Vote Pension fund reform overwhelmingly rejected by voters

The years of reform work on the second pillar have failed. The electorate rejected the pension fund bill on Sunday with 67% of votes against. This means that everything remains as it was. Clearing the reform backlog is likely to remain difficult.

According to the final results from the cantons, 1,655,300 voters said no to the BVG reform, while 810,800 voted in favor. The turnout was around 45 percent.

A look at the voting map shows a rare unanimity: all cantons rejected the bill. The "no" votes ranged from 57% in Zug to 77% in Jura and Neuchâtel. In around fifty municipalities, the "no" vote was over 81%. Only 26 out of 2126 municipalities were in favor of the pension fund reform.

The no vote at the ballot box came as no surprise. However, the clarity of the result is astonishing: the last referendum polls predicted a No vote of 51% (SRG) and 59% (Tamedia/"20 Minuten").

Political scientist speaks of a "slap in the face"

According to political scientist Urs Bieri from the gfs.bern research institute, there was mistrust as to whether the problems with the financing of the second pillar were really real. "There was no common awareness of the problem." Lukas Golder, also a political scientist at gfs.bern, spoke on Swiss television SRF of a "slap in the face" and a "slap in the face".

The proposal to reform the second pillar was highly controversial during the referendum campaign. The proponents spoke of a "good compromise", while the opponents described the reform as "miserable and terrible". Among other things, the focus was on the complexity of the bill. The incorrect AHV figures published by the federal government were obviously also grist to the opponents' mill.

The No vote means that the backlog of pension reform remains. Since the introduction of the second pillar in 1985, the Federal Law on Occupational Retirement, Survivors' and Disability Pension Plans (BVG) has only been comprehensively reformed once, namely in the noughties. Since then, several attempts at reform have failed. Now work is starting again on field one.

Status quo with the minimum conversion rate

The failed BVG reform was intended to financially stabilize the second pillar of old-age provision in light of the growing number of pensioners, increasing life expectancy and falling returns. The minimum conversion rate for calculating pensions in the mandatory part of the insurance would have fallen from 6.8% to 6%.

This will now not happen. The other points of the reform will not be implemented either: People with low incomes in old age should have been better protected, but they and their employers would also have had to pay more into the second pillar.

According to the federal government, the pension fund reform would have mainly affected those in employment who are insured according to the BVG minimum or only a little more. Who would have been affected by the reform would have depended on their personal situation - for example, their professional career and the pension fund regulations.

Major success for the left

The No vote is a success for the left. Once again, it was able to convince the majority of the population on a social policy issue. The campaign led by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (SGB) focused on the slogan that more people had suffered than benefited from the reform.

In addition, the opponents complained that the pension funds had achieved high returns over the past ten years and were "swimming in money". The left was supported in the referendum campaign by eight business associations. They argued that the bill would lead to false incentives for savings and more bureaucracy and should therefore be rejected.

Compromise required

In contrast, the business umbrella organizations Economiesuisse and the Employers' Association and exponents of the conservative parties SVP, FDP and Mitte as well as the GLP described the BVG reform as overdue and campaigned for a Yes vote. They focused on the improvements for people with low incomes and part-time employees.

Parliament had learned its lessons from the past, said Center Party President Gerhard Pfister at the launch of the Yes campaign. On the one hand, the various pillars of the pension system had not been mixed up. On the other hand, the reform is not purely a restructuring proposal.

The focus is now on the question of what a pension fund reform could look like that would gain majority support in parliament and among the people. At the beginning of the failed reform process, the social partners were at the same table. However, the compromise they negotiated had no chance in parliament.

SDA