Government communication takes a hit. According to Franck Riester, “women are somewhat penalized by the postponement of the age” of retirement. The bill was presented to the Council of Ministers on Monday.
“We absolutely do not disagree. They are a little more impacted, ”acknowledged the Minister for Relations with Parliament on Monday evening, during the Public Hearing program on Public Senate, LCP and Figaro Live. Women, in order to be able to reach their contribution period, use, and this is very legitimate, quarters validated by child. It allows them to more easily access the minimum quarters to be able to validate a retirement without a discount, ”explained Franck Riester.
“The quarters per child do not play on the postponement of the age, they play on the duration of contribution”, he continued. “On this point in particular, they are a little more impacted than men”.
The impact document presented on Monday
A statement that goes in the direction of a document presented Monday by the government as the impact study of its bill. We learn that overall, between the increases in the legal age (64 years in 2030), the contribution period (accelerated to reach 43 years from 2027) and the various “derogatory provisions”, the average age departure should go from a little under 63 today to 64 and a half for future retirees who will leave in twenty years. Without the reform, they would stop at 64.
A global effort of six months which covers strong disparities, in particular between men and women: the gap will indeed go from simple to double between the first (4 months) and the seconds (8 months) for the 1980 generation.
“On the other hand, we have a device, which is to their advantage, which is the device in particular for long careers of parental leave, which was not the case previously”, declared Franck Riester. Periods of parental leave will in future be taken into account, according to the pension reform project, a measure “more just for women”, according to the government.
Mockery from the left
During her presentation of the project, the Prime Minister had affirmed that the reform should reduce the pension gap between men and women, but had not indicated that women should, on average, work until a more advanced age. .
“Even the government ends up recognizing that women will be penalized by postponing the legal age. The more the days pass, the more everything demonstrates the injustice of this project, ”tweeted the first secretary of the PS, Olivier Faure. Definitely, Macronie is desperate: listen to it, we could not have said it better, ”exclaimed LFI MEP Manon Aubry.
“If it is a government minister who says so …”, added the former socialist minister Guillaume Garot on the social network.
Heckled terminal at the Assembly
Elisabeth Borne, strongly challenged in the National Assembly on Tuesday afternoon, tried to extinguish the controversy, ensuring that the reform would “reduce” inequalities with men. “I cannot let it be said that our project would not protect women. On the contrary”, launched the Prime Minister, during the session of questions to the government, in response to the socialist deputy Mélanie Thomin who estimated that women will be “more heavily penalized” by the postponement of the retirement age. retirement age 62 to 64.
Long heckled on the benches of the left, Elisabeth Borne assured that the reform would reduce “the unacceptable inequalities between women and men at the time of retirement”.
“We protect women who have incomplete and choppy careers, women who started working early, women who have small pensions,” she insisted. “Women will be the first beneficiaries of the revaluation of small pensions,” added the Prime Minister.
“The reform will contribute to reducing the pension gap between men and women”, said the head of government, denouncing a “false trial”, but adding that she hoped that the parliamentary debate would make it possible to “continue to enrich the project”. .