On 15 May 2011 the Vaud electorate approved, by 61 % Yes, the law on cantonal supplementary benefits for families and the cantonal bridge pension (LPCFam). The canton thereby created two welfare schemes that were pioneering in French-speaking Switzerland, in force from 1 October 2011.
The family supplementary benefits top up the income of families who work but struggle to make ends meet — the “working poor” with children — to keep them off social assistance. The bridge pension offers a financial bridge to older people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits, until their old-age (AVS) pension opens, so they neither fall onto social assistance nor have to dip into their occupational (2nd-pillar) savings.
The project was championed by cantonal minister Pierre-Yves Maillard (Socialist), head of the health and social affairs department; the family strand drew on Ticino’s model. A referendum, driven mainly by the new contributions funding the scheme, brought it to a popular vote.
The contrast is striking: the same Sunday, Vaud voters rejected a cantonal minimum wage but overwhelmingly backed these targeted benefits. A deliberate preference for social transfers over wage regulation.
▲ Yes — 61 % A clear 61 % majority approved creating the family benefits and the bridge pension. | ▼ No — 39 % The referendum’s backers, opposed to the new charges, gathered only 39 % of the vote. |
Actors and figures
▲ Yes camp • Pierre-Yves Maillard (Socialist), head of the DSAS — architect of the law and the bridge pension. • Socialist Party and Greens — early backers. • Unions and family associations — in favour of a targeted safety net. • A large part of the centre — rallying to the Vaud social compromise. | ▼ No camp • Referendum committee — opposed to the new funding contributions. • Right-wing and employer circles — worried about cost and extra payroll charges. |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) Family benefits will lift the working poor off social assistance « Topping up working families’ income will keep them off the welfare rolls. » — Cantonal government / DSAS, 2011 ✓ Argument confirmed By the end of 2011 some 900 families were able to leave social assistance (Revenu d’insertion). Later cantonal evaluations confirmed the effect: several hundred households off welfare thanks to the family benefits. The bridge pension will spare older unemployed people from welfare « A bridge to the old-age pension will save jobless seniors from welfare and from raiding their 2nd pillar. » — Pierre-Yves Maillard (Socialist), 2011 ✓ Argument confirmed The bridge pension worked from autumn 2011 and became permanent. The Vaud model even shaped the federal debate: in 2021 the Confederation introduced transitional benefits for older unemployed people. | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) Too costly, with unsustainable charges « These new benefits will blow a hole in the accounts and raise contributions. » — Referendum committee, 2011 ✗~ Partly refuted The scheme was funded by dedicated contributions and sustained over time without destabilising cantonal finances. The fear of unmanageable cost did not materialise — though spending naturally rose with the number of beneficiaries. It is for the Confederation to solve these problems « Older-worker unemployment and family poverty belong to federal social insurance, not the canton. » — Opponents of the law, 2011 ✓~ Partly confirmed The argument was not baseless: ten years later the Confederation did legislate on older unemployed people (transitional benefits, 2021). But Vaud had meanwhile shown a canton could act alone and serve as a model. |
Factual assessment
2 Confirmed | 1 Partly confirmed | 1 Partly refuted | 0 Refuted |
By broadly approving the LPCFam on the very day they rejected the minimum wage, Vaud voters drew a clear line: yes to a targeted safety net funded by taxes and contributions, no to direct wage regulation. The “Vaud method” in action.
On substance, the sponsors’ promises held. The family benefits lifted hundreds of households off social assistance in the first year, and the bridge pension spared older jobless people the double penalty of welfare and a raided pension pot.
The referendum backers’ financial fears were not absurd — social spending did rise — but the predicted budget catastrophe never came. As for “this is Bern’s business”, the answer proved nuanced: the Confederation eventually took it up, ten years after Vaud.
Rarely has a cantonal vote so anticipated a federal policy. The Vaud bridge pension of 2011 is, in many ways, the ancestor of the federal transitional benefits of 2021.