Haro on the French compensation system considered too generous, unsuitable and ineffective.
The charge is led by three economists from the Economic Analysis Council (CAE) responsible for advising the Prime Minister.
Pierre Cahuc, Stéphane Carcillo and Camille Landais tackle in a report the "defects" of the functioning of the unemployment insurance system created in 1958 and managed by the social partners.
Terms that until now were decided via agreements that unions and employers negotiated every two or three years depending on financial balances.
Benefit levels not sufficiently incentive to return to work.
Today, they write, the system helps make compensation "slightly" more generous "in times of low unemployment than high unemployment."
However, according to them, it is exactly the opposite that should be done via a general principle more incentive to the resumption of employment: to be generous with the compensation of job seekers when growth declines and to tighten the screw. when the economy picks up.
It would be a question of taking inspiration from what "Canada or the United States" are doing.
In short, adjust the parameters that govern the amount of compensation “according to indicators of economic activity”.
The new rule would thus amount to modulating the “duration of compensation” and the conditions for being entitled to an allowance, depending on the state of the economy and the labor market.
Vary the criteria, for example according to the unemployment rate.
Canada, which is cited as an example by the authors, even goes so far as to vary the rights of the unemployed according to economic criteria specific to each region, by retaining the unemployment rate.
The higher the unemployment rate, the lower the conditions for being entitled to benefits, in particular the number of hours required to obtain compensation, and vice versa.
Regarding the amount of compensation and the duration, the calculation is not the same across the whole country and depends, once again, on the regional unemployment rate.
A nationalization that does not speak its name
.
Another shock finding highlighted in this report is the steering and management by the social partners.
Paritarianism has, according to them, had its day.
“The State has lost confidence in Unédic's ability to manage and have expertise.
Today, a pilot is missing from the ship, ”Stéphane Carcillo bluntly affirms.
Moreover, analysis for his part Pierre Cahuc, "it is the executive which has been in control since 2018, the social partners no longer even negotiate".
The report therefore recommends creating a new High Council for Unemployment Insurance, which would take decisions and provide expert opinions.
It would be made up of experts from all sides as well as abroad, "not only from Unédic", but also from various representatives of the administrations ... Every year, once this High Authority has issued its opinion and recommendations in Regarding compensation according to economic criteria and deficits, the unemployment insurance budget and the parameters relating to compensation will be discussed in parliament.
This report commits only the authors.
Will these explosive recommendations be those retained by the government, which is due to open discussions on unemployment insurance in the coming weeks?
“These recommendations are the sole responsibility of the authors of the report.
They outline a number of avenues, but the discussion will take place with the social partners, ”the Ministry of Labor tells us.
Newsletter It pays me
The newsletter that improves your purchasing power
Subscribe to the newsletterAll newsletters
Unsurprisingly, this report sparked an outcry among unions.
"A report, inspired by the mechanism of the pension reform and which is steered by the government," denounces Jean-François Foucard of the CFE-CGC.
A “scandalous report.
This aims to plan the rights of the unemployed!
They do not understand anything about unemployment insurance ”for Denis Gravouil of the CGT.
“When you want to kill your dog, you say he has rabies.
This is a note from academics who do not understand anything about unemployment insurance, ”tackle Michel Beaugas of FO.
Contacted, the CFDT did not follow up.
As for the Medef, he believes that “the CAE is free of its positions.
From there to consider that it fixes the roadmap of the government, it is a step which one does not cross.
Let the consultation play its role.
"