The executive intends to present “on the return of summer”, “after discussion with the social partners”, a bill on “labour reform”, with two tracks which particularly worry the unions.
On the one hand a new reform of unemployment insurance and on the other the creation of France Travail to replace Pôle emploi. What we know about these two measures:
Unemployment insurance: “going further”
During the campaign, Emmanuel Macron had mentioned a modulation of unemployment compensation, with tougher rules when the unemployment rate is low. But the announcement on July 14 of a reform project to “go further” confused the timing a bit.
Two days before, the Minister of Labor Olivier Dussopt had indeed indicated that the rules of compensation for the unemployed, which expire on October 31, would be extended the time to assess their “usefulness”.
“We only have a few months of hindsight”, explained the minister, since the previous reform, dating from 2019, had been delayed because of Covid-19 and legal remedies.
If the executive has not specified its timetable, extension and reform could go hand in hand according to Beaugas. “They can extend the decree on the current rules to avoid a legal vacuum on November 1 and then modify it at any time. This amounts to excluding us from the definition of the parameters of unemployment insurance, ”he disputes.
France Travail, “hut” or “cathedral”?
To better support those who are destined to return to work and achieve full employment, the executive wants to transform Pôle emploi into a form of one-stop shop called “France Travail”. During her general policy statement, Elisabeth Borne judged that the support of the unemployed was today “too complex”. The Head of State also put forward on July 14 “a complete response”.
During the recent Aix Economic Meetings, Olivier Dussopt indicated that “the parameters are not fixed”. According to comments reported by the AEF agency, rather than “the maximalist hypothesis of a merger”, he favors work on “the front office, therefore reception, orientation and diagnosis” to improve the coordination of public and private actors.
An employment actor notes for his part that this idea of reform has fallen “like a meteorite”, seeing it as “a techno thing”, “not very operational”. There is, he says, “a good principle that is laid down” to simplify and make more efficient, but from there to “manufacture a monster”, not to mention the difficult discussions in view with the communities…
–
