Marlaska Unifies: Police and Civil Guard to be High-Risk Profession, Unlike Defence

The Ministry of the Interior, led by Fernando Grande-Marlaska, has confirmed to the unions its intention to declare the high-risk profession for all Police and Civil Guard personnel. This decision contrasts with the management of the Ministry of Defence, led by Margarita Robles, which has generated discomfort in the Armed Forces by differentiating soldiers according to their date of entry.

A working table at the end of April will mark the beginning of the regulatory change for Clases Pasivas and Social Security. The main objective is to prevent the conflict and division experienced in the military sphere from being transferred to the police forces. The Defence announcement, made through social media, generated surprise and frustration in the military sphere.

Sources from the National Police have confirmed that, unlike the Defence model, Interior will not exclude agents who entered before 2011. Comprehensive recognition is sought, covering both officials attached to the Clases Pasivas regime and those who contribute to Social Security. The State Secretariat for Security conveyed a message of calm in a meeting with unions, assuring that the issue of improving pensions will be addressed. It is planned to apply correction indices to increase contributions based on services provided.

The objective is to recognize the inherent dangerousness of police work and its impact on retirement. The logic, according to the sources consulted, is clear, since “it is not the same to be working for 30 years in a shop as it is to be working for 30 years in the police”.

The Ministry of the Interior has set a calendar to implement the necessary changes. At the end of April, a technical table will begin to address the regulatory modification in Clases Pasivas and Social Security. The objective is that this recognition translates into real improvements in the pensions of the agents.

The model to follow are other groups that already have this recognition, such as miners, who retired with good pensions at early ages. The aspiration is to improve the current regime and extend solutions to the Social Security system, where there is currently no equivalent route.

The Ministry of the Interior's decision to distance itself from the Defence model has a clear political reading. It seeks to avoid conflict with unions and associations that could reproduce the climate of tension existing in the Armed Forces. By including the most veteran agents, one of the main focuses of protest within the Police and Civil Guard is deactivated.

This measure accentuates the contrast between both ministries. The difference in treatment is evident: a civil guard who entered before 2011 could see their profession as high-risk recognized in full, while a soldier in the same situation would be excluded by the model proposed by their own ministry.

While Defence limited the measure to soldiers incorporated from 2011, Interior seeks a solution that encompasses all agents. This difference in treatment highlights the different strategies and priorities of both ministries in the management of state security.

Military professional associations have rejected the limitation imposed by Defence, warning about the creation of differences within the same group. Interior's decision to include all agents seeks to avoid these types of divisions and guarantee equitable treatment.