Dedicated to the topic “Old age insurance: fair pension opportunities for women”, the international IPEO conference was held at the Cusanus Academy in Brixen/Bressanone, Italy, on 11–12 September 2025. It was organised by the AFB – Bildungs- und Energieforum in cooperation with the European Centre for Workers' Questions (EZA) and funded by the European Union, and brought together around 46 representatives of workers’ organisations from South Tyrol/Italy, Germany, Austria, Belgium, and Serbia.
For many women, reaching retirement age is associated with an increased risk of poverty. Four main factors explain the gender pension gap between women and men: fewer contribution years due to unpaid family-related career breaks, part-time employment to meet family responsibilities, employment in professions with lower social recognition, and lower pay – all to the disadvantage of women. The extent of this gap varies across EU countries, with Denmark and Hungary showing only minor differences in pension levels, while Austria (39.7%), Italy (42.7%), and Germany (50%) report major disparities. Barriers to labour market entry, limited career opportunities, and breaks for childcare and— increasingly—informal family caregiving negatively affect pension entitlements. At the IPEO conference in Brixen, experts from several countries agreed that these are the main causes of women’s lower pensions.
Overall, low pension levels are also the result of rules and restrictions within pension systems that determine how entitlements are calculated. Policy frameworks have long been shaped by the male breadwinner model, focused one-sidedly on men’s employment and largely neglecting other family responsibilities. Yet women’s employment has risen significantly in recent decades, and it is still women who mainly take time off work or reduce their working hours to care for the family. The persistent gender pay gap illustrates how difficult it is to overcome entrenched role models. It is hoped that the soon-to-be-transposed EU Pay Transparency Directive will promote the disclosure of pay differences and thus strengthen efforts toward equality.
Taking time off work to handle family responsibilities often turns into a “boomerang” for pension entitlements, since the key societal contribution of unpaid care work at home is not—or only inadequately—taken into account for old-age pensions. Women therefore suffer a double disadvantage, especially during times of prolonged economic crises with phases of involuntary unemployment, as seen over the past 15 years. Technical innovations and now also generative AI are reshaping production and service systems, making many traditional jobs obsolete. This leads to a restructuring of the labour market, with periods of unemployment or career shifts.
Part-time work can be a successful model for reconciling family and career, but it may become a trap for pension security if women remain in part-time positions for too long and if pension systems are based primarily on contribution years. Indeed, old-age poverty predominantly affects women. Many women do not retire directly from employment and, due to contribution gaps, often rely solely on the old age pension paid out by the state. Another cause of low pensions lies in the horizontal and vertical segmentation of the labour market: women are mainly employed in lower-paid sectors such as services, trade, and tourism. They make up the majority of the workforce in professions with lower social recognition, such as social services and healthcare, where only higher hierarchical and management positions earn adequate incomes. Even in leadership roles, women are still paid less than men with comparable responsibilities.
A cross-country comparison confirms that childcare and caregiving are either not recognized at all, or only partially and insufficiently recognized for pension entitlement. Tax rules and labour market as well as post-retirement employment regulations also need adjustments to correct disadvantages linked to family, childcare, and caregiving responsibilities. Examples include family income-splitting systems or entitlement to unemployment benefits after job termination during the first year of a child’s life.
Experts agreed that trade unions, workers’ organizations, and social associations should act more decisively to improve the situation of women at risk of poverty who receive only minimum pensions. There are already examples of how to increase minimum pensions, for instance through adjustments that offset the inflation-related loss of purchasing power. At a systemic level, family responsibilities should be more firmly and equally taken into account in labour market legislation. Given the acute risk of poverty for women with few contribution years, it is urgent to ensure that family work, childcare, and caregiving periods are fully recognized. While this would primarily benefit women, it is hoped that it will also encourage more men to take on these responsibilities.
In this regard, what is needed now is to promote greater partnership in parenting, supported by targeted incentives. One innovative idea is the “family working time model,” in which couples reduce their working hours to 28–32 per week in order to share family work more equally. The conference also discussed proposals such as recognizing caregiving during part-time work, establishing a legal right to childcare places in nurseries, expanding all-day school models to relieve parents and promote equal opportunities, and granting medically justified work interruptions for women experiencing menopausal disorders.
Another key area for women’s empowerment is financial literacy. OECD surveys show that in some EU countries the population has poor financial literacy: knowledge of financial systems and saving options is limited. Women are not only too cautious in wage negotiations but, due to insecurity, also fail to adequately consider the financial aspects of everyday decisions—such as marital property regimes or the choice of part-time work after having children.