To promote the employment of senior citizens, the President of the basis of the employees pension plan proposes that separating of a senior business be obliged, until the end of his professional career, to continue to contribute on the basis of his final salary.
Unions call for protest against pension reform while remaining divided on this issue. Can the challenge to move in the long term
This will depend on the response of the Government. It must change the presented copy end of April. Otherwise, there will be other movements. We will we let not trap placing the "Rendez-vous" of 2008 on pensions to a working group on the employment of senior citizens, even if this dialogue is important and we want to complete.
What are your main claims
In his text, Xavier Bertrand refers to at the outset the consolidation of pension plans, the need to "restore confidence". But it does propose nothing tangible to accomplish. The Government addresses the backup of the distribution plan through the lengthening of the period of assessment. He stubbornly refuses to discuss the question of the financing of pensions, and social schemes in General, while new resources are needed. And nothing is expected to ensure a good level of pension.
Governmental measures can ensure return to the balance of the accounts
Absolutely not. It is even on the contrary, since there is more than measures that cost of measures that in this plan. The deficit of the old-age insurance risk thus strongly widening by 2012. New resources come from transfers from other funds, Unedic, family allowances, which, if they are legitimate, are not lasting solutions. The "liberalisation" of total employment-retirement worries me: it would cost in the order of EUR 700 million to the general scheme of the private sector in the short term, if employees who have sufficiently contributed to quickly liquidate their retirement. This is inconsistent with the objective of ensuring, through the increase in the rate of the raise, that senior citizens stay longer in their business. There is certainly a legitimacy to relax the rules of cumulation in the private sector, because in other plans, employees can already to liquidate their retirement and finding another job without penalty, but it is too early to do so. It must proceed by steps.
The passage of 40 to 41 years of the period of assessment entraînerat - he departure no pension at full rate or cause to longer careers
Even if, in 2010, the employment rate of those aged 55-64 increases to 40 versus 38 today, what will happen to the remaining 60 They will be penalized by the 41 years, that will weaken their basic but also retirement and especially their supplementary pension, calculated by points. It is therefore essential to provide guarantees to those, many, which will not be active.
I proposed that, when a company separates a senior employee, she has an obligation to continue to pay its contributions for retirement on the basis of the last salary of activity, until he found a job or to end his professional career. This individual overcontribution situation for the employer would have more effect than the overall increase proposed by the Government on the horizon of 2010.
The problem of the plan proposed us, is that he rested all efforts on the employees. The lack of response on the arduousness is another surprising weakness. It is not possible to accept the passage to 41 years in such conditions.