SRF Arena on the BVG reform: Baume-Schneider thinks the proposal is “better than nothing”

The reform of the occupational pension scheme (BVG) is probably one of the most complicated proposals that the people have had to decide on in recent years. The SFR voting arena on Wednesday evening showed above all how far apart supporters and opponents are in their assessment of this proposal. However, it is questionable whether the debate helped undecided voters to make their decision.

For SP Council of States member Flavia Wasserfallen, parliament has turned a good compromise between the social partners with pension supplements of up to 200 francs for everyone into an “inedible menu”. Women with low incomes will in future have to pay monthly pension fund contributions of 100 to 150 francs. At the end of their working lives, they will have a slightly higher pension at best, but their supplementary benefits will be reduced by the same amount, and they will still be dependent on them.

Trade unionist Lampart disappointed with Federal Council

Federal Councillor Elisabeth Baume-Schneider was given the task of representing the parliamentary proposal. She understands women who, because of their low income, are not happy about higher wage deductions. But these women have to think about old age, when they will be happy to have a pension fund pension. There are insured people who have suffered pension losses, but for most of them the reform is worth it. “For many people, this proposal is better than nothing.”

Daniel Lampart, head of the secretariat of the Trade Union Confederation (SGB), was disappointed with the Federal Council’s stance and addressed this criticism directly to the SP Federal Councillor. The reform would lead to pension cuts for precisely those who had worked all their lives for a medium wage. And the second pillar was designed for these people. As an example, Lampart cited a lawyer’s secretary who is now 60 years old and who has always worked 80 to 90 percent. At the moment, at 65, she receives a pension fund pension of 1,500 francs, but in the future it will be even less due to the reduction in the conversion rate that determines pensions from 6.8 to 6.0 percent. This is because the pension supplements for the transition generation do not compensate for the losses.

Melanie Mettler: “Blockade tactics driven by power politics”

GLP National Councillor Melanie Mettler accused the Left of looking for faults instead of standing up for their clientele: women and low-paid workers. There has been a backlog of reforms in the second pillar for 20 years. The Left has a “blockade tactic driven by power politics”. If the left-wing referendum is successful, this will block Switzerland’s ability to act for several years, said Mettler. “If we do not agree to this compromise, Switzerland will have missed an opportunity.”

SVP National Councillor and entrepreneur Diana Gutjahr praised the reform as a family proposal. Better protection for women in the second pillar would not only benefit the women themselves, but in the case of married couples, it would benefit the whole family. In her company, costs would rise by 4 percent due to the reform, but she was nevertheless in favour of the proposal.

Urs Pfäffli, President of the Zurich Restaurant Association, sees things quite differently. He said that he represents both the businesses and their employees in the arena. In his industry, the reform increases costs per employee by 1,750 francs per year. This reform is too expensive for employers and employees.

The opponents also disagreed on the question of whether the reduction in the conversion rate was necessary. This was very important for the funds that only covered the statutory minimum, i.e. the mandatory amount, said Baume-Schneider. She pointed to the uncertain return expectations on the capital markets. Wasserfallen believes the reduction, which would lead to lower pensions, is unnecessary. The pension funds’ coverage ratio is increasing and increasing, which is why there is not a single argument for the reduction.

Markus Brotschi is Tamedia’s Federal Parliament editor, the focus of his reporting is social and health policy. He has worked as a journalist and editor since 1994. More info

Found an error? Report it now.

0 Comments