On Thursday 18 December 2025, the OGBL–LCGB trade union alliance issued a statement criticising the government’s pension reform adopted under draft law 8514, which they described as hastily prepared and problematic in terms of practical implementation.
The unions said that, on the very day the bill was voted, social partners were confronted with a fait accompli, arguing that the reform had been prepared without genuine social dialogue and without direct involvement of the National Pension Insurance Fund (CNAP), which is responsible for implementing the measures. According to the unions, this has resulted in an “ill-considered” reform developed without meaningful consultation.
The OGBL-LCGB recalled that they had criticised the consultation process from the outset, describing the “Schwätz mat!” exercise as ineffective. They noted that while all stakeholders had spoken out against a forced extension of working life, the Prime Minister Luc Frieden announced a gradual increase of five years in early retirement during his State of the Nation address. The unions also referred to the demonstration of 28 June 2025, when more than 25,000 people protested against what they described as a unilateral approach by the government.
According to the unions, subsequent social dialogue rounds in July and September 2025 were intended to find a compromise on the content of the pension reform, but discussions were interrupted in order for the government to present its conclusions. They said the outcome confirms their concerns, pointing to a reform prepared without meaningful dialogue with the social partners.
The unions highlighted two measures in particular as posing significant implementation problems. They argued that the planned gradual increase of eight months in early retirement between 2026 and 2030 is too vague to allow for clear and consistent application. They also stated that the progressive pension cannot be implemented as currently provided for in the text adopted by the Chamber of Deputies (Chambre des Salariés - CSL).
These concerns were raised both in the opinion of the Chamber of Employees and in a letter from the CNAP Board of Directors to Luxembourg’s Minister of Health and Social Security Martine Deprez, the unions said. According to the OGBL-LCGB, the response received did not address the substance of the issues raised.
With regard to the extension of working life, the unions said the legislation does not clearly combine the requirement of a 480-month career, including contributory and supplementary periods, with the condition of having reached the age of 60. They argued that, in certain cases, insured persons may already have completed additional contributory periods before being legally entitled to early retirement, meaning that no further increase should apply.
On the issue of the progressive pension, the unions stated that it does not constitute a pension within the meaning of the Social Security Code, but rather an allowance comparable to those governed by labour law. As a result, they said the CNAP is not technically equipped to guarantee correct payment of this allowance, and that the related costs should be borne by the State rather than added to other expenses imposed on the CNAP.
The OGBL-LCGB said Minister Deprez was aware of these issues but had chosen to proceed regardless. They described this approach as unacceptable and criticised what they see as a lack of respect for tripartite social dialogue and for the governance model of the CNAP.
The unions called on the government to urgently introduce the necessary legislative amendments, in particular to establish what they described as a genuine right to a progressive pension.
