The LPP (occupational pension scheme) aims to supplement the benefits of the AVS/AI in order to maintain, in the spirit of the Swiss system, an appropriate standard of living in retirement, and also to cover the risks of disability and death.

For an SME, the main challenge is twofold: to comply with legal obligations for employees subject to the LPP and to choose a plan structure that remains consistent with your economic reality.

In concrete terms, the LPP organizes benefits in the event of old age (capital or annuity), disability and death, according to regulations and financing parameters.

What the LPP “covers” generally must therefore be read through three filters: the minimum legal framework, the plan regulations (which define the benefits), and the financing parameters (employer/employee split, rates, reserve management).

In practice, many SMEs hesitate between staying as close as possible to the legal minimum, opting for an improved plan (better risk and retirement coverage), or structuring categories (executives, key personnel) with different levels, which can be relevant.

but requires HR consistency.

The points of concern are rarely where you expect them. First, coordination: a long sick leave may initially involve loss of earnings insurance (if it exists) and then switch to AI and LPP depending on the conditions.

An inconsistency between these building blocks creates periods of uncertainty and unrealistic expectations.

Furthermore, the definitions of “insured salary,” “coordinated salary,” and “risk benefits” do not always translate as one might expect. Depending on the plan, certain variable salary components may or may not be included, and coordination with the Old-Age and Survivors' Insurance (OASI) and the Accident Insurance Act (AIA) influences overall coverage.

To choose the right level of coverage, an SME benefits from thinking like a decision committee, even if it's just two people.

First step: map the population (salaries, ages, turnover, perceived health risks, dependence on a few key people).

Second step: define your business priorities: cost stability, HR attractiveness, protection of managers, administrative simplicity.

Third step: test concrete scenarios, for example, “long-term leave of a key employee”, “death of a salaried partner”, “rapid growth with salary increases”. Fourth step: compare the plan options and document the trade-offs.

In this exercise, a short pension audit often makes the difference: plan review, reading of regulations, data check and comparison of risk areas (under-insurance, over-insurance, duplicates).

Mage & associés can support this review in a structured way, helping you to ask the right questions, clarify the trade-offs and document your choices for serene governance.