MISSCEO Comparative tables

Access the MISSCEO database

The 2022 MISSCEO comparative tables on social protection systems are available in the database which has been updated with the 2022 data currently available. The tables resume the situation concerning the legislation of social protection on 1 January 2022 in the MISSCEO states: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Türkiye and Ukraine.

The pdf version of the 2022 data appears below.

1.   Financing
2.   Health care
3.   Sickness - Cash benefits
4.   Maternity/Paternity
5.   Invalidity
6.   Old-age
7.   Survivors
8.   Employment injuries and occupational diseases
9.   Family benefits
10. Unemployment
11. Guaranteeing sufficient resources
12. Long-term care

Introductions to social security systems per country

Albania

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Charts and description of social protection per country

Albania

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Social protection of self-employed per country

The approach adopted by MISSCEO, as regards the coverage of self-employed persons, is to include references to self-employed persons and civil servants in the Comparative Tables if they are included under a general scheme for the economically active population. This means schemes that are based on the performance of economic activity and not on any distinction between employees and self-employed persons. Schemes based on economic activity can be identified when the benefits received by self-employed persons and employees are the same. There may be differences between the rates of financial contributions made by these parties or the conditions applied.

Separate schemes for self-employed persons, where the amount of benefit paid differ from that of employees are not included in the MISSCEO comparative tables. In view of the varying structures of the protection systems, a representation in the form of "Comparative Tables" characteristically utilised by MISSCEO quickly came up against certain limits: Table XIII would become far and away the most extensive of all tables, which had less to do with the wealth of information than with the layout of the table itself. Instead, MISSCEO has produced the short description of the social protection of the self-employed in this annex to the tables.

Albania	Montenegro
Armenia	Serbia
Azerbaijan	North Macedonia
Bosnia and Herzegovina	Türkiye
Georgia	Ukraine
Republic of Moldova

Information on coordination instruments per country

The member states of MISSCEO also provide information on coordination instruments with regard to their respective countries, which is updated on a periodic basis.

Albania, (appendix)

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Republic of Moldova

Türkiye

Ukraine

The European Social Charter
a guardian of our social rights

Shortcuts

Code of Social Security

events

Back Gender pay gap is still persistent in Europe

The European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) has adopted 15 decisions (see links below) on state compliance with the right to equal pay, as well as the right to equal opportunities in the workplace, following complaints which were lodged within the framework of the collective complaints procedure by the international NGO University Women Europe (UWE). The decisions concern the 15 States which have accepted the complaints procedure (Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia and Sweden). The decisions were adopted by the ECSR on 5 and 6 December 2019 and became public on 29 June 2020.

The decisions identify clear and strong standards in the field of equal pay and, more precisely, they require that the right to equal pay has to be guaranteed in law (UWE Decisions Factsheet). The ECSR has identified the following obligations for States:

To recognise the right to equal pay for equal work or work of equal value in their legislation;
To ensure access to effective remedies for victims of pay discrimination;
To ensure and guarantee pay transparency and enable pay comparisons;
To maintain effective equality bodies and relevant institutions in order to ensure equal pay in practice.

Moreover, the right to equal pay implies the obligation to adopt measures to promote it. This obligation has two elements: on the one hand, collecting reliable and standardised data to measure and analyse the gender pay gap and, on the other hand, designing effective policies and measures aimed at reducing the gender pay gap on the basis of an analysis of the data collected. The States are also under an obligation to show measurable progress in reducing the gender pay gap.

The ECSR acknowledges that the gender pay gap is no longer solely or even primarily a result of discrimination as such. The gap arises mainly from differences in the so-called “average characteristics” of women and men in the labour market. These differences result from many factors, such as horizontal segregation, where there is the concentration of one sex in certain economic activities (sectoral gender segregation) or the concentration of one sex in certain occupations (occupational gender segregation), as well as vertical segregation. The decisions highlight the positive obligations of States to tackle these phenomena in the labour market, including by promoting the advancement of women in decision-making positions within private companies.

14 out of the 15 States were found to be in violation of one or more of the above-mentioned aspects of the obligation to guarantee the right to equal pay and the right to equal opportunities in the workplace. However, the ECSR also noted various positive developments. Measures taken by some States in recent years have led to some progress in reducing the gender pay gap, but the progress is slow. The ECSR’s decisions clearly demonstrate that problems and practices, such as segregation in the labour market, lack of pay transparency, secrecy regarding pay levels, obstacles to access effective remedies and retaliatory dismissals continue to exist and prevent full realisation of the equal pay principle.

The decisions on the merits of the complaints lodged by UWE:

No. 124/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Belgium

No. 125/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Bulgaria

No. 126/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Croatia

No. 127/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Cyprus

No. 128/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Czech Republic

No. 129/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Finland

No. 130/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. France

No. 131/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Greece

No. 132/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Ireland

No. 133/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. Italy

No. 134/2016 University Women of Europe (UWE) v. the Netherlands