Short answer. It depends on your contributions. Compulsory coverage under Article 168 runs to employees not over sixty, but the proviso keeps an employee over sixty within compulsory coverage if he is paying contributions to qualify for the retirement or life insurance benefit administered by the System.
What the law says
Coverage in the State Insurance Fund shall be compulsory upon all employers and their employees not over sixty (60) years of age
Labor Code, Article 168 — Compulsory Coverage Under State Fund. Read the full provision →
The age line, and what sits on either side of it
The main clause sets compulsory coverage for employers and employees not over sixty (60) years of age. Read on its own, that would place a worker who passes sixty outside the compulsory scheme, which is exactly the assumption that brings most people to this question. But the sentence does not stop there. The proviso that follows it puts a defined group of over-sixty employees back inside compulsory coverage, so age alone does not settle whether you are covered.
The proviso is about contributions, not about age
The condition it sets is that the employee is over sixty and paying contributions to qualify for the retirement or life insurance benefit administered by the System. Both parts have to be true. So the question that decides your case is not how old you are but whether contributions are still being paid on your behalf towards that benefit. Where they are, the article says you shall be subject to compulsory coverage — mandatory language, which means it is not something your employer elects into or out of.
Why it is worth checking rather than assuming
Older workers are frequently told, casually and without anyone consulting the provision, that they aged out of coverage. Sometimes the employer has genuinely stopped remitting; sometimes contributions have continued and nobody at the workplace realises what follows from that. The distinction matters most at the worst possible moment — after an injury — when the answer determines whether a claim can be made at all. It is a far better question to resolve while you are well than to discover the answer to from a denial letter.
How to find out where you stand
Your own contribution record is the document that answers this, so obtain a current copy rather than relying on what payroll tells you, and check whether remittances actually continued past your sixtieth birthday and up to the present. Compare it against your payslips, since deductions shown on a payslip and contributions actually remitted are not always the same thing. Keep both. If they diverge, that gap is itself a problem worth raising with a lawyer, quite apart from the coverage question that brought you here.
Related provisions
- Labor Code, Article 168 — Compulsory Coverage Under State Fund
- Labor Code, Article 170 — When Coverage Takes Effect