The political absurdity of the LPP reform

The reform of the LPP resembles a scene from a surrealist painting, populated by paradoxes and inconsistencies which captivate as much as they confuse.

In this theater of the absurd, the roles are reversed: traditionally, one would expect the left to cheer reform that favors women, part-time workers and low wages, while the right and entrepreneurs should criticize it for its high costs. However, curiously, each camp takes the opposite position, for reasons that seem strictly political, creating an atmosphere of confusion and intensely polarized debate.

One point in particular arouses a wave of emotions and lively debates: the drop in the conversion rate from 6.8 to 6%. “A scandal, my little lady!” some exclaim, although, if we look more closely and rationally, this drop only affects 15% of policyholders. Take for example the Migros pension fund, which has 51,000 employees. Its director, Christoph Ryter, recently explained that only 23 of these employees would suffer the consequences of this reduction. This reality, rich in contradictions, raises more questions than it provides answers.

Faced with such a gap between political expectations and reality, agreement between the parties becomes imperative. However, political calculations seem to eclipse collective interest, miring dialogue in mirages of political opportunism.

It is urgent to remember that encouraging part-time work and low salaries meets a crucial societal need. Being insured with the LPP not only offers retirement coverage, but also significant benefits in the event of disability and death, aspects that are too often neglected.

Certainly, this reform is imperfect and strewn with inconsistencies, particularly during the transition period. Indeed, some new retirees benefit from additional funds through complex and arbitrary redistributions, while others, retiring earlier or later, are left behind. However, rejecting this reform would seriously weaken our Swiss three-pillar system, essential to the financial security of seniors, new generations, part-time workers and people on low incomes.

Erosion of trust

It is vital to find a compromise, even if imperfect, to guarantee the sustainability of our pension model. Ignoring these notable improvements would be tragic for years to come. Leaving aside this reform could lead to a gradual erosion of confidence in our pension system, which could have significant economic and social repercussions. The role of politicians should not be to win points at all costs, but to reach a consensus that benefits society as a whole. Hello, are you from the right, are you from the left? Hello, you should just use common sense!

Did you find an error? Please report it to us.

1 comment