The Government reflects early use of funds

The horizon and framing. The 2003 reform was to horizon 2020: it is in particular to this date that is fixed, for the time being, the rule of an increase in the duration of contribution proportional to that of life expectancy. This time, the Government should provide a horizon more distant (it is not that the subject of pensions is ever reopened), probably 2030. The deadline of 2050 is considered too remote: it would show as early as today a very report of age. Another key on the framing of the reform question: is it to take measures against fully or partially the need for funding In 2003, the Government posted a balance for private purpose. But the need for planned funding for the public (State, communities) by 2020 was still considerable (16 billion) and nothing was scheduled to meet, if this is an increase in the contribution of the State.

Age legal and/or period of assessment. To delay the age, the Government may first increase the assessment required to receive a pension at full rate. This is the logic of the reforms of 1993, 2003 and 2008 (special diets). The duration will reach 41 years in 2012 (2016 for special diets) and 41.5 years in 2020. If the Executive extended beyond the principle of proportional to life expectancy increased, it would reach 42 years in 2030 and 43.5 years in 2050. Problem: this would penalize people who have started to contribute later (studies, periods of unemployment not compensated early career). Another solution: raise the minimum legal age of the entitlement to retirement, now set at 60 years. Most unions oppose, because this would penalise employees who began to work very young and who contribute more than necessary. In all cases, the necessary development of the employment of senior citizens will be also invoked.

The arduousness. The 2003 reform provided for the implementation of measures for employees exercising painful trades (staggered hours, port charges, etc.). But after the failure of the inter-professional negotiations, which have skated from 2005 to 2008, the subject is at a standstill. Unions require a mechanism for departures anticipated retirement for the relevant employees. So however would be complex to implement, have a high cost and could lead to recreate special regimes, that the Government excludes. The Elysee has promised that the subject would be on the table but believes that it is beyond the scope of pension. The Executive prefers targeted measures promoting continued employment and career development.

Revenues. Projections of the COR will show that even with "extreme" on the legal age assumptions and the period of assessment, the projected financing need plans (approximately EUR 100 billion in 2050) is not fully covered. The Elysee has lifted the taboo on higher levies, fairness. Question is if it will be a measure to reach essentially policy (tax the rich) or if the Executive awaiting important financial receipts. In January, François Fillon also said that the principle of the 2003 law providing for an increase in retirement contributions offset by a decrease in contributions Unedic (prevented by the crisis) was still topical even if it could not intervene immediately.

The level of pensions. For those who are already retired, the Act ensures a continuation of the standard of living, pensions being adjusted at the same rate as inflation. Activity, employees worry about the rate of replacement will they benefit, i.e. the percentage of their last salary will be their first pension. In 2003, the CFDT had obtained that employees who had their careers in the SMIC are insured to receive a pension representing 85 of the minimum wage, via an increase of the minimum contributory"(which increases assessed with low pay periods). This guarantee may be renewed, the Government, seems, step found another recipe miracle. The unions claim that the replacement rate continued to deteriorate for all employees: he fell to 43 of the last salary, when the regime of private (CNAV) database is intended to guarantee 50.

The public service. Raising the legal age or duration of contribution will concern both the public and the private sector, now being harmonised on this point. But beyond "It is one of the subjects of reference, is not necessarily the subject of reference", cautiously said Georges Tron, Secretary of State for public service, yesterday on Radio j. "is a subject that cannot be removed from the overall discussion, but could not as a prerequisite to", he added. A time envisaged by François Fillon, the redesign of the mode of calculation of the pension of officials (based on the last 6 months of salary instead of the best 25 years in the private sector) is the order of the day, since found to be complex and risky: should take more into account premiums for retirement, which would heavily penalize teachers (who shortly). Except to increase wages. Complicated and expensive. The Executive reflects on other measures such as the increase in the rate of assessment, the establishment of a public retirement fund or the end of the right to early after 15 years of service for the mothers of three children.

Family benefits. Other benefits of pension granted in respect of children (old-age insurance of the parents in the home, pension bonuses, etc.) should not be upset. The Government has just reform one of the most important: the increase of periods of insurance, to achieve compliance with European jurisprudence on gender equality.

The special schemes. 2008 Reform provided for the progressive alignment of the duration of contribution of the special schemes (SNCF, RATP, EDF, GDF, etc.) on the scheme of the private sector and Government officials: it will reach 41 years in 2016. But the legal age for departure, he is by no means be harmonized. Railway workers can including 55 years (such as "active" at EDF careers), and even 50 years for train drivers. Likely raising the legal age should logically also touch the special schemes. At the risk of fire to the powder in the undertakings concerned, while the last alors que la dernière réforme reform is fresh. In particular to the SNCF, where the social climate is degraded.

The pension reserve fund. Expected to smooth financing needs after 2020, its very existence will be put on the table. With assets representing a little more than 30 billion euros, its role can only be limited. The Government reflects early use of funds. The current recipe of the RIF - social levy of 2 on the income of the heritage and investments (about 1.5 billion per year) - could be fléchée to the amortization of the social debt (Cades) Fund if it is given, as is likely, new debts to cushion. The assets of the Fund could also be used to pay the accumulated deficits. Jean-François Copé proposes him to use RIF to financing small pensions in him doing support the contributory minimum.

Retirement savings. The Government repeats forever: it's save of retirement plans, not to implement a system based on capitalization. Employers still militates for the creation of a "floor" of capitalization. The CFDT request that the pension savings be made more accessible to the working classes and the employees of SMEs.