AGE DISCRIMINATION IS LEGAL IN SWITZERLAND

What this article is about?

The Swiss LPP social security rates depend in particular on age (older employees contribute more) as well as on the benefits offered by the employer who has subscribed to the provident fund.

Background

Due to a cost-saving program at my previous company, I am currently seeking new opportunities to fulfill the requirements for my unemployment insurance. I am perfectly comfortable with this challenge, as I am an IT expert with extensive experience. I have held positions as Chief Engineer and later as Product Owner for major tech giants, where I was instrumental in developing commercial cloud solutions that are utilized by customers worldwide. Given my track record, I am undoubtedly a mature and highly skilled professional who can add significant value to any company.

However, there is a substantial issue with my country's LPP social law, which imposes varying tax rates based on age. After reaching the age of 50, employees become prohibitively expensive for employers, resulting in age-based discrimination that severely limits job opportunities for seasoned professionals like myself.

This book aims to shed light on the "legal discrimination" practiced in Switzerland and to advocate for mandatory changes within the country. As will be demonstrated later (see "My letter to Swiss government"), this form of discrimination is in direct violation of human rights laws.

Swiss organizations fighting age discrimination

Several organizations are advocating for a single contribution rate in the Swiss pension system to address age discrimination. These include:

1. Trade Unions: Organizations like Unia and SGB/USS are actively pushing for reforms to ensure fair treatment for workers of all ages.

2. Employers' Associations: Some employers' associations are also supporting the idea of a single contribution rate to simplify the system and promote equality.

3. Pension Funds: Certain pension funds and financial institutions are advocating for changes to make the system more sustainable and equitable.

These groups believe that a single contribution rate would help eliminate age-based biases and create a more balanced and fair pension system for everyone.

So, yes, I am not alone and, yes, the problem exists for a while!

Structure of LPP social security rates

The LPP (Occupational Pension) rate applies to the coordinated salary, which is the gross salary minus the coordination deduction. Coordinated salary = gross salary – coordination deduction In 2025, the coordinated salary ranges from CHF 22,680 to CHF 90,720. Salaries below CHF 22,680 are not subject to LPP contributions, while salaries above CHF 90,720 are capped at CHF 90,720 for LPP calculations

The LPP social security rates depend in particular on age (older employees contribute more) as well as on the benefits offered by the employer who has subscribed to the provident fund.

Overall, the LPP rates evolve as follows:

Age range [years]	LPP social security rates	Enterprise costs in addition to your contractual salary
25 – 34	7%	3.5%
35 – 44	10%	5%
45 – 54	15%	7.5%
55 – 64	18%	9%

These rates are at a minimum shared between the employer and the employees. Some employers may decide to take on a larger portion of the LPP contribution, or even cover it 100%.

As companies invest in experienced employees, they naturally incur higher costs due to the valuable expertise and skills these individuals bring. Additionally, the age-based contribution rates imposed by the LPP further increase the financial burden on employers for senior employees. This dual cost of compensating for experience and the age-related contributions creates a significant disparity between the expenses associated with senior and junior employees.

The current situation benefits neither employees nor employers. Both parties face significant challenges under the existing system. Senior employees are unfairly disadvantaged due to age-based contribution rates, making it difficult for them to secure employment despite their valuable experience and expertise. Employers, on the other hand, are burdened with higher costs, discouraging them from hiring seasoned professionals.

It is imperative to address this issue and advocate for changes that promote fairness and equality in the workplace. By doing so, we can create a more inclusive environment where experience is valued, and both employees and employers can thrive.

My letter to Swiss government

Dear Swiss Government,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to bring attention to a pressing issue regarding the age-based contribution rates of the LPP (2nd pillar) pension scheme in Switzerland and to explain why this practice constitutes discrimination against human rights laws.

The current structure of the LPP contribution rates increases progressively with the age of the employee. While this system aims to ensure adequate savings for retirement, it inadvertently results in age discrimination against senior employees, particularly those aged 50 and above. This age-based contribution structure violates the principles of equality and non-discrimination enshrined in various human rights laws and international agreements, including:

1. The Swiss Federal Constitution Article 8 of the Swiss Federal Constitution guarantees equality before the law and prohibits discrimination based on age. By imposing higher contribution rates on senior employees, the LPP system creates an unequal financial burden solely based on age, undermining the constitutional right to equality.

2. The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 14 of the ECHR prohibits discrimination on various grounds, including age. The current LPP contribution rates disproportionately affect senior employees, placing them at a disadvantage compared to their younger counterparts. This practice is inconsistent with the ECHR's mandate to promote equal treatment for all individuals, regardless of age.

3. International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions Switzerland, as a member of the ILO, is bound by its conventions, including Convention No. 111, which aims to eliminate discrimination in employment and occupation. The age-based LPP contribution rates effectively discriminate against senior employees, contravening the ILO's principles of equal opportunity and treatment.

4. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 7 of the UDHR states that all individuals are entitled to equal protection against discrimination. The LPP's age-based contribution structure fails to uphold this fundamental human right, as it imposes a higher financial burden on employees solely based on their age.

Economic and Social Impact Age discrimination in the LPP contribution rates not only violates human rights laws but also has significant economic and social implications. Senior employees face increased financial pressure, potentially leading to reduced disposable income and financial insecurity. This can result in decreased productivity, lower morale, and a negative impact on the overall well-being of senior employees.

Call to Action I urge the relevant authorities to review and reform the LPP contribution structure to ensure it aligns with the principles of equality and non-discrimination. By adopting a more equitable system, Switzerland can uphold its commitment to human rights and foster an inclusive and fair working environment for all employees, regardless of age.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I hope we can work together to address this issue and promote equal treatment for all individuals in Switzerland.

Sincerely,
Jan Affolter

Possible Legal Actions

Possibilities for Legal Action Outside Switzerland Against Government Inertia

It is legally feasible to bring this case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). As a supranational court, the ECHR ensures compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It may be petitioned by any individual or non-governmental organization that believes its fundamental rights have been violated by a signatory state.

However, before submitting a petition to the ECHR, exhausting all domestic legal remedies is a mandatory prerequisite. The measure in question must have been contested in national courts up to the final decision. The petition to the ECHR must be filed within six months following this decision.

Given the Swiss government's long-standing tendency to maintain the status quo, an international legal action could serve as a strategic lever to uphold principles of justice and equality. A petition to European authorities could not only result in a binding decision but also increase legal and diplomatic pressure on Switzerland, compelling it to reform the disputed system.

If you wish to further explore this avenue, it is strongly advised to consult a lawyer specializing in human rights and international litigation to ensure the admissibility and strength of the case.

Is It Possible to Bypass Domestic Legal Remedies?

Generally, to bring a case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), one must exhaust all available domestic legal remedies in the country of origin before submitting a petition. This means challenging the issue through national courts and obtaining a final ruling before escalating it to the ECHR.

However, exceptions to this requirement exist if it can be demonstrated that domestic remedies would be ineffective or would cause irreparable harm. In such cases, compelling arguments can be presented to the ECHR justifying why internal legal procedures have not been pursued.

To navigate this complex legal process efficiently and avoid unnecessary delays while protecting potential victims, it is strongly advised to consult a human rights lawyer. Their expertise will help assess the best course of action and determine whether an immediate international legal challenge is feasible.