Two weeks before the strike on December 5 and while the SNCF will take a major step, in six weeks, with the end of the recruitment of agents status, the Court of Auditors released Monday a report where it particularly targets free travel to which railway workers and their families are entitled.

Rigidity of the organization of work, too low versatility of agents, abnormally high absenteeism rate, salary increase too dependent on seniority ... Big chapters are devoted to these different topics in the report of the Court of Auditors on the human resources policy of the SNCF. At the end of the report, the Court of Auditors also examines free travel for railway workers and their families. On that, she said, there would be a lot to see again too. The report comes in a tense context. On 5 December, the main unions of the SNCF and the RATP call to stop work to protest the pension reform.

In the railway language, we call it the "circulation facilities". They exist since the creation of the SNCF in 1938 and they allow to travel either free or with a reduction of 90%. In 2013, the Court of Auditors recommended reducing the scope of beneficiaries. Keep railwaymen, their spouses and their children, yes, but exclude the parents and grandparents of the railwayman and those of his spouse who were entitled to four free return trips a year.

Direct and indirect costs

Finally, the requests of the Court of Auditors were not satisfied because the railwaymen always have this right. In total, says the court, in six years, the number of beneficiaries has jumped 20% and the cost of these facilities for SNCF is now 220 million euros per year. This is the direct cost. But there is also an indirect cost: the presence of many beneficiaries of these traffic facilities in complete or near-complete trains results in the fact that some customers can no longer take the trains in question.

"This effect is all the more damaging," says the court of auditors, "that it often concerns connections in full time with high potential revenue." In lost revenue, it would cost 30 million euros per year. Hence the court's double recommendation: to reduce for good the perimeter of the beneficiaries of these circulation facilities and to limit the days and the time slots where one can benefit from them.