photo: Gennady Cherkasov
11 October 2017 in the “MK” published an article “Basmanny justice” climbed under the white robe” in which it was plunged many into shock the judgment of the Basmanny district court of Moscow under the claim of the doctor-kardioreumatology to the Government Department of the Main Department of Pension Fund of Russia (in connection with which the author and the editors thought it was appropriate the phrase “Basmanny justice” in the literal (because really Basmanny court — the name of the district) and figuratively (it is unlikely that the court’s decision was not liked by the Respondent — state Fund). The issue was appeal against the Respondent’s decision to invalidate the refusal to the citizen in the early appointment of insurance old-age pension and the inclusion of a special experience periods of his work is singular and unique in its kind medical organization “Center of endosurgery and lithotripsy”. It should be noted that the court tried: body the decision took 15 sheets, so that the unmotivated will not be called.
Motivation of the judicial decision to reject the inclusion of period of work of the doctor in TSELT, as stated in the publication, came down to the fact that is not considered as a special experience period of work as a doctor-cardiologist, ZAO “Center of endosurgery and lithotripsy”, giving the right to early appointment of insurance old-age pension. As indicated in the text of the decision, “as JSC “TSELT” in its organizational-legal form (OPF) is a commercial organization established for profit, which cannot be attributed to the health care institutions”. Originality of thinking is not only that, as if in passing, the court noted: “the name of the institutions as a joint stock company and closed joint stock company engaged in medical activities, the legal act are given.” Here the court acknowledges that the company and still unable to carry out medical activities. The only trouble is that the name from Celta was inappropriate. The vagueness of the concepts to which the appeals court is more than obvious. The concept of “health care institution” is narrowed to the OPF. When it is necessary to refer to the commercial component, the court points to the OPF. Then OPF (a JSC and JSC is the OPF) flows smoothly into the name when it is necessary to “beat” name. But what’s this? After all, the name of the organization is not limited only to the OPF and in the legal act we are talking about therapeutic activities carried out in one form or another, related to a particular type of medical institution (hospital, clinic, health center, clinic, infirmary, hospital, etc.). And this the main essence of medical work, the court of first instance saw. In the article, the men in white coats shared his opinion, which also had someone not like it.
Our publication from 11.10.2017 touched for the living judge of the Basmanny district court of Moscow Borisov K. P., has made the decision that 16.10.2017 addressed to the editorial office with a detailed letter, post which completely allows the format of the printed edition. So here are excerpts from the letter, revealing the position and motivation of the judge on such an important issue of pension provision doctors ‘ private clinics:
“After reading this article… I thought long and hard before I decided whether to answer me on this publication, however, a number of circumstances don’t allow you to leave the article without attention…
Given the interest of the citizens to question the possibility of early receipt of health workers pensions, it seems important to inform you about the motives of the judicial act and the legal regulation of the issues…
…The court did not include a special experience, which citizens acquire the right of retirement before reaching the generally established retirement age, the period of implementation of medical activities in organizations not classified by its organizational-legal form of the institutions, which provides such a right.
In this context it should be noted that this shall not prejudice… the right to social security in old age as these periods of employment taken into account when setting insurance pensions on a common basis. As suggested by the court of first instance, such legal regulation of the procedure of acquisition by citizens of the Russian Federation of the right to receive mandatory pension provision does not mean impossibility of their implementation is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the right to social security in old age, because the pension takes into account differences in the nature of work and functional duties of employees in the workplace.
Establishing the legal basis and conditions of appointment of pensions, the possibility of early appointment of insurance old-age pension, the legislator binds right to the pension before reaching the generally established retirement age is not any job, but only such, which is associated with the impact of various factors, increased mental and physical exertion, due to the specificity and nature of the work, in particular with therapeutic activities in health care…
Meanwhile, the name of the institutions as a joint stock company and closed joint stock company engaged in medical activities, the legal act is not specified.
The government of the Russian Federation the Ministry of labour and social protection of the Russian Federation is obliged to set for the performance of Federal Executive authorities and in coordination with the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation, the identity of professional activities performed after the change of the legal form and names of the relevant companies, the professional activities carried out before the change. In respect of posts in CJSC “TSELT” the identity of the professional activity is not set.”
Another sender said that “the decision about which speech will go, has so far not entered into force, its legality and validity shall be assessed by a panel of three judges of the Moscow city court. The right to appeal the decision of the Basmanny district court of Moscow plaintiff sold, and they filed an appeal”. So we will monitor the development of the case, exposing the problem of more than one individual doctor, using medical terminology, which revealed the abscess inequality doctors treating us in the state and private medical institutions.