Supplementary insurance is becoming more established

More and more employees have some form of supplementary insurance through their employer. Hospitalisation insurance and supplementary pension are the most common examples. Since these fringe benefits are often complexly regulated, quite a few people knock on the door of their trade union with questions. Of course, we are happy to oblige!

Within ACV, Chris Van Zeghbroeck is specialised in this subject matter. Not only does she receive more and more questions, she also consults with employers and insurers to shape the fringe benefits. “We gladly take part in determining these benefits. After all, fringe benefits are an important part of the employment contract of a growing group of workers. And the contribution paid by your employer is part of your salary. So it goes without saying that we feel committed. Moreover, the rules and fine print are sometimes so legally or technically intricate that an average employee will not understand all the details. If so, it is up to us to assist our members in that respect.”

There was a time when trade unions opposed supplementary insurance on principle. That is no longer the case. What has changed?

Van Zeghbroeck: “We continue to see strong social security as the cornerstone. That is still the best tool to insure people socially and in solidarity against setbacks or for their old age. However, social security benefits are limited. And our government is still making cuts to social spending. So we also feel the need to help shape that additional pillar.”

How are you involved in this?

Van Zeghbroeck: “Our involvement is quite varied. We are hardly involved in hospitalisation insurance. But we are involved in supplementary pensions. We take part in negotiations in a number of sectors to help shape sectoral plans. They are especially numerous in the joint committees for blue-collar workers, and usually relatively simple. A fixed percentage of the wage is put into the sectoral plan. There are fewer sectoral plans for white-collar workers, but agreements are usually made on a company-by-company basis, although the non-profit sector is an important exception, with a detailed sectoral plan. At the company level, the arrangements are often much more complex. We take part in negotiations on this level as well. But to clear up a misunderstanding: blue-collar workers are certainly not always less well off than white-collar workers.  Since white-collar workers usually cannot rely on an industry agreement, they often do not even have a supplementary pension in small companies. After all, individual employers are never obliged to offer a supplementary pension scheme. Large companies more readily provide a pension plan for white-collar workers. Their blue-collar workers are usually covered by a sectoral plan.”

Talking about blue-collar and white-collar workers: I thought there was no longer any distinction?

Van Zeghbroeck: “That’s right. But in terms of supplementary pensions, the equalisation is still not complete. The negotiations are now at sector level. Afterwards, the companies will come up. All differences need to be levelled out by 2030. That is no easy task. For example, in joint committee 200, the largest joint committee for white-collar workers, alignment must be reached with twenty-eight joint committees for blue-collar workers! The arrangements are different everywhere, so harmonising them will be difficult. Especially because the wage norm does not allow wages to rise. And that includes supplementary pension contributions. Social plan contributions are not included in the wage norm, but employers are not very keen to introduce them. For corporate employers, harmonisation mainly means levelling down. Of course, we have a different opinion. Let me assure you: those negotiations are challenging.”

Besides blue-collar and white-collar workers, we also have executives. Should their employment conditions also be harmonised?

Van Zeghbroeck: “No they shouldn’t. Other arrangements may continue to exist for executives. However, the question remains who is or is not an ‘executive’. That dividing line is not very clear. We receive many queries from employees who claim that status on objective grounds, but are nevertheless white-collar workers.”

 

“It goes without saying that you can contact us in case of questions”

 

What sort of questions do members ask you? And how do you answer them?

Van Zeghbroeck:“We get a lot of questions from employees of SMEs where there is no union representation and employers sometimes disregard their legal obligations.  They suddenly stop payments, promised coverage fails to materialise … Quite a few variable-wage workers also ask us whether the calculation of their contribution is correct. And we also find that insurers sometimes discriminate against employees who suffer from mental illness in their supplementary health insurance. This is not allowed, as the court recently confirmed. Yet it still happens. In the past, we also often heard that younger workers up to 25 years of age or workers on temporary contracts were excluded from supplementary pension schemes. But that has since been banned as well. I think we may take credit for that, as we helped achieve this ban as a union.”

Do I understand correctly that, on the basis of individual members’ queries, you are trying to find as many collective solutions as possible?

Van Zeghbroeck: “Indeed. We assist members individually, but also try to improve the rules and agreements structurally. For instance, we have been working for years to ensure that the death cover provided in the supplementary pension is also guaranteed for those no longer in active service at the time of death. After all, this is often preceded by a period of illness, during which the employment contract is suspended. Of course, it is not acceptable that no death cover is paid out in those cases. Yet this is often the case. Thanks to our union work, you can now pay the insurance premium yourself in some cases and get death cover. But it is even better, of course, that the employer does so or takes out insurance for this purpose. That is perfectly possible. During the COVID-19 pandemic, that happened temporarily. We have achieved small successes in this regard after years of negotiations, but wish to further legally improve the weak position of the long-term sick.”

Often people don’t really know the ins and outs of the matter.

Van Zeghbroeck: “That’s right. We are therefore fully committed to increasing transparency. You cannot expect people to read and understand a 30-page policy full of legal jargon. That is why the social partners, in cooperation with Sigedis, have made sure that you can also find understandable information about your supplementary pension at mypension.be. And from 2026 onwards, your employer will also be required to provide you with a clear sign-up document explaining in clear language what you are entitled to. What does the policy state about your death cover? What about the time-credit system? This information will also appear on mypension.be.”

Is there also a gender gap in terms of supplementary pension?

“Definitely. Recent figures show that, on average, the supplementary pension of men is twice that of women. And only 48% of women are entitled to it, compared to 66% of men. This is due to the fact that men earn higher wages on average and women work more part-time. In addition, women work more often in sectors without or with less favourable supplementary pension schemes. For example, supplementary pension is lagging behind in the healthcare sector, which is a pre-eminently female sector.  So there is still work to be done on supplementary pensions.”

Author: Jan Deceunynck | Image: Daniël Rys