because that money comes from what is already used to pay pensions,
[00:28:40] so what there is is a defunding
[00:28:43] of pensions and retirements, but
[00:28:46] moment why it happens, not all workers
[00:28:50] work perfectly, there is always someone who, hey, I have to fire, why,
[00:28:54] either because the position doesn't suit me or because the person works
[00:28:57] badly, it's their right and what it does is
[00:29:00] that that money is secured. Yes, what is fantastic is
[00:29:03] that retirees are putting their money to
[00:29:06] finance the purchase of houses with mortgages and now they will also
[00:29:10] finance the layoffs, the truth is that retirees are
[00:29:21] I think maybe a point that I would add so that the people who are
[00:29:25] watching us, who are calm, especially the workers,
[00:29:28] that this regime applies to the 6 million workers that exist.
[00:29:32] Argentina's private sector does not apply to the public sector or to
[00:29:36] domestic workers, for example, so that they have it
[00:29:39] clear, eh and it will not affect the way
[00:29:42] in which the severance pay of
[00:29:45] a worker who is fired is calculated, that does not change
[00:29:49] at all, what does end up changing, well, as they well said, where
[00:29:52] the money comes from for the worker, eh I think that
[00:29:56] an intangible advantage, let's say, is that tomorrow
[00:30:00] if they are in a company and they feel that that
[00:30:03] company is about to
[00:30:06] go bankrupt or is in a bad situation, is short of money, does not have money to
[00:30:09] pay, eh, to the extent that this is mandatory and companies will
[00:30:13] have to put that money in that fund, eh, the day that
[00:30:16] they have to dismiss them, they will be able to ensure that they will collect the
[00:30:20] severance pay, so from that point of view the worker will feel a little
[00:30:24] safer that the money will go to
[00:30:35] first the company notifies the fund, then the fund
[00:30:39] deposits in 5 business days and if it is not enough the company
[00:30:43] puts the rest, which is important, clear.