Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Reforming the Reform

A CGT spokesman concedes that even with full employment, only 50% of the retirement deficit would be covered. So what does the CGT propose to cover the other half? A change of subject:

Etes-vous favorable à la proposition de François Chérèque de négocier avec le Medef sur l'emploi ?
A la CGT, nous avons mis la question de l'emploi au cœur du dossier des retraites depuis le début. Car il y a besoin de nouveaux financements pour assurer la pérennité de celui des retraites. Et nous avons considéré que 50 % de ce besoin pourrait être rempli si l'on revenait à une situation de plein emploi. Nous avons donc demandé qu'on puisse, dans le dossier des retraites, discuter d'une nouvelle politique de l'emploi, différente de celle menée depuis des années : exonérer de cotisations sociales les entreprises.
En quoi consisterait cette "nouvelle" politique ?
Nous proposons notamment que la politique de l'emploi soit prise en compte dans la règle de calcul des cotisations sociales, et donc que ces dernières soient modulées en fonction des critères d'emploi et de salaires dans l'entreprise : le taux de discrimination entre les hommes et les femmes, le rapport entre la masse salariale et la valeur ajoutée...

This is rather baffling. It would indeed be nice to have more gender equality in the workplace, but how will that solve the retirement problem? As for the ratio of wages to value-added ... perhaps someone can enlighten me what the goal here is. M. Aubin adds: "Dans ce pays, on voit bien que pour avoir une négociation, il faut un conflit social. La situation de blocage actuel est liée au manque de dialogue social, notamment de la part de l'Elysée et du gouvernement." Well, perhaps, but I've always found it useful, when I want to have a dialogue, to stick to one subject, at least for a while.

5 comments:

FrédéricLN said...

It's part of the old say: "il faut savoir terminer une grève". No agreement on the content, but introduce another topic to hide the (likely) defeat.

Apart from that, the CGT agenda on unemployment "cotisations" (insurance premiums, contributions) is presented a rather "anti-capitalistic" way, but is not stupid. It's truly surprising that the cost for the employer is presently the same, whether he uses CDD or CDI, whether he fires people every month (and that costs high allowances) or keeps the staff.

But ... there has been a negociation on these issues in 2008 or 2009, and neither the TUs nor the business unions went in that direction.

Anonymous said...

Isn't there a law that levies fines based on gender inequality in companies?

Anonymous said...

"changing the topic" also: JF Copé thinks that there should be a multi-subject entrance examination at the end of the 5th grade in order to decide whether students are allowed to move on to secondary education. All students who do not show "complete mastery of the primary curriculum" would be preventing from moving on with their education.
Right now, about 10% primary school children are held back in France, but it can reach 25% in disadvantaged schools. So the goal wouldn't be to make kids repeat, since it's already done, but to keep a certain type of kids from entering secondary schools.
JF Copé does not seem to have an idea of what you'd do with the countless kids who'd fail the entrance exam, even if they repeat one year.
On the other hand, since the Special Convention on Education by UMP is a week away, he's still got some time to come up with something for them. Someone's suggested "pre-apprenticeships" for 12-14 year olds, then apprenticeships.

Anonymous said...

"changing the topic" also: JF Copé thinks that there should be a multi-subject entrance examination at the end of the 5th grade in order to decide whether students are allowed to move on to secondary education. All students who do not show "complete mastery of the primary curriculum" would be preventing from moving on with their education.
Right now, about 10% primary school children are held back in France, but it can reach 25% in disadvantaged schools. So the goal wouldn't be to make kids repeat, since it's already done, but to keep a certain type of kids from entering secondary schools.
JF Copé does not seem to have an idea of what you'd do with the countless kids who'd fail the entrance exam, even if they repeat one year.
On the other hand, since the Special Convention on Education by UMP is a week away, he's still got some time to come up with something for them. Someone's suggested "pre-apprenticeships" for 12-14 year olds, then apprenticeships.
In the meanwhile, it gets people talking and it provides a nice discussion topic outside of the pension reform protests. Changing the topic, thus.

Anonymous said...

http://www.lesechos.fr/economie-politique/france/actu/020881916278-philippe-askenazy-la-reforme-des-retraites-tres-rapide-va-creer-un-choc-sur-le-marche-du-travail-.htm

Theis economist, interviewed by Les Echos, states that the current reform will in effect cut 30,000 positions within 10 years.

Do these protesting students have a point (THEY'll be the ones who won't have access to these jobs)?
What else can be done?
Or should we stick to another subject?
MYOS