Lomen receive on average a retirement pension 28% lower than that of men, according to the Department of Research, Studies and Statistics of the Ministry of Labour. And this, by adjusting for dependents and survivors’ pensions (women live longer than men). Otherwise, the differential would be 40%.
Of course, social inequalities do not arise at the time of retirement, and it is necessary to fight on all fronts during all stages of life to obtain better equality of opportunity. But there is a measure specific to pensions which could reduce the difference in the level of pension between men and women: it is to allow all working people to pay part of their pension contributions to their spouse for the duration of their choice ( upon simple declaration on an official website).
This provision for sharing contributions, combined with annual projections of the individual retirement account, would allow women to better understand their situation and conduct real negotiations with their successive spouses (since this is the reality of the modern family unit).
One could object that the balance of power would not necessarily be in favor of women. But any negotiation is all the more likely to be productive when it occurs early in the couple’s life. Ex ante compromises are a priori much fairer and more responsible than ex post adjustments imposed by the administration, which depend on the life course of individuals and over which they have no real control.
Flexibility
Discussions between spouses (married, PACS or cohabitants) will also take place without asymmetry of information, since they will be based on projections of the pension system in the form of an average scenario but also a whole range of probable scenarios.
The spouses will thus be able to compare their situations and decide with full knowledge of the facts. Without sacrificing his future retirement or relying on random future policies, one of the two may decide to work less because he has obtained the guarantee of compensation from his spouse, whether to take care of children, the house, a common project, a need for professional retraining, end-of-life support for a loved one, their own health problems, etc. Basically, it would be the recognition of unpaid housework.
Such flexibility could therefore create a much more predictive framework in which to actively prepare for retirement throughout life. We therefore insist on the importance of public authorities making interactive assessment tools available, producing regular reports (at least annually) for each adult. We would not require proof of life as a couple, but, to avoid carelessness, we would ask everyone to confirm fairly frequently (for example quarterly) the breakdown of their contributions to one or more people.
You have 41.57% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.