On March 8, voters in Aargau will decide whether to reduce social assistance for people who have relied on welfare for more than two years, reports SRF. The proposal, launched by the youth wing of the Swiss People’s Party (UDC/SVP), reflects a broader debate over how far social aid should go—and how hard it should push recipients back into work.
The popular initiative, titled Work must pay, would lower the basic welfare allowance by at least 5% for long-term recipients. Exemptions would apply to children, parents of infants under four months, and people aged 55 and over—but only if they have worked in Switzerland for at least 20 years without previously claiming social assistance.
Supporters argue that the measure would restore welfare to its original purpose. Social assistance, they say, is meant as emergency help, not a permanent alternative to work. More than half of recipients receive support for extended periods, according to the initiative committee, which sees this as evidence that incentives to re-enter employment are too weak. Cutting benefits, they argue, would reduce dependency and ease the burden on taxpayers.
Opponents reject that logic. Welfare can already be reduced or withdrawn under existing rules, they note, making the two-year threshold arbitrary. Long-term recipients, they argue, are typically constrained by health problems, care responsibilities or structural barriers, not a lack of motivation. Deliberately making life on social assistance uncomfortable risks punishing hardship rather than addressing it.
The cantonal parliament narrowly backs the initiative, by 67 votes to 64. The UDC/SVP and the PLR/FDP support it; the Socialist Party, the Greens, the Green Liberals, the Evangelical People’s Party and the Centre Party oppose it. The cantonal government also recommends rejection, arguing that while the principle that work should pay is uncontroversial, the proposal would add bureaucracy and increase pressure on municipalities without clear benefits.
Business groups, including Aargau’s employers’ associations, have lined up behind the initiative. Its critics see that as confirmation that cost-cutting, rather than social outcomes, is the driving force.
Aargau is not alone. Other cantons have grappled with similar questions. Basel-Landschaft tightened its welfare rules in 2022, introducing explicit rewards and sanctions. Uri’s voters, by contrast, narrowly rejected stricter oversight of welfare recipients in 2025. Together, these votes suggest that while the case for tougher welfare rules is politically durable, it remains far from settled.
In Switzerland, welfare must often be repaid. Whether benefits must be returned once a recipient begins earning again depends on where they live. Some cantons, such as Aargau, Basel-Landschaft, St. Gallen and Valais, require repayment when income improves, while others, including Geneva, Basel-City and Vaud, generally limit repayment to large windfalls, such as inheritance or lottery wins, rather than regular earnings. This patchwork reflects the decentralized nature of Swiss social assistance and differing interpretations of broad welfare-policy guidelines.
Receiving welfare can also disqualify someone from gaining Swiss citizenship. However, repayment clears the way.
More on this:
SRF article (in German)
For more stories like this on Switzerland follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
