Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102) - Switzerland (Ratification: 1977)

Part VI (Employment injury benefit). (a)  Article 32(d) of the Convention (in relation to Article 69(j)). In its direct request in 1994, the Committee  drew the Government’s attention to the need to amend the provisions of section 29 of the Federal Accident Insurance Act (LAA) which makes the surviving spouse’s entitlement to benefit subject to certain conditions in cases where the marriage is contracted after the accident which caused the decease of the insured person (subsection 2); and allows benefits to be refused or reduced when the surviving spouse has been in serious breach of his/her duties towards the children (subsection 5). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to give full effect to the above provisions of the Convention in both law and practice.

(b) Article 34, paragraphs 1 and 2. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that there have been no new developments regarding the practice of the coverage by the insurer of the total cost of home nursing care provided to victims of occupational injuries at the recommendation of the physician. The Committee would be grateful to be informed in due time of any measure taken to explicitly set out this practice in the national legislation.

Part XII (Equality of treatment of non-national residents), Article 68, paragraph 2. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report and the comments made by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) concerning the cantonal family allowance schemes. The Government states that non-national employees residing in Switzerland with their families have the same rights as nationals in the field of family allowances. However, the USS points out that certain cantons have adopted restrictions in their legislation respecting family allowances that are in contradiction with the principle of equality established by the Convention and which affect the children residing abroad of men and women workers who are resident and employed in Switzerland. It cites actual examples of such restrictions contained in the regulations in certain Cantons. The Committee notes in this respect that, according to the publication by the Federal Social Insurance Office entitled "Summary of cantonal family schemes. Situation at 1 April 2000" (p. 14), many laws contain special requirements respecting the entitlement of non-national employees to allowances and, in certain Cantons, also with regard to Swiss employees with children who are abroad. Non-national workers whose children live outside Switzerland are assimilated to Swiss employees only in the following Cantons: Appenzell-Outer Rhoden, Appenzell-Inner Rhoden, Fribourg, Glarus, Lucerne, Obwalden and Valais. In view of the complexity of the Swiss family allowances system, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the issues raised by the USS, accompanied by copies of the relevant cantonal regulations.