Trade unions have again confronted the government
Getty Images
The trade union union OGBL-LCGB demands urgent amendments to Bill No. 8514 on pension reform in Luxembourg. The law was passed by the Chamber of Deputies despite strong criticism from the social partners and the very administration of CNAP, the National Pension Fund, which will be responsible for its implementation.
From the outset, the unions called the consultation process "Schwätz mat!" (literally: "Let's talk together") a farce. The promise to "fight poverty" and not to increase working life expectancy was broken by Prime Minister Luc Frieden himself when he unilaterally announced a 5-year increase in the retirement age. This sparked widespread protests, with over 25,000 people taking to the streets on 28 June 2025.
After the July and September "social rounds", where a compromise was expected, the government unilaterally ended the negotiations and presented its version of the reform without waiting for the agreement of the unions and experts.
The problems with implementation, as it turns out, are deeper than just a lack of political consensus. CNAP, the entity responsible for the payment of pensions, is unable to implement a number of provisions of the law in its current form.
The unions highlight two major failures:
- The increase of the early retirement age (by 8 months from 2026 to 2030) is so vague that it cannot be applied in practice. The law does not take into account specific cases, for example, when a person reaches the required insurance length of service (480 months) but has not yet formally reached the age of 60.
- Progressive pension - does not correspond to the concept of pension under the Social Security Code. Rather, it is a labour law compensation and CNAP has neither the legal authority nor the technical capacity to administer it. According to the logic of the law, the cost of such a payment should come from the state budget, not from the CNAP fund.
Despite all these signals, the Minister of Health and Social Welfare chose to ignore both the CNAP council's comments and the official warnings from the Labour Chamber's opinion. The response was a formal "thank you for your participation", after which the project was promoted without changes.
The OGBL and LCGB accuse the government of completely ignoring tripartism, the traditional CNAP governance model based on the participation of the state, employers and trade unions. The Minister has shown "disrespect" for the social dialogue partners and the pension administration itself.
The unions are demanding:
- Immediately amend the law to introduce a true legally enforceable progressive pension;
- Exclude from CNAP the administration of employment benefits that are not essentially pensions;
- Restore respect for social dialogue as a basis for social policy.
Otherwise, the OGBL and LCGB warn, the consequences could be both legal and social. A reform designed to stabilise the pension system risks, on the contrary, undermining confidence in it and leading to new protests.
