SNL pension fund: SEV disputes interpretation of results

Context

TL;DR

• UBS will manage the assets of the SNL Pension Fund
• ATIOZ imposed a new procedure after a conflict of interest
• The funding ratio was 104,1% at the end of 2025
• SEV disputes SNL's results and communication

Key facts

• Location → Lugano
• Asset management mandate → UBS, after Copernicus
• Supervisory authority → ATIOZ
• Union → SEV
• Coverage ratio → 104,1% as of December 31, 2025

On October 30, 2026, from Lugano, the Transport Staff Union (SEV) challenged the interpretation given to the decision concerning the SNL Pension Fund. According to the note, the Pension Committee decided to entrust UBS with asset management, which until then had been managed by Copernicus.

According to the union, the decision would not attest to the navigation company's management success: rather, the procedure would have been imposed by the supervisory authority ATIOZ following a conflict-of-interest situation.

The procedure imposed by the authority

SEV disputes the fact that, at the time, Agostino Ferrazzini simultaneously held the chairmanship of SNL and of the holding company at the head of Copernicus Wealth Management. The union considers the circumstance extremely serious and recalls that it had already reported it to the competent authority through a detailed formal complaint.

For SEV, precisely that overlap would have made a new procedure for awarding the mandate indispensable. According to the reconstruction in the note, the new procedure effectively excluded the possibility that asset management would remain with Copernicus.

UBS is therefore the manager designated for the Pension Fund's assets, while Copernicus remains the former manager mentioned in the matter. The objections, however, concern not only the transfer of the mandate.

SEV also maintains that Copernicus's management would have recorded performance markedly below average and management costs markedly above average. For the union, these results raise questions about the efficiency and appropriateness of asset management, while SNL's communication would have failed to address these critical issues. In the union's account, the issue therefore concerns both the origin of the new procedure and the assessment of the previous mandate.

Operational details

The comparison of funding ratios is the main numerical element of SEV's criticism. However, the figures do not all have the same date or the same basis: some concern the SNL Pension Fund, others Symova or the average of Swiss pension funds.

The figures compared

The most direct comparison is between 104,1% and 117,1%: both refer to December 31, 2025, but the former is attributed to the SNL Pension Fund and the latter to the average of all Swiss pension funds. The arithmetic difference is 13 percentage points, obtained by subtracting 104,1 from 117,1. This is a calculation based on the reported figures, not a new percentage attributed to the management.

The 111,97% figure instead belongs to the former Symova Pension Fund and dates back to December 31, 2021, before the transition to Valitas. The SEV note describes a loss in the funding ratio of almost 8% over four years. If only the two figures 111,97% and 104,1% are compared, the difference is 7,87 percentage points: the numerical result is close to the wording used by the trade union, but it does not replace the period and context indicated in the source.

The 120% figure also requires caution. It is not the result actually recorded by the SNL Pension Fund: SEV presents it as an estimate of what would have happened if the employees had remained with Symova, with reference to December 31, 2025. The hypothetical condition is an integral part of the figure.

This makes it possible to distinguish three aspects: the figure recorded for SNL, the comparison with the Swiss average, and the alternative estimate put forward by the trade union. The source does not translate any of these indicators into an individual amount for employees, nor does it provide a personal figure for those who work across the border.

Key points

SEV presents 104,1% as a figure that SNL's communication would have misleadingly emphasized. The criticism does not erase the number: it disputes the meaning attributed to that number in relation to the performance and costs challenged in connection with the previous manager.

What is documented and what is not

The relevant passage of the statement is:

Calling the coverage ratio of 104,1% recorded at the end of 2025 positive does not remove the serious critical issues and does not redeem a management with disheartening results.

The content provided does not include the amounts of the management costs, Copernicus's performance percentages, or the method used to calculate the estimate of around 120%. It is therefore possible to report SEV's assessment and set out the comparisons indicated, but not to add a more detailed ranking or an independent verification of the results.

There is also no documented separate position from UBS, the ATIOZ supervisory authority, the Pension Commission or Agostino Ferrazzini on the merits of the criticisms. The text reports the trade union statement, the previous report to the competent authority and SNL's communication as described by SEV; it provides no other responses.

For a cross-border worker who was an employee of SNL, the relevant connection would be the pension fund and LPP aspect. The source, however, does not say whether there are cross-border workers among the employees, how many there are or what their pension status is. This caution prevents the matter from being turned into a general fact about cross-border employment.

The same limitation applies to other areas typical of cross-border employment: the statement does not address the G permit, AVS, LAMal, withholding tax, INPS or double taxation. No effects on taxation, health insurance, AVS pension provision or Italy-Switzerland relations linked to this specific decision are therefore documented.

The verifiable fact remains limited: SEV disputes the procedure, the previous mandate and the interpretation of the results of the SNL Pension Fund. To remain solely within the pension context, AVS/LPP and pension.

Source: tio.ch