- The two bills creating a "universal system" of point pensions are presented this Friday in the Council of Ministers.
- 20 Minutes has sent your questions about the future reform to one of its defenders.
- Deputy La République en Marche Olivier Véran, future rapporteur for the National Assembly, answered your questions on the pivotal age, the arduousness, or even the concept of a full career.
For months, the subject of pensions has been at the heart of the debates. But many French people are still wondering about government reform. The two bills are presented to the Council of Ministers this Friday. Pivotal age, full career, consideration of arduousness ... 20 Minutes offered to send your questions to a defender of the bill, the deputy La République en Marche Olivier Véran, one of the rapporteurs of the reform at National Assembly.
You were close to 200 to answer us. We have selected your questions and asked them to the elected representative of Isère, a doctor by training and a former nursing assistant.
To begin, a question for all people born before 1975. Corinne and Frédéric ask us if the reform will modify their pension. Do you guarantee that their retirement will not be modified in any way by your reform?
Only people born from 1975 are affected by the changeover to the universal scheme. For special schemes, longer transition periods are provided. For everyone else, nothing will change.
Won't they be affected by the pivotal age?
Initially, it was planned that all French people, whatever their pension scheme and date of birth, would have a pivotal age, gradually introduced in 2022, to reach 64 years in 2027. But this part has been removed from the text by the Prime Minister. A conference of funders will make proposals at the end of April to fill the foreseeable deficit over the 2027-2037 period. Because there is an unknown factor: how are we going to finance the balance of the system over this period? It will depend on the conclusions of this conference. If they are adapted, we will not put this pivotal age back in the bill.
On the other hand, the bill provides, by 2037, for the progressive reduction of the equilibrium age, which could reach 64 years, for French people born after 1975.
Several Internet users wonder about the age from which they can leave with a full-rate retirement. Roland and Isabelle ask: "How many quarters does a complete career correspond to? If the number of quarters is reached at 60, can you retire without suffering a discount? "
The contribution period has gradually lengthened, notably with the Touraine law in 2013. Today, you have to contribute for 43 years to receive a full-rate retirement. In practice, the French enter the workforce at 22 years of age on average, so this allows them to leave at 65 if they have contributed for 43 years. The age of balance that we propose is below, at 64 years old.
Today, if you started working late, at 25, or if you had a choppy career, you cannot retire at full rate at 62. You must be up to age 67. With this reform, you can stop working two to three years earlier.
Several readers wonder about long careers, like Jérôme, Jean-François, or Anne. Will there be an exemption for people who started working young, so that they retire before the equilibrium age without discount?
Yes, depending on the situation of each. In principle, people who started working early will have to contribute the equivalent of 43 years, in terms of points.
Laurène is worried: “will the age of balance evolve over the years? "
Every 5 years, the system will have to be balanced. A golden rule, enshrined in law, will oblige governments to deal with the deficit and find a solution with the social partners.
So every 5 years, it will be possible for a government to raise this age of equilibrium?
We believe that an equilibrium age set at 65 in 20 to 30 years will make it possible to balance the pension system in the long term. Conversely, if there are good surprises - falling unemployment, growth, birth rate - then the equilibrium age or the level of contributions can be lowered.
On the point, Dominique asks how many euros of gross salary will allow to acquire a point?
10 euros will acquire a point.
Michel asks: "on what criteria will the point value be established and by whom? Will it be indexed, for example on inflation, wages, or growth? Can it be frozen? "
The value of the point cannot be lowered under any circumstances. It will be enshrined in law. So pensions can only increase.
Or remain stable?
As we are going to index the point on wages, which are rising faster than prices, we expect them to increase, as long as we have growth in the country.
Can the item be frozen?
The value of the point cannot drop, it will be in a golden rule that we put in the law. And we index the point on wages.
Renaud asks: "Can you explain by what magic trick a retirement calculated over a whole career will be more favorable to employees than a retirement calculated over the best 25 years?" "
For private sector employees, today we take their best 25 years to calculate their pension, but we take nothing else into account. Careers are very often hit by periods of unemployment, disability, illness, maternity. There are very few linear careers over 43 years. Until now, people who had career breaks were forced to work longer hours and had lower pensions. This will no longer be the case with the point system.
Won't these points acquired during periods of unemployment be less financially attractive than a pension calculated on the 25 best wages?
On a case by case basis, we will have to look. But today, 310 billion euros are paid into pensions each year, or 14% of GDP. This percentage will not decrease, so we will distribute a gradually increasing amount of money.
Yes, but the number of retirees is also increasing, as Guy points out, who asks why you are not increasing the share of GDP spent on pensions?
If you increase it, you will have to lower other budgets (hospital, education, etc.). The COR (Pensions Guidance Council) forecasts that 14% of GDP will guarantee that the overall level of pensions for French people will not fall in the next 30 years. It could even increase, because the GDP generally increases faster than the number of retirees [+ 1.7% in 2018, while the number of retirees increased by 1.5% in one year].
Pierre wonders: how much will the minimum pension amount for people who have not been able to make a full career?
It is not part of the bill. There is already ASPA (Solidarity Allowance for the Elderly or ASPA), which we have increased by 100 euros per month for three years, bringing the minimum old age to 1,000 euros per month.
Several internet users, like Julien, wonder about the universality of the reform and the exemptions granted to certain professions (pilots, truck drivers, SNCF agents, EDF). Jean-Michel adds: how can you continue to declare that this reform is fair, advantageous, and "at the same time" having to grant certain professions to keep their old system?
The system is universal because each euro contributed gives the right to the same benefits. The value of the point is the same for everyone and there is only one national fund, instead of 42 funds. But this is not a uniform reform, we take into account the specific differences specific to each profession, in particular the arduousness.
Certain professions, such as lawyers, will however be able to keep their funds?
For professions that have functional autonomous funds, we can temporarily offer them a delegation of public service: the universal fund will delegate part of its missions to the autonomous fund.
Ghislain, in the construction industry (buildings and public works), wonders about taking into account the arduousness of his job. What will be the criteria for leaving early with a full retirement?
Today, arduousness is treated differently according to pension plans, even when the professions are identical, between private and public for example. We want to set up identical criteria for everyone. The C2P (professional prevention account) will be open to officials and employees of special schemes. 250,000 additional French will be able to retire two years earlier [Unions denounce at the same time the end of early departures for many public officials exposed to the hardship].
Then, we will better take into account night work, by lowering the thresholds, especially for nursing staff. Finally, those who have worked for several years in arduous positions will be able to reduce their working time when they approach retirement, without losing their rights.
In 2017, the government nevertheless removed four arduousness criteria (handling heavy loads, painful postures, mechanical vibrations and chemical risks) out of the ten previously taken into account by the C2P…
The four criteria removed were considered to be ineffective and not very applicable. But today, the issue of arduousness is in the hands of the social partners.
Cyril asks: How can you explain that people earning more than 10,000 euros per month will only contribute 2.81% while other people receiving less than 10,000 euros will contribute 28%?
From 10,000 euros per month, you will only contribute 2.81%, but you will not have any new rights. This corresponds to less than 1% of French people.
But according to Agir-Arrco, this would represent a shortfall of 3.7 billion per year between 2025 and 2040 ...
In the first years only, the transition period. Then it will save money.
Benoît asks if this lowered contribution is not used to “force high wages to invest in a funded pension? "
We also note that those with very high income levels already have a funded pension system. It is not a gift to the wealthy at all.
Several readers point out the difficulties of seniors in finding a job. Christine asks you if your reform, setting an equilibrium age at 64, will not put these people out of work?
The employment of seniors is a real problem in our country. All governments have broken their teeth so far. It is essential to match the age of balance to a large employment plan for seniors for our country.
Economy
Pension reform: What does the interim impact study of the future point system reveal?
Politics
Pension reform: A crucial week for the government and for the opponents
- LREM
- Retirement
- Pension reform
- Economy
- Government