On the question of pensions, Laurent Berger had already been very firm: no question of pushing back the legal age of departure to 65, as promised by Emmanuel Macron. But the CFDT activists, meeting in congress in Lyon from Monday June 13 to Friday June 17, asked their secretary general to beef up his speech, even if it meant shaking it up a bit. This episode shows, once again, how the subject is ultra-sensitive, including within the central cedist, which has nevertheless endorsed reforms – particularly in 2003 – synonymous with increased efforts to collect his pension. The fact that France’s leading trade union is raising its voice again is not good news for the government, if it is to implement the President of the Republic’s desire to “work longer” population.
The debate within the CFDT focused on a sentence in the draft “general resolution” – the document which, once rewritten and approved by the delegates, serves as a roadmap for the organisation. The few offending words reaffirmed that the CFDT allows an increase in the contribution period to respond to the increase in life expectancy. In the ” home “ Cedto, it is, for years, a constant line. It had also led the confederation to accept the Touraine law of January 2014, which gradually brings to 172 quarters the time of affiliation required to receive a full pension.
But the wording used in the resolution was deemed ambiguous by the Interco de la Somme union. She “could fuel unjust reform”estimated, Thursday, its secretary general, Arnaud Espel, whose intervention was vigorously applauded by the assistance, gathered in the vast amphitheater of the International City of Lyon. “Is it up to us and, above all, is it the right time to go back to the parameters? »he wondered, expressing an apprehension shared by other components of the plant.
Frédéric Sève, the national secretary in charge of the file, tried to dispel fears by explaining that the resolution, in its initial version, only repeated a doctrine that” we (…) hammers for a long time ». “We don’t need to change it to counter government projects, quite the contrary”, he added. The day before, Mr. Berger had been even more direct: ” We do not have (…) the intention to validate an extension of the contribution period beyond what is provided for by the Touraine law”, he had said. And to apostrophize the room: “My friends, no unnecessary warning, no bad debates between us, no groundless fear. »
You have 50.03% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.