If you don’t have an occupational pension plan, your financial problems will get worse when you retire.
Photo: Christoph Schürpf (Keystone)
It is problematic that many communities take away the old-age savings from occupational pension schemes from social welfare recipients before they retire. These communities are concerned with despicable financial interests: They want the costs of social assistance to be paid as far as possible at any price. In some places, the responsible municipal employees seem to be largely unconcerned as to whether this procedure makes sense from a socio-political perspective and is good for those affected.
The short-sighted action has unpleasant consequences for welfare recipients. Because if people in financial need are forced to draw their retirement savings before they reach retirement age, it will also be impossible to draw occupational benefits as a lifelong pension. This severely weakens financial security in old age.
The early withdrawal is usually linked to early retirement. Consequence: People who have received social assistance not only lose their savings capital from the second pillar, but also have to accept a reduction in their AHV pension. This further exacerbates the financial problems of retirement age.
As silly and shameless as it may seem to cut retirement savings for people with money problems, there is an incentive for communities to fout about it.
As silly and shameless as it may seem to cut retirement savings for people with money problems, there is an incentive for communities to fout about it. This is because the missing money is paid for from another fund: a pensioner in financial need no longer receives social assistance, but supplementary benefits that the federal government and cantons pay from tax money. However, the supplementary benefits are associated with considerable restrictions for those affected – for example, it is no longer possible to obtain them abroad.
Finally, the legal uncertainty and the great discretion in some cantons are of concern: it may be that a person receiving social assistance in one municipality has to hand over all of his pension capital and nothing at all in the neighboring municipality. Sometimes it even depends on the responsible person. This is an undignified lottery for old-age provision that should be abolished.
Found a mistake?Report now.
– Unworthy lottery for old-age provision
It is worrying that social assistance recipients often have to cede their second pillar to municipalities. There is also legal uncertainty, which leaves room for arbitrariness.