In a Paris Café at the Centre Pompidou I came last week with a waiter into the conversation. My accent revealed my origins. So he told me that he had once worked in Zinal. Happily I spoke to him on the higher pension age is debated in France, currently, violently.
Incredibly, as the man about the baby Boomer echauffierte. They could early in retirement and it is good to have. But you, the Younger, for the Old toil and could only go later in retirement.
In Switzerland, I never encountered a young person who complained so about the privileges of the post-war generation. This would be reason enough, if you consider that the working population in the occupational Pension Fund to be missed each year an estimated seven billion Swiss francs in order to Finance non-covered pensions of the baby boomers.
So we would need to in the ominous conversion rate that would, in the interest of the young already are reduced. Recently has agreed to the employers ‘ Association with the trade unions to reduce the statutory conversion rate of six per cent, as was provided in the failed pension schemes in 2020. With this percentage the pension Fund capital is converted into a pension. To 100’000 Swiss francs, are available at a rate of 6.8 per cent, 6800 francs in the year. A reduction is actually indisputable – I believed.
Now, the Economics Professor Monika Bütler says in an Interview with the “NZZ”, nothing the better Option would be to do for many pension funds.
your criticism is directed in advance to the flat-rate Supplement of 0.5% of the AHV-liable income for the first 15 new pensioners-year courses. So the Older at the expense of the Younger ones are subsidised. In addition, the Economist pointed out that many pension funds have lowered the conversion rate already. This is possible because most pension plans do not offer voluntary benefits, which are subject to the statutory minimum conversion rate.
According to Monika Bütler, the negotiated Reform was a “last straw as far as persons insured in the funds, which have lowered the conversion rate already”. Because the reduction was offset in many cases with one-off grants. Have paid these grants not surprisingly, employers and younger workers.
“For a majority of the young in most pension funds, this solution is very unfair,” says Bütler. She’s right. The young are covered in the second pillar disadvantageous. However, in contrast to the waiter in Paris, you don’t have to complain. The boys have helped at the ballot box repeatedly to thwart a reduction in the conversion rate. So on 7. March 2010; also on 24. By September 2017. Only themselves to blame.