032874 hs Is Social Security unfair to women?

By Nancy ANN RELLA WRN Staff Writer

Cries of sex discrimination have reverberated through bastions of the credit and banking industries, academic circles, and almost every vocational realm,

The Social Security Administration has not been slighted in this respect.

The Social Security Administration booklet, "Women and Social Security," uses these careful phrases: "Social Security provisions have been closely scrutinized in recent years by those concerned with the treatment of women under all public programs."

OBVIOUSLY, as an increasing number of women have shed traditional homemaker roles to forge careers outside domestic domains, they have been earning larger benefits in their own right, Hence the question: Is Social Security unfair to women?

Ferdinand A. Macaluso. district manager at the white, Plains Social Security office, says it is not,

In fact, he asserted during an interview at his 200 Mamaroneck Ave. office, Social Security provisions are ' 'weighted in favor of women. "

WHAT MIGHT appear offensive to the women's rights advocate Macaluso explained, is the fact that under the original Social Security Act of 1935, women were deemed dependent.

"When a man becomes 65," he said, "his wife is paid dependent benefits, and her dependency status is not questioned.

"When a woman reaches 65. her husband has to prove his dependency. that is, that he receives one-half his support from his wife."

Returning to women .and, Social Security "Some aspects of' old-age, survivor, disability and health insurance programs have come under increasing attack as unfair to working wives . . Complaints of discrimination against women appear to stem mainly  from the provision that a married women who has worked in employment covered under Social Security may draw a benefit at age 62 or later based either on her own earnings or
her husband's earnings, whichever is larger, but not two full benefits."

Macaluso explains that both husband and wife can draw benefits up to the maximum. as individuals. Further, if the woman woman's benefits. because of low-salary or part-time employment, are less than half her husband's, she can instead draw that amount as the man wife. She can not, however. draw on husband's benefits may he $260 per month and a wife's only $100, each based on their respective work records. In that event $130 could be added to the wife's allotment to bring her total monthly benefits up to half her husband's benefits.

"The reverse is not true for Men Macaluso said; "It really discriminates against men

THE BOOKLET comments "The woman , benefit, based on her husbands work may be larger than her own retirement benefit because the covered earnings of women, on the average, are lower than those of men. This reflects their less regular and extended employment, their greater concentration in low-paid occupations and industries, as well as any past. (if not present) discrimination in pay for the same work. Thus in many cases, the working wife received a retirement benefit no larger than the non-working wife may receive as a dependent. This is interpreted by some as meaning that a woman's own work and her Social Security contributions have brought no benefit."

In most f , ields, separate and unequal wage scales for men and women once existed, but
this now is changing, and Macaluso contends Social Security provisions will also.Women
'will be earning more and beeligible under retired worker benefits more frequently than as dependents.

"Social Security is a fluid thing. "it keeps changing," he added. "Within the same year, laws may change before a provision goes into effect."

MACALUSO also commented that at one time' divorced women who had been married many years were barred from receiving any Social Security benefits based upon the ex.husband's entitlement. Now,

he pointed out, if married to a man for 20 yearsi then divorced, she may collect retirement benefits when he does, and widow's benefits when he dies.

A younger divorced who with dependent children way collect mother's benefits, he added, for all children up to 18 years of age and for any disabled child at any age.

The reverse is not true, that is, a man may not collect benefits based on his divorced wife's entitlement in her own right.

MACALUSO presented one other example of an- area in which he said- he believes women come out ahead women teachers who are over 62 and still working may collect Social Security benefits (luring summer vacations.

As the American society moves toward giving women an equal status with men in all phases of life, institutions like Social Security will emerge with a more equitable appearance - for both men and women - but at present, Macaluso said. "most people accept Social Security as it is."

To obtain a copy of "Women and Social Security," available at 95 cents, write to the U. S.. Government Printing Office, Public 139curnentsi Distribution Center, Pueblo, Colorado. 81009.)