Lis pension reform a matter of testosterone? The lexical field dominating these days gives food for thought: never giving up on the streets, defying public opinion’s refusal, saving the country from itself… “mother of reforms” actually looks like a “macho-reform”according to the amused expression of a representative of employers.
Wouldn’t a reform that wouldn’t be painful be a real reform? In 2017, the elected Macronists readily mocked the “reforms” of their predecessors. “There is in France this idea that the hardness to carry out a reform will enhance the image of the one who carries it”, summarizes Bruno Cautrès, researcher at Cevipof. Not fearing unpopularity, that is the attribute of the leader. Ten years after raising the legal retirement age from 60 to 62 in 2012, former head of state Nicolas Sarkozy is still making it a lesson in firmness. “There was nothing to negotiate, he summarizes in an interview with Figaro Magazine from February 3. We just had to listen and inform, that’s what we called “coordinating”. »
Reform in consensus: what other European countries manage to do – including for their pension system – we would be condemned to be deprived of. “There is no government that is carrying out pension reform with lightheartedness. We know it is difficult”regretted the Minister of Labor, Olivier Dussopt, Wednesday 1is February, on France 2. According to INSEE, the reform that has brought in the most in history was nevertheless carried out in general indifference in the summer of 1993, by Edouard Balladur. By indexing pensions to inflation – which was low at the time – and no longer to wages, it considerably limited their growth. Certainly, without any political benefit for the person concerned.
A bit of brutality
The current government has nevertheless chosen the hard way. By making the postponement of the legal age from 62 to 64 the heart of his reform, even if it also includes an acceleration of that of Marisol Touraine, he assumes a share of brutality. The CFDT would have preferred a simple extension of the contribution period, a scenario deemed fairer by many experts, despite a more spread out return over time. This would not have brought in enough, explains the executive, which does not however evaluate this scenario beyond 2030, while the financing problems arise rather after, according to the Pensions Orientation Council.
You have 18.06% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.