In the end, the exercise turned out to be more difficult than expected. On Tuesday, October 29, employers’ and workers’ organizations resumed negotiations on unemployment insurance that they had begun a week earlier. This second discussion highlighted an obstacle whose size had perhaps been underestimated: how to achieve the savings requested by the government? “It won’t be like a letter sent by mail.”summarized Jean-François Foucard, head of the CFE-CGC delegation, in statements to journalists at the end of the meeting.
This round of conversations seemed relatively easy to complete since the protagonists are not starting from scratch. They can resume the agreement signed on November 10, 2023 by the employers and three unions (CFDT, CFTC, FO), but which Gabriel Attal’s government refused to validate in the spring of this year. thus preventing its entry into force.
The problem is that the social partners must respond to a request from the Minister of Labor, Astrid Panosyan-Bouvet: identify “measures to generate 400 million euros of additional savings annually.”
The sum seems modest when compared to the 3.6 billion that Gabriel Attal expected to generate each year with his reform project, before it was reserved. However, it must be found, and this from 2025. The CGT has suggested additional business contributions for certain salary brackets, but this option has no chance of being accepted by business movements.
Cross-border workers in the spotlight
If the idea of increasing the income of the compensation system is ruled out, the parties involved will have to look towards the benefit expenditure side, which means reducing the entitlements of job seekers. This possibility hardly attracts the unions, especially because “A lot of effort has been made”recalled Olivier Guivarch, national secretary of the CFDT, referring to the reforms undertaken since 2019, which have tightened the conditions of support for the unemployed.
For several days now, a hypothesis has prevailed: reviewing the rules applicable to people who have worked in a neighboring country. They are expensive, in particular because they attempt to calculate the benefit based on the remuneration received, which in some cases is much higher than in France. But such changes may require revision of international texts in which “we have no hand”stressed Frédéric Belouze, on behalf of the CFTC. Another option, also aimed at cross-border workers, would be to introduce stricter provisions for this category (through, for example, a “step-down coefficient” that would reduce the amount of the allowance). But the legal feasibility of such a scenario is questionable with regard to the principle of equality.
You have 6.82% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
