Short answer. Your claim is not affected. Article 196 says an employer's failure to remit contributions does not prejudice the employee's or dependents' right to benefits under the Title. The consequence falls on the employer instead, who becomes liable to the System for the benefits paid, plus penalties.
What the law says
Failure or refusal of the employer to pay or remit the contribution herein prescribed shall not prejudice the right of the employee or his dependents to the benefits under this Title.
Labor Code, Article 196 — Delinquent Employer Contributions. Read the full provision →
Your right to the benefit does not depend on your employer's compliance
Article 196 draws a clear line between the employer's obligation to remit contributions and your own right to receive benefits if something happens to you at work. The employer being delinquent in his contributions is treated as the employer's problem, not yours: the article states plainly that this failure shall not prejudice the right of the employee or his dependents to the benefits. You do not have to prove your employer was current on payments before your claim can be recognized, and a delinquent employer is not a defense that defeats your claim.
Where the liability actually lands
Instead of falling on you, the consequences of non-remittance fall on the employer directly. Article 196 makes a delinquent employer liable to the System for the benefits which may have been paid to you or your dependents, and that liability constitutes a lien on all his property, real or personal, ranked as preferred to any credit, except taxes. The employer can resolve this by paying a lump sum covering the liability, which the article says absolves them of the delinquent contribution and penalty for that particular employee — but none of this changes what you are owed.
What happens if the employer never even reported you
Article 196 goes a step further for the situation where an employer had not even reported your employment before something happened to you. If a sickness, injury, disability or death occurs before the System receives any report of the name of his employee, the employer becomes liable to the System for the lump sum equivalent of whatever benefits you or your dependents are entitled to. In other words, an employer cannot avoid responsibility toward you by simply never registering you in the first place — the obligation and your entitlement both survive that failure.
What the article does not do for you
Article 196 removes one obstacle; it does not carry the claim by itself. It says non-remittance shall not prejudice your right to the benefits under this Title — which means you still have to bring yourself within that Title, by showing the sickness, injury, disability or death is one the system actually compensates. The article answers the objection that nothing was paid in on your behalf, and nothing more. Notice, too, that the liabilities it creates run to the System rather than to you: the lien on the employer's property and the lump-sum liability are the System's remedies against a delinquent employer, not a separate sum you collect from him. The practical consequence is about proof. An employer who never remitted has often never reported the employment either, so the records that establish you were his employee — payslips, identification, appointment papers, rosters — are what your claim will turn on.