**The economic boom of the 1960s was only possible thanks to migrant workers.** Swiss National Museum

The trade unions and fears of being overrun by foreigners

Switzerland’s population and economy grew like never before in the 1960s, partly due to the influx of foreign labour that made this record economic boom possible in the first place. At the same time, fear of ‘excessive immigration’ was on the rise. Tapping into the zeitgeist, the Swiss Trade Union Federation called for limits on immigration in a move that would leave a lasting mark on the political debate.

Noëmi Crain Merz

Noëmi Crain Merz is a historian, university lecturer and curator.

The Swiss Italian-language newspaper Gazzetta Ticinese noted with some annoyance on 22 February 1965 that: “A new word has even been coined – inforestieramento!” (meaning ‘excessive immigration’ or, in the parlance of the time, ‘foreign infiltration’). Elsewhere, in the German-speaking part of the country, the equivalent term (Überfremdung) was by no means unfamiliar; it merely began experiencing a resurgence in the post-war period as Switzerland’s economy soared. Alongside the baby boom, immigration driven by economic growth had led to the largest population increase ever experienced in Switzerland. By the mid-1960s, there were around 5.8 million people living in the country. The arrival of workers recruited from abroad ignited a debate not entirely dissimilar to the discussions being held in the 21^st century. The main difference between then and now: in the early 1960s, calls for restrictions came mainly from the left side of the political spectrum. In 1965 a delegation of three high-ranking members of the Swiss Trade Union Federation (Schweizerischer Gewerkschaftsbund, SGB) – its president Hermann Leuenberger, who was also a National Councillor representing the Swiss Social Democratic Party (SP), board member Ernst Wüthrich and SP President Fritz Grütter – met with Federal Councillor Hans Peter Tschudi to demand that the number of migrant workers in Switzerland be capped at 500,000. As that figure had long since been exceeded, this would effectively have meant expelling tens of thousands of foreigners.

The Schweizer Spiegel magazine was already warning of the dangers of ‘letting in too many foreigners’ as early as 1927. — **The *Schweizer Spiegel* magazine was already warning of the dangers of ‘letting in too many foreigners’ as early as 1927.** Swiss National Museum

How much is ‘tolerable’ and how much ‘acceptable’?

The trade union leadership was prompted to approach the Federal Council following the ratification of an agreement between Switzerland and Italy in 1964 that made it easier for families to be reunited. This improved the situation of Italian children in particular, as they had previously either been left behind by their parents or brought to live in Switzerland illegally. Many Swiss feared the country would henceforth be “swamped by outsiders”. Although the majority of trade unions had backed the agreement, they found themselves in a quandary. Their claim to stand in solidarity with all working people faltered in the face of reality now that the working population was increasingly made up of – mostly non-unionised – foreigners.

Trade unionist Wüthrich lay the blame for the situation on those in the business world and “their unbridled drive for expansion”, claiming it was they who “arm in arm with the federal and cantonal authorities [have] caused the problem of excessive immigration”. Waldemar Jucker, a fellow SP member of the Trade Union Federation, likewise failed to understand how immigrants could be allowed to “stream practically unchecked” into Switzerland, where things normally tended to proceed at a “slow and sluggish” pace –especially given that the authorities possessed the means to intervene.

**The trade unions placed this ad in the run-up to the nationwide referendum in February 1965.** e-newspaperarchives

This particular criticism was not new. Back in 1956, the federation had raised warnings about the “alarming total of 355,000 foreign workers”. Meantime, it was not merely the increasing competition they faced on the employment and housing markets that gave Swiss citizens cause for concern – the nation was by now afraid of being overrun by foreigners. The Swiss Trade Union Federation wrote in its 1961 manifesto that the “influx of foreign labour must be controlled in order to preserve Switzerland’s unique political, cultural and linguistic character and prevent foreign infiltration”. This was also the subtle focus of a postulate submitted to the National Council by Willi Ritschard in 1962. The future Social Democratic Federal Councillor began by highlighting the "foreign infiltration of our country" in general, before turning to the consequences for the labour market, which were "also becoming increasingly problematic in terms of the economy." Unlike the unions, the centre-right parties and the business world resisted the imposition of a fixed cap on immigration. But they also did little to challenge the narrative of a ‘threat to Swissness’. Their proposed remedy was to adopt the rotation principle whereby unmarried guest workers would come to Switzerland for a fixed length of time depending on seasonal demand and be replaced by others the following year. That way, their integration into Swiss society would be avoided, and migrant workers would stay among themselves.

Italian workers and an Italian family waiting to go back home for Christmas, 1966. Swiss National Museum / Swiss National Museum

Although not all union leaders backed the proposal to enshrine a ceiling of 500,000 on migrant workers in Swiss law, almost none dared to speak out against the idea of Switzerland being overrun culturally – a topic being discussed among the grassroots membership with sometimes racist undertones. “Seriously concerned” by the 1964 agreement, the Solothurn trade union association called on the authorities not only "to put an immediate stop to the immigration of further foreign workers”, but also to “reduce the number of foreign workers remaining in our country to a tolerable level as soon as possible.” Its counterpart in Basel-Stadt declared that the Italians could not be given what they themselves didn’t have: sufficient housing. It argued that the Italian workers could only be guaranteed “fair treatment” if their numbers were “reduced to a tolerable level”. The notion that the large number of foreigners in Switzerland, mainly from Italy, were no longer ‘tolerable’ was repeated so often that hardly anyone thought to ask what it actually meant. Oreste Fabbri, the secretary of the Basel trade union association and left-wing member of the cantonal parliament, himself the son of Italian immigrants, tried to appease the critics, arguing that while further immigration should be stopped there was no need to reduce the numbers. He maintained that it should not be seen as a problem if slightly more than 500,000 migrant workers were to remain in the country. Given that they would “mainly stay among themselves” and not mix with the Swiss population, he asked: “How could our very Swissness be threatened by 600,000 or 700,000 foreigners?”

Migrant workers often lived in purpose-built barracks (video in German). Swiss Federal Archives

“Switzerland for the Swiss”

In the mid-1960s new players emerged on the scene. Although the arguments they put forward were similar, these opponents of immigration hailed from the opposite end of the political spectrum. Some had previously sided with the Frontist movement or shown pro-fascist leanings. They too saw the business world’s’ “pursuit of profit” as the root of the supposed problem, and they too emphasised that their campaign to reduce the number of foreigners to a “reasonable level” had “nothing to do with racial hatred, arrogance, or inhumanity”. The Swiss Popular Movement against Excessive Immigration claimed in 1965 that it simply wanted to “prevent foreigners being given preferential treatment and the Swiss being discriminated against”. Although clearly distancing itself from the “extreme statements” made by these far-right groups, the Trade Union Federation had used very similar arguments for so long that it became increasingly difficult for it to change its course without losing credibility.

In the early 1960s, conciliatory tones were most readily to be found in right-leaning liberal circles. The National-Zeitung, a Basel-based publication, wondered in 1962 whether “the spectre of excessive immigration” – which was barely noticeable in some parts of the country anyway – "would even be haunting us if it weren’t being stirred up constantly?” The NZZ newspaper also called on its readers to “maintain a sense of proportion” when the political debate threatened to escalate in the wake of the 1964 agreement. It found that Switzerland could not afford a migrant worker policy that took no notice of what was happening abroad, but also that “given its humanitarian heritage and for reasons of humanity" the country had an obligation to improve the situation of its Italian workers.

After all, they were still needed if Switzerland wanted to go on enjoying a level of prosperity never before experienced. More and more working-class families rose into the middle class during the economic boom. While many were annoyed by the presence of foreigners in the country and by the increasing population density, almost none were willing to relinquish their new-found financial opportunities. The National-Zeitung called for more honesty. In the first of a series of articles published in 1962 entitled ‘Ohne Italiener kein Wohlstand’ (No prosperity without the Italians), anyone who had “traded their bicycle for a moped”, anyone who had had “to stop their car at a pedestrian crossing to let foreign workers cross the street” and “any first-class ticket holders who had found groups of Italians engaged in lively debate blocking their way at the railway station” were kindly asked not to forget who the average person in the street had to thank for the huge economic upswing.

Swiss Economic Archives — **‘*No prosperity without the Italians’*: the *National-Zeitung* called for more honesty in the debate on ‘excessive immigration’.** Schweizerisches Wirtschaftsarchiv

The tone tended to be different at the conservative grassroots level. Openly xenophobic sentiments were expressed in the Landesverband Freier Schweizer Arbeitnehmer (National Association of Free Swiss Employees, LFSA), a union closely associated with the reform wing of the Free Democratic Party. Founded in 1919 as an alternative to the Swiss Trade Union Federation, the LFSA’s rejection of the agreement met with overwhelming support. Its newspaper, the ‘Schweizer Arbeitnehmer’, could only print a small selection from the “flood of letters” it received on the grounds that most were too “harshly worded” for publication. However, the editors apparently had no problem in publishing letters that considered statements such as “Italians do not assimilate. They belong to a foreign ethnic group” as a “biological fact” and that demanded action under the motto “Switzerland for the Swiss”.

In response to public discontent and a first ‘initiative on excessive immigration’, submitted in 1964 and later withdrawn, the Federal Council introduced quotas. Supporters of immigration continued to base their arguments almost exclusively on economic grounds. Few saw immigrants as enriching society. One exception was Hans Franz Sarasin, the president of the Basel Chamber of Commerce. He wanted to make it easier for settlement permits to be granted and to place foreigners on an equal economic footing with Swiss citizens. In 1962, he called for a “more liberal status for migrant workers” and wrote an article asserting that the goal must be naturalisation. He believed that foreigners had become “an indispensable part of our population” around the turn of the century thanks to the “judicious” policy of swift naturalisation of the time, and reminded readers of the numerous construction companies founded and run by Italians. Sarasin, a lawyer, saw Switzerland's “great assimilative power” as a hallmark.

The rise of right-wing populism

But voices wishing to see Switzerland not as an immigration society but as an ethnically homogeneous one grew louder. In December 1964, an event protesting against ‘excessive immigration’ at Zurich's Kaufleuten venue spiralled out of control. One speaker's statement that Italians were “no more criminally inclined” than Swiss people provoked boos and whistles. When he then tried to appease the audience by remarking that the number of migrant workers could be reduced drastically if every Swiss employee worked one hour longer per week, a commotion broke out. In a hastily arranged vote, those in attendance forced the speaker to give up the floor. Loud applause, on the other hand, went to an audience member who saw this as “the greatest treason in living memory” – adding that during the war, traitors had been shot. The boundaries of acceptable discourse had shifted.

Report on a meeting of the National Action Party to stir up support for the ‘initiative on excessive immigration’ (video in German). SRF

Despite Wüthrich’s best intentions, the unions failed to regain control of the narrative in 1965 by emphasising that they alone had “always” taken the position that the number of migrant workers in the country should be limited. Quite the reverse: their rhetoric unwittingly helped prepare the ground for the xenophobic movements that emerged in the mid-1960s, led by James Schwarzenbach, a former fascist sympathiser. His ‘initiative on excessive immigration’, which was put to a popular referendum in 1970, permanently split the working class and ultimately led to the rise of right-wing populism in Switzerland.

More of: 20th / 21st century Economy Politics

Further posts

The hotelier who saw the light

Helmut Stalder 27.01.2026 Johannes Badrutt sought to offer guests at the Kulm Hotel in St. Moritz a truly exclusive experience. He built Switzerland’s first hydroelectric plant and installed its first electric lighting system in the hotel dining room – and all before Edison had invented the light bulb. An historic event with unexpected results.

De re metallica – a 16th-century bestseller

Dominik Landwehr 21.01.2022 How a Chemnitz doctor revolutionised mining, and why he had his book printed in Basel… The story of Georg Bauer, better known as Georgius Agricola.

A glimpse inside the pages of the first Latin edition of «De re metallica» of 1556.

SAFIR – an automobile from West Zurich

Felix Graf 26.10.2018 From 1913 to 1991, the present-day home of the Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra and lofty Prime Tower was a major centre for the production of gears, pumps and machine tools. And from 1907 to 1910 was the birthplace of a few dozen SAFIR brand automobiles.