In Iran's legal system, one of the most common lawsuits within the jurisdiction of labor dispute resolution authorities is lawsuits related to contribution, which, in the assumption of issuing a decision in favor of the worker, ultimately implements it in order to calculate and collect contribution. However, the social security organization refuses to implement these votes in many cases for reasons such as lack of employment verification, inaccurate contribution records, contribution gaps, and conflicting verdicts; So that this issue causes a lawsuit on behalf of the convict in the Court of Administrative Justice. Considering the challenges in this field for the workers and the attention of the Administrative Court of Justice to this issue in numerous opinions, the current article has studied this issue using the descriptive-analytical method and based on library studies. This article findings show in the above four cases, the social security organization has tried to avoid the implementation of the decisions of labor dispute resolution authorities in the field of contribution based on the interpretation of laws and regulations, or that by establishing regulations, by establishing regulations, it closes the way for the implementation of opinions that it considers incorrect. Although in many cases, the organization's refusal is legally correct but the investigations carried out show the organization has used strict methods for protect this pension fund financial resources. Considering this issue, the Administrative Court of Justice has tried to support the workers rights in the form of unanimity verdicts and divisions verdicts.