Social insurance: the invisible mistakes that cost a lot

February 12, 2026

Social insurance and occupational pension plans are often taken for granted, even considered automatic. However, numerous errors, approximations, or half-truths can have very real consequences on the rights of insured persons and the quality of advice provided. In this joint interview, Albert Gallegos and Danièle Felley, both ISFB lecturers, share their insights from the field: common mistakes, blind spots, sensitive situations, and essential professional reflexes for securing AVS/AI/APG and LPP coverage for both insured persons and employers.

Albert Gallegos, if you had to name three common mistakes regarding AVS/AI/APG that actually cost insured persons money or entitlements, what would they be, and how can they be avoided?

AG: The first is to believe that the first pillar is entirely automatic: "I'm in the system, so I can move forward with peace of mind." As long as the situation is straightforward, this works. But as soon as there is a change—part-time work, two employers, becoming self-employed, a period abroad, a break in activity—the risk is not that you will leave the system, but that you will be incorrectly classified or poorly monitored. And this can result in delays, more complicated procedures, or reduced entitlements.

The second mistake is gaps in Social Security contributions. These are often discovered at retirement age, when the scope for correction is sometimes limited. However, even a few incomplete years can have a significant impact on the amount of the pension.

The third is managing life events: service, maternity/paternity leave, long-term sick leave, disability insurance. Many people think that "it takes care of itself," when in fact you have to meet certain conditions and deadlines and provide the right documents. My approach is simple: for each situation, identify the possible entitlement, check the conditions, then secure the evidence and the timeline. That's how you avoid most mistakes.

Danièle Felley, the LPP is based on technical mechanisms that can sometimes be complex. In your experience, what are the most common errors or approximations observed in practice, and what are their concrete impacts?

DF: Very often, it all starts with a feeling of security: "I've always been insured, so everything is in order." Then you take a closer look. The insured salary does not correspond to the actual income, coordination with the AHV has been applied mechanically, or the activity rate has never been adjusted over the years.

The LPP is not a flawed system, but one that requires choices and trade-offs. When these are implicit or misunderstood, the figures give an illusion of protection, while future benefits tell a different story.

For the insured, this can mean delayed expectations or decisions made too late. For the employer, it often leads to misunderstandings and widespread unease. The LPP works very well—provided it is read, understood, and carefully managed.

Danièle Felley, We often feel that social insurance only becomes understandable when a problem arises. In your opinion, what makes this system difficult to understand, and where should we start to make it clearer and more reassuring?

DF: Social insurance is often perceived as complex because people discover it bit by bit, usually at times of stress: illness, childbirth, sick leave, approaching retirement.

The system is actually very structured, but it is rarely presented as a coherent whole. We learn a rule here, an exception there, without any overall view. This gives the impression of great complexity, when in fact it is mainly a lack of reference points.

To make this system easier to understand, we must first explain what each type of insurance is for, when it applies, and what it does not cover. Once these basics are established, many misunderstandings disappear. Understanding this area means regaining a sense of calm and control.

Albert Gallegos, why is occupational pension provision one of the areas where the risk of "half-truths" is highest, and how can professionals ensure that their advice is reliable?

AG: Occupational pension provision is an area where there is a high risk of "half-truths" for one simple reason: people often confuse the law, the fund's regulations, and customary practices. However, in the LPP, the regulations are not a minor detail: they often set out key conditions and benefits, especially in sensitive cases.

These sensitive cases typically include early retirement, disability, death, divorce, buybacks, or certain withdrawals. In these situations, an approximation can be costly or lead to inappropriate advice, and sometimes the decision is difficult to correct.

To ensure sound advice, I apply a very concrete method: start with the facts and dates (chronology is essential), distinguish between what falls under the minimum LPP requirements and what falls under the supplementary requirements, then check the regulations to verify the exact conditions. And finally, be transparent about what needs to be confirmed by the fund, the employer, or the disability insurance office.

It also boosts professional credibility: we don't just say "in general," we clearly explain why, what rules we are basing our advice on, and what the steps are. That is exactly the goal of the training: to make complex situations understandable and reliably manageable.

Discussions with Albert Gallegos and Danièle Felley highlight a reality that is often underestimated: social insurance and occupational pension plans are neither automatic nor set in stone. They are based on specific rules, explicit choices, and a careful assessment of individual situations throughout one's working life. The most costly mistakes rarely arise from a lack of goodwill, but from approximations, half-truths, or excessive confidence in mechanisms that are assumed to be "self-evident." In an environment marked by career mobility and diversity of status, mastery of these systems becomes a central issue for the security and quality of advice.

These issues, addressed here from the perspective of experience and practice, will be revisited and explored in greater depth by Albert Gallegos and Danièle Felley during their upcoming presentation as part of the ISFB short course " Understanding the Swiss social insurance system," which will be held online on May 4 and 11. The objective is the same as in this exchange: to make these mechanisms understandable, consistent, and fully manageable in professional activity.

Joint interview with Danièle Felley, ISFB lecturer, and Albert Gallegos, ISFB lecturer

An article written as part of the short training course "Understanding Swiss social insurance."