The financing of social partners continues to be shrouded in a thick fog, despite the measures adopted ten years ago to try to put an end to the opacity which prevailed at the time. This is one of the main messages formulated by the Court of Auditors in a rather harsh report made public on May 24. She scanned the association which manages the joint fund responsible for distributing subsidies to unions and employers. This structure, which was to carry out “transparency”n / A “not reached” its objective, according to the magistrates of Rue Cambon, in Paris. To make matters worse, it has freed itself from certain legal obligations, which has earned it a firm refocusing.
Created by a law of March 2014, the joint fund is managed by an association in which representatives of employees and business leaders sit. The aim of such a device is to “simplify” and of ” clarify “ the circuits of resources irrigating social actors, at the origin of several scandals in the past – for example that triggered, in 2007, by the “slush fund” of the metallurgical employers. It also involves granting credits to organizations that fulfill “missions of general interest”as the Court of Auditors recalls in its report.
The fund in question is funded in two ways: a contribution paid by companies (which is equivalent to 0.016% of their payroll) and subsidies from the State. The money thus collected reaches substantial levels: nearly 142.5 million euros in 2022. This windfall is then redistributed to unions and employer movements – the former receiving, in total, almost twice as much as the latter . In 2022, the CFDT pocketed 22 million euros, while the Medef was granted 13.6 million euros.
“Contestable” procedure
The managing association, governed by the social partners, divides the cake. The problem, according to the Court of Auditors, is that the distribution “obeys multiple and parallel rules which make the flow of funds difficult to assess”. A difficulty far from being trivial because the number of beneficiaries is large, particularly on the employers’ side: some 340 sectoral employer organizations receive aid, sometimes for symbolic amounts (18 euros for a structure defending the interests of fishermen- craftsmen…).
In addition, the breakdown of credits is carried out in a manner “artisanal”relying, in part, on an information system “unsuitable” (“simple Excel tables”). “Despite the good will of the agents”this situation represents “a major risk, the slightest mistake could lead to anomalies in the calculation”.
You have 38.99% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.