Every second person receives less pension

After two years of hard negotiations, unions and employers agreed in the summer of 2019 on the reform of occupational pensions: the conversion rate must be lowered, but there are pension supplements for everyone – financed by a 0.5 percent payroll tax, which the rich pay also. The Federal Council sends the model to Parliament.

Four years later, the social partners’ compromise died. The conversion percentage should fall from 6.8 to 6 percent, but there are only supplements for half of the pensioners. And that only for 15 transition years. In return, wage contributions increase – to an annual income of CHF 170,000. Means: The solidarity participation of the rich is eliminated.

The social partners are appalled. The employers don’t even want to respond to the template. The Swiss Trade Union Confederation (SGB) announced the referendum before the National Council discussed the bill for the second and final time at its spring session starting tomorrow.

“The occupational pension reform is a mess,” says SGB president Pierre-Yves Maillard (54). “In 2019, everyone agreed that a reduction in conversion rate should not lead to reductions in benefits.” But Parliament threw the compromise overboard. “The common people don’t want a contribution from the rich. That’s why so many pensions are falling.”

What does that mean concretely? Facilities specialist Gabriela Medici (37) of the SGB calculated: “On average, insured persons lose up to 200 francs per person per month with the BVG reform. The pension losses are greatest for people who are no longer in the transitional generation.”

If the model of the Council of States prevails, all monthly incomes above 4,600 francs will be affected. In the National Council model, it applies to all incomes of CHF 4,200 or more. Medici: “That would be about half of all women and three quarters of all men.”

Inflation is not taken into account

Added to this is inflation, which is not compensated in the second pillar. The result: “Measured in terms of consumer spending, a person over the age of 65 is threatened with a loss of purchasing power of CHF 300 in 2024,” says Medici. “The bottom line is that there is a pension loss of up to 500 francs per person per month.”

According to Medici, it is all the more important that only half of the pensioners are compensated with supplements. “This only protects pensions up to almost 1,000 francs a month.” It is precisely these people who are generally dependent on a supplement in old age – but this must be reduced by the supplements. “These policyholders pay higher salary premiums, but have no money left in old age. Your situation is getting worse. Women are especially affected.”

Reduce the conversion rate without pension cuts: the BVG reform clearly misses this goal. “But it brings improvements for part-time workers and low-income earners,” says SVP state councilor Hannes Germann (66).

Provoke the left and the low-wage industry

The catch: the associated adjustments mean higher contributions for employers in the low-wage sectors. Those actors must now be brought on board, says Germann. “If we provoke both the left and the low-wage industry into an unholy alliance, the kettle will be fixed. Then the reform at the ballot box has no chance.”

There will definitely be elections. “The referendum is set,” confirms Pierre-Yves Maillard. The vote is expected to take place in March 2024. On the same day, the people will also decide on the SP initiative for a 13th AHV pension. For Maillard, the two templates are linked: “Instead of paying three billion a year for a pension reduction in the BVG, we can decide on a 13th AHV pension for everyone.”

However, saying no to the BVG reform would not bode well for young people, says Hannes Germann. “If we don’t change anything, the big earners will continue to take the pension money of future generations.”

But Germann no longer defends the exercise with zeal. “We should have put aside the reduction in the conversion rate for the transitional generation and concentrated on the measures in favor of part-time workers and low-income earners. There is a clear majority for that.”

The protracted dispute over the reform of the second pillar has left its mark. There only seems to be one thing in common in Bundesbern: whatever the outcome, the important thing is that it comes to an end.

Source:Blick