2002. unfortunately, the current legislation does not include the subtle, but very important, distinctions of the different components of an effective occupational pension system : that of a pension institution, a pension fund, a pension scheme and the entity that operates the funds. in addition, it misinterprets the role of the pension institution with regard to its responsibility towards its members, giving them the false sense of “ social security - like ” full protection, irrespective of the financial capacity of the sponsor. finally, the current legislation does not recognise greek economic reality, as the economic burden of establishing an occupational pension fund is excessive, even for the bigger employers, let alone small and medium - sized enterprises, which constitute the backbone of the greek economy. the transposition, during the coming months, of the new eu directive “ iorps ii ” to greek legislation should be seen as an opportunity for a new metamorphosis, with a view to making the occupational pension system work properly and fulfil its purpose. i am confident that the greek labour force could reap major benefits from the occupational pension system, should : - the role of each distinctive component be identified and duly recognised ; - the role of the occupational pension institution be restored as a trustee of the employer ’ s promises to its employees, discarding any “ social security - like ” features ; - in line with greek economic reality, greater flexibility be introduced. for example, the law could allow more than one employers ( even from different industries ), each with its own pension scheme, to contribute to the same pension fund that is operated jointly with other funds by a single entity ; - it be acknowledged that an authorised entity may be responsible for operating a pension institution ; - due recognition be given to the very important notion of the mobility of pension rights ; - procedures be determined for an orderly liquidation or disbursement of benefits in case of insolvency of an iorp, its sponsor undertaking or the entity that operates the iorp ; and - last but not least, the unnecessary fragmentation of iorps supervision be eliminated. it is only under such conditions that the occupational pension system would serve its purpose and that the private insurance sector could assume its role in operating iorps by lending its expertise and experience to the iorps ( in areas such as underwriting risks, collecting contributions, disbursing benefits, designing and implementing liability - driven investment strategies ) and provide actuarial and accounting services ; that is

. 8 % of gdp ). while the 2015 and 2016 reforms did attempt to further curtail pension benefits, they exempted old retirees until july 2018. as a result, the fiscal adjustment delivered by the latest reforms is borne by new generations of retirees with longer careers, thus worsening benefit - contribution links and raising issues of intergenerational fairness. on the other hand, the system can no longer finance itself through rising contributions ; high social security contributions increase the tax burden on labour and lead to a fall in gdp in the medium term. note also that under the current supplementary ndc scheme they generate future pension obligations too. this context of unfolding pension cuts shows that an adequate and, at the same time, sustainable “ social security only ” system is not affordable under the present circumstances in greece. ownership of reform efforts is difficult, but may be strengthened by policies that increase incomes for pensioners in the future, thus providing appropriate social safety nets and mitigating socio - political resistance or the risk of reversal. such policies include extending working lives and improving the employability of older workers, encouraging private savings or, most commonly and to the point, supplementing pension accumulation from public first pillar schemes with occupational pensions of second pillar and personal pension of third pillar schemes. retirement financial security should not, and cannot, be provided from one source : social security funds, employer - sponsored retirement plans and personal savings should all be seen as indispensable and complementary parts of a single system that secure its affordability, adequacy and sustainability. in order to form such an integrated system, all stakeholders should understand their respective roles : the state should not insist on retaining the monopoly of retirement benefits ; employers should cease misinterpreting their role in providing security to their employees only during their labour time but should extend it, most importantly, after their retirement ; and citizens should not forget about the role their personal savings play in ensuring their own retirement financial security. 3 / 6 bis central bankers'speeches the benefits of an occupational pension system are obvious : first and foremost, it increases the post - retirement financial resources of the labour force. it increases the productivity of the workforce as it constitutes an efficient means of deferred remuneration and, finally, it increases the total investments in the country by being an alternative to banks, but very efficient, way of financing the real economy. occupational pension funds ( or else called iorps ) were introduced in greece by law 3029 /