La eficiencia administrativa frente a los derechos laborales adquiridos, en la escisión del instituto de seguros sociales

Abstract

Before the enactment of Law 100 of 1993, the Social Insurance Institution paid health services to employees in the private sector, monopoly that will not require any effort.

The cumulative deficit for the lack of input from the Nation under the Act 90 of 1946 and the changes in their legal status, was not allowed to take on the challenge of competition of the actors within the system, so its management was questioned by enforcement agencies and several adverse court rulings over the financial crisis deepened, coupled with high labor costs for the benefits of the collective agreement, whose main beneficiaries were the servants of Clinical and CAA.

This led to the formulation of Conpes of March 31, 2003 entitled “Plan of modernization of the Institute of Social Security Health”, which resulted in the issuance of Decree 1750 of June 26, 2003 ordered the excision of the service provider health Clinics and Ambulatory Care Centers (CAA) and the creation of seven State social enterprises.

Decree Law 1750 of 2003 produced significant changes for servers to date of issue labored as official workers of the Institute of Social Security and that under the new law were automatically incorporated into the plant staff new state social enterprises as public employees, except those who held public office or functions of maintenance of hospital physical plant and general services, considered public employees; being its wage and benefits system stipulated for government employees in the executive branch of the national order, they cannot conclude collective labor agreements, and the application of the benefits of collective labor agreement signed between the Institute of Social Insurance and the union of Social Security Workers October 2001.

This decree was sued for infringement of the top order, and the Constitutional Court in Case of constitutionality that have erga omnes effect on the theory of acquired rights, held that Article 18 was restrictive as it only referred to acquired rights in relation to benefits, not contemplating relative to wages and contents in collective labor agreements.

To exist between the Social Insurance Institute and its workers a collective agreement in force, in accordance with Case C-314 and C 349 2004, the Constitutional Court stated that the convention should apply to the servers of the new entities while during their term, they must in compliance with such pronouncements recognize treaty rights with the exception of those relating to pensions, from June 26, 2003 until October 31, 2004, ignoring the effect of the collective agreement from that date forward.