The mass demonstrations against pension “reform” stem from resentment that built up under Emmanuel Macron’s government.
On January 10, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne presented a draft pension reform, the centerpiece of which was to raise the minimum retirement age from 62 to 64. The project sparked mass mobilization, especially on the basis of broad trade union solidarity. This is unusual in France, where the trade union situation is highly fragmented.
The main federation, the CFDT, has often distinguished itself in these types of reforms by its willingness to compromise. Not at all this time.
We have witnessed the largest demonstrations in France for the last 30 years, even larger than those of November-December 1995. Particularly impressive was a demonstration in a small town. gilets jaunes In 2018-2019, this is a rebellion. La France ProfondEven if the modalities are very different.
The results of the poll are clear: 72% oppose the reform, with almost 80% of those under 65 years old. This is true for 78 percent of the workforce, with only slightly fewer managers opposing it. The only people who are slightly in favor are pensioners.
Why is this? There are three main reasons.
Become a member of Social Europe
Support independent publishing and progressive ideas by becoming a Social Europe member for less than €5 a month. Your support makes all the difference!
“Reform” fatigue
First, for 40 years, successive governments have asked the French people to accept “reforms” that would reduce social rights. These have led to a decline in public services such as health, education, and transportation, reduced purchasing power, and worsened working conditions. They did not end the hollowing out of industry, stop France’s external balance from deteriorating, or boost France’s poor innovation, as promised. And the French are fed up.
At this very moment, due to the flawed institutional system of the Fifth Republic, they found themselves ruled by the most neoliberal government in 40 years. Re-elected President Emmanuel Macron said that if all these social setbacks did not strengthen the “competitiveness” of the French economy, it was not because the policies were wrong, but rather that France had made enough progress and fast enough. I’m sure it wasn’t progressing. In this direction.
Since 2017, President Macron has been true to his word. He has dismantled labor laws and weakened trade unions, cut housing benefits for the poorest, restricted the rights of the unemployed, and is now “reforming” pensions to save money. At the same time, it is cutting taxes on the wealthiest people and doubling cuts in corporate taxes and social security contributions. It’s a recipe for revolution…
Under the Fifth Republic’s electoral system, Macron will enjoy full power for five years if he wins the support of just one-fifth of voters in the first round of the 2022 presidential election. However, weakened in his first term, he did not succeed in gaining an absolute parliamentary majority this time. But he intends to solidify his majority by treating pension reform as follows: LeRpicturepublishera traditional right-wing party that strongly advocates such cuts in social spending.
In doing so, Mr. Macron is exacerbating tensions in French society and fueling radicalization. Before the pandemic, gilets jaunes The movement had already become France’s longest-running and most violent social movement since World War II.
One might have thought this would be a lesson. However, barely emerging from the coronavirus pandemic and in the midst of the Ukraine war, President Macron decided to reform unemployment insurance and now pension reform in order to once again cut social spending and employee rights. So there was a massive veto, even if it was led by trade unions. gilets jaunes.
particularly unfair
The second factor is that this reform is particularly unfair. The French pension system is built around two main parameters. They are the minimum retirement age (currently 62 years old) and the minimum contribution period required to receive a full pension (42 years, which in 2035 he plans to extend to 43 years). The minimum retirement age for him is 64 years, but in the proposal this criterion will be brought forward to 2027. )
This project is particularly unfair because it will penalize those who started working and paying contributions earlier. These people are often the ones with the lowest salaries, harshest working conditions, and shortest life expectancy, while those who studied at university and already had to retire after age 64 are least affected. I don’t accept it. The government has a duty to propose some amendments to limit inequity, but these are not easy to implement and many questions remain.
This is scandalizing the nation. This is especially true since Macron explained in detail during his first term that he would not take such a step because it would be too unfair. We have gone through many rounds of pension reform. In 1993, 2003, 2010… each time the government declares that this is the last time and that the system will be safe for decades. And each time, the system is strengthened again a few years later.
Indeed, the share of gross domestic product devoted to pensions in France is 15.9 percent (including disability), one of the highest in Europe, although less than Greece or Italy. But this reflects the past.
As for the future, according to the European Commission, thanks to the reforms already introduced, France will, on the contrary, be the only country in the European Union where the share of pensions in GDP should decrease, despite an aging population. He says it’s one of them. By 2070, France will no longer be in third place in this respect, but will be in ninth place, close to the EU average.
Considering the increasing proportion of pensioners in the population, this means a sharp deterioration of future pensioners. The people fully understand this. This is why they do not accept that the government wants to go further and cut 0.7 percentage points of GDP from pension spending.
Furthermore, although the minimum legal retirement age is at the bottom of the EU spectrum, what primarily determines the retirement age? effective Retirement age in France refers to the contribution period. This effective pension age is already increasing rapidly and will continue to increase as the first generation with mass access to higher education retires. Even without reform, it will reach 64 within a few years.
For these reasons, the public does not recognize the urgency of such reforms. If there is a limited problem of balancing pension budgets over the next few years, a small increase in employer and employee contributions could be considered.
poor working conditions
Finally, the third aspect explains the strong reluctance of the French to work longer in old age, namely the poor working conditions. Although France has a very comprehensive labor law and numerous collective agreements, the rate of unionization is very low and the powers of employee representatives are very limited, which is absent in almost all small and medium-sized enterprises. The Labor Inspection Bureau is also characterized by its skeletal nature. All of this comes with an authoritarian, hierarchical, feudal management style.
This means much worse working conditions than in the Germanic and Nordic countries, including the physical environment, stress and work rhythms, and psychological pressure, as easily observed in the Eurofound study. in extreme conditionsAccording to Eurostat, in 2019 there were 3.4 deaths per 100,000 employees, making it the EU member state (Norway and Switzerland plus Norway and Switzerland) with the highest risk of dying at work, ahead of Bulgaria. The country was France.
Macron’s government made no attempt to improve the situation. On the contrary, in 2017, it abolished the health and safety committees that existed in companies with 50 or more employees. It’s no surprise that the French want to stop having to work in such conditions as soon as possible.
widening gap
The demonstrations are set to reach their climax on March 7, and a prolonged general strike does not seem the most likely scenario. Workers will probably be reluctant to embark on such a venture, since the economic situation is not favorable and the associated loss of purchasing power is already considerable. In France, students often act as catalysts for large-scale social movements, but far from their young minds, they do not seem to be very active in this issue.
Will the government be able to reverse 64 years of history, especially to restart its relationship with the CFDT? This is reasonable, but unlikely. Macron has made this “reform” a symbol of the country’s ability to change. This measure is also key to an alliance with the traditional right. And he has the institutional means to push this law through Congress.
Therefore, it seems likely that reform will materialize. However, it would widen the gulf between the people and the elites and once again increase the potential for popular resentment against the system. Unfortunately, it primarily benefits the working class and politically dominant far right.
Guillaume Duval is a former editor-in-chief. alternative economics.