Found an error?
Report nowNo sooner has the 10-million initiative been rejected than the next debate is already on the table: Should Switzerland raise the retirement age? The discussion is sparking strong reactions.
The debate over a higher retirement age strikes a nerve. Hardly any other topic is currently stirring up as much emotion as the question of whether Swiss citizens should work longer in the future.
The comments reveal two camps. Some believe raising the retirement age is long overdue. Others see it as a hidden pension cut and a sign that policymakers are out of touch with reality.
Several readers argue that rising life expectancy leaves no other choice. Reader raro writes: “At least 67 years is long overdue.”
Others also point out that many people today remain fit and active for much longer than previous generations. One reader reports that he is still working at age 82 and has never regretted it. For him, working until age 70 is “a logical consequence” of increased life expectancy.
Another reader shares a similar view; at 80, he still works daily in gardens, on construction sites, and on technical projects. His conclusion: “Not working makes you sick—not the other way around.”
A reader writes on WhatsApp that she herself worked until age 70. “You stay flexible and open-minded, and you benefit from the knowledge of younger people. And they, in turn, benefit from the experience of older people.”
However, the voices critical of raising the retirement age are receiving significantly more support.
The same question keeps coming up in the comments: How are people supposed to work until 67 or 70 if they’re already having trouble finding a new job at 50 or 55?
“People over 50 have a hard time finding work. But at the same time, they want to raise the retirement age to 70,” writes one reader.
A 59-year-old communications specialist describes her personal experience in particularly striking terms. Despite a college degree, continuing education, and decades of professional experience, she has applied for numerous jobs in recent months—without a single job interview.
For many commenters, this is precisely where the contradiction in the debate lies: On the one hand, people are being asked to work longer; on the other hand, older workers often have a tough time in the job market.
Several readers therefore do not believe that the discussion is actually about the shortage of skilled workers.
“This is a disguised pension cut. Nothing else,” writes one commenter. Anyone who retires before the higher reference age in the future will have to expect greater financial losses.
Many are particularly critical of the situation in physically demanding professions. Construction workers, tradespeople, and caregivers are mentioned repeatedly.
“Why don’t you try working as a roofer until you’re 70?” challenges one reader. Not every profession can be practiced without difficulty well into old age.
The causes of the skilled labor shortage are also the subject of heated debate.
Several readers argue that the problem lies not primarily with the retirement age, but with the companies themselves. They claim these companies do not provide enough training or replace older employees with younger, cheaper workers.
One reader sums it up: “The skilled labor shortage apparently exists mainly where no one asks about your date of birth.” Others call for better working conditions—for example, in the healthcare sector—instead of endless discussions about working longer.
For some commentators, the timing of the debate is a source of additional frustration. They point out that during the campaign for the 10-Million Initiative, arguments frequently centered on the consequences for the labor market and social welfare systems.
Now, just a few days after the vote, discussions about raising the retirement age are already underway. Several readers therefore accuse politicians of being inconsistent.
Despite all the differences, a surprising common thread emerges in the comments. Even many supporters of a higher retirement age maintain that Switzerland must first find better solutions for older workers.
For many, the crucial question remains the same, as reader Hanno writes in an email to the editorial staff: “What good is a retirement age of 67 or 70 if workers are already considered too old ten years earlier?”
