and Peru 5.9% and 9.8%, respectively(ILO, 2020b). The most developed countries had the lowest proportions(lower than the regional average), and vice versa; El Salvador and Peru had between two and three times the regional average. It was not possible to obtain statistics on the coverage of this group in all countries—in Uruguay it was 28% in 2015 and in Costa Rica 16%; in the rest of the countries should be much lower. In Chile, the 2015 Presidential Commission proposed giving voluntary coverage to this group. 2. SOCIAL SOLIDARITY AND GENDER EQUITY a. Promises of the Structural Reforms Reformers neither addressed social solidarity nor gender equity, because the individual account of the insured belongs to them and there are no transfers between generations, income groups, and genders.“A mandatory multipillar arrangement for old age security helps countries to make clear decisions about which groups should gain and which should lose through transfers in the public mandatory pillar, both within and across generations. This should reduce perverse or capricious redistribution—and poverty”(WB, 1994: 22). In other words, the WB branded the solidarity distribution among generations as harmful or capricious, but it stated that the reform would reduce poverty. 32 As for solidarity among genders, the WB pinpointed the problems faced in public systems, but it omitted any reference to how the private system would affect gender discrimination(WB, 1994: 34). The three WB/OECD officials who criticized certain adverse effects in the structural reform, argued that the private system“redistributes and diversi­fies the risks to retirement income more efficiently than do pure PAYG systems;” [also] by diversifying the retirement risks across multiple pillars,“reforms were 32 The WB(1994: 69) said:“Widows are thus one of the first groups of old people who should be targeted for social assistance, in the interest of alleviating poverty among those who the traditional system fails.” However, the WB did not refer to how the new(“non-traditional”) private system would face poverty, not only among widows, but also among those not covered by such system—handicapped and orphans. 57