近一年来,有4件信函、电话咨询:儿子或丈夫欠了单位的债,债务人所在(甚至不是所在)单位,却要他们的父亲、母亲或妻子用养老金偿还,且多用强行扣发的手段。这当然不会是普遍的,但却是应该十分重视的现象。当事人异口同声地问:这样对不对,我同口一声答复:不只是不对,而且是违法。 理由之一是,债权人当然有权向债务人讨债,民间精炼的语言叫:“冤有头,债有主”。如果讨债讨到了非债务人头上,是找错了“主”,再加使用了行政手段强迫非债务人偿还这种无来由的债,申诉、告状是必然的,因为他们不眼气。理由之二是:在实行养老保险费社会统筹之后,养老金倒底是谁支付的?这是个认识上的关键问题。国家政策规定,企业有为职工缴纳养老保险费的义务,一曰尽了义务,这笔钱就是劳动者的而不是 In the past year, there have been four letters and telephone inquiries: the debt owed by the son or husband to the employer, the employer where the debtor is located, or even the employer, but their fathers, mothers or wives are repaying with pensions and the use of forcible deduction . This of course will not be universal, but it is a phenomenon that should be taken seriously. The parties asked in unison: That was right. I replied with one voice: Not only wrong, but also illegal. One of the reasons is that creditors of course have the right to debt collectors from the debtor. The language refined by the private sector is called “injustice, debt-dominated”. If the debts were found on the head of the non-debtors, they found the wrong “master” and used administrative measures to force non-debtors to repay such unjustified debts. Appeals and pleadings are inevitable because they do not look down upon them. The second reason is that after the implementation of the social pooling of old-age insurance premiums, who pays the pensions? This is a key cognitive issue. According to the state policy, enterprises have the obligation to pay pension insurance premiums for their employees. When they say that they do their duty, the money is the worker’s wage rather than