While public debates in all the official European palaces focus on the impossible management of the public debt, whose moratorium we shall have to consider daring to organize one day, lenders, are increasingly interested in another issue: the labor market. And they have succeeded in imposing across Europe, a much greater flexibility, allowing and facilitating the ease of individual and collective dismissals, which is a prerequisite for mobility, growth and employment. Everywhere. Except in France. And the rating agencies keep saying it: if nothing is done on this subject in France, competitiveness will not return. Same for growth. And interest rates of government and private borrowing will increase there.
In France, the discussions began. And, seemingly, the social partners disagree about almost everything: MEDEF is requesting a re-examination of the processes of collective dismissals, even if it means recognizing in return the overtaxing of fixed-term contracts, to which CGPME is totally opposed. Force Ouvriere (FO) does not want to hear about the calling into question of the processes of collective dismissals, while the CFDT especially wants to have the right to co-manage businesses, while the CGT especially wants to be against any agreement with the employers, no matter who they are. With at the same time, a change in leadership this week within the CGT and CFTD. Some small steps can be made, such as on the extension of the fixed-term contract and the continuation of social protection for the unemployed. But not on the central point, which is to recreate a society of employment.
The reality is that we are in a society of connivance : in fact all the social partners agree not to agree, and to have responsibility rest with the government on inevitable unpopular decisions in the matter of flexibility. And even more, they agree to focus only on protecting those who have a job, and the unemployed are left out of the picture; and finally, and more importantly, they agree not to touch the gold mine, that of continuing education, which ensures comfortable earnings to a lot of people who gravitate around them; in fact, the reform of continuing education is not even in the framework for negotiation!
And yet, this is where the solution lies : so that the necessary flexibility does not lead to intolerable precariousness, we must guarantee a new status to all those who will have to leave a job, other than that of unemployed, but that of an employee in training and job searching, to renew his knowledge and look for a new occupational activity. What I have already termed here as « contract of evolution ».
In order to ensure this, we should dare to propose three radical reforms : first, acknowledge that to be trained (and universities are here for that, even in summer) and to look for a job are socially useful activities which merit a remuneration. Then, we should allocate a portion of public money that is wasted today in continuing education to this remuneration. Finally, by devoting the rest of this manna to finance trade unions, so they can see a positive outcome for them.
Of all this, social partners do whatever it takes not to talk about it. And political power, busy filling the gaps, busy avoiding layoffs here and there, is at risk of missing the essential: the jobs of tomorrow are not in the unlimited safeguarding of the jobs of the past but in the training and preparation for occupations of the future.
j@attali.com