Pensions Conclave: What is (more or less) agreed, what is stuck, what remains to be resolved by this evening

Google News

Reading time: 4 min.

Recap: The social partners' "conclave" on pensions is scheduled to conclude this Tuesday evening with a final meeting. "Le Nouvel Obs" takes stock of the latest discussions, ranging from the retirement age, which will remain unchanged, to the compromises regarding hardship.

Agreement or irreconcilable positions? Instigated by François Bayrou at the beginning of the year, the "conclave" of social partners on pensions is due to conclude this Tuesday evening, June 17, with a final meeting.

Also read

Interview with Patrick Aubert on pensions: "We need to reexamine the issue of age and the criterion of a full career"

The challenge of the "conclave" is considerable: to find common ground to make Elisabeth Borne's 2023 pension reform less unpopular , gradually raising the legal retirement age from 62 to 64. And to rebalance the pension system which, without countermeasures, would plunge into a deficit estimated at 6.6 billion euros in 2030, according to the projections of the Pensions Advisory Council (COR).

For the Prime Minister, who had launched this new format of discussions after a compromise reached with the Socialists to avoid a government censure, this is a moment of truth. François Bayrou had then committed to presenting a possible agreement of the social partners before Parliament. But before getting to that point, the "conclave" would have to produce a joint statement of conclusions. It's "50/50," echoed CFDT boss Marylise Léon and Medef president Patrick Martin in the press on Sunday.

Although it was no great mystery from the beginning , the Medef (French employers' association) confirmed last Tuesday that it would not budge on the retirement age of 64. Without wanting to say it very clearly, the unions have taken note of this situation. They will not give up demanding a return to 62, but would agree to sign an agreement if the retirement age were lowered for certain categories of people.

"We can only get out of this if we say that we did not agree on the 64-year-old age but that we still made progress on certain issues where there were injustices," a union leader told AFP on condition of anonymity.

As for the rest, everything is still possible. It will all depend on what employers give up in terms of women's careers, hardship, or increased contributions.

The Medef suggests "allowing women who have acquired additional quarters linked to maternity to benefit from an improvement in their pension level by modifying the calculation of the average annual salary" , "no longer on the 25 best years but on 23 or 24 years, which will mechanically improve their pension level" . But, to "finance the additional cost, the parental surcharge from the age of 63, introduced by the Borne reform, would be abolished" .

With the premium, some mothers can, at age 63, see their pension increased by 1.25% per quarter of contributions, or a maximum of 5%. Other proposals have been put forward by the unions, notably by the CFE-CGC, which proposes, on the contrary, extending the premium to age 62, which the MEDEF wants to eliminate.

Offering early retirement to people working in arduous or exhausting conditions could be a compromise. The Medef (French employers' association) has proposed that people with disabilities or permanent incapacity be able to retire at 61 or 60, depending on the case (currently 62).

But "the account is not there on the employee side," Christelle Thieffinne for the CFE-CGC decided at the end of the week: there is a "blind spot" in the employers' proposals, that of people who are worn out at 60 but not recognized as disabled, according to her. The CFDT is defending tooth and nail a proposal to extend early retirement linked to the professional prevention account (C2P). It proposes in particular that this could concern people exposed to "manual handling of loads," difficult postures and mechanical vibrations.

Regarding professional wear and tear, the CFDT wants the professional prevention account (C2P) to be reviewed and amended to allow for the inclusion of criteria for handling heavy loads, awkward postures, and mechanical vibrations. This will enable affected employees to retire a little earlier.

If the employers' organisations "want an agreement, they will accept our proposal (...) otherwise there will be no agreement with the CFDT, that's clear and simple" , Marylise Léon insisted on RTL on Tuesday, noting that "the ball is in the court" of the Medef in particular "since the CPME has made overtures" .

The Confederation of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises has proposed the creation of "wear points" for people "who have to carry heavy loads, endure difficult postures or mechanical vibrations" giving "the right to training and retraining assistance" .

And there is still a major blind spot: what about the financing of the pension system? "Medef and CPME do not want to participate in the financial effort," grumbles Pascale Coton for the CFTC: the employers' organizations refuse to increase employee or employer contributions. As for sources of financing, the unions do not reject the idea that retirees could be asked to contribute. The scenarios envisaged revolve around an under-indexation of pensions to inflation – as is already the case for the Agirc-Arrco supplementary pensions – or an increase in the CSG rates likely to spare modest retirees.

The Prime Minister said on Monday that he was ready to grant "a few more days" beyond the Tuesday deadline to the five participants still present - CFDT, CFTC, CFE-CGC on the union side, Medef and CPME on the employers' side. But "we don't need more time" , "it has to end this evening" , argued on RTL this Tuesday morning, the number one of the CFDT Marylise Léon. According to her, "the ball is in the court of the employers' organisations" , particularly on the subject of hardship on which there is a "blockage" .