Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
As linca points out, the pension scheme is part of the job offer that current workers have chosen. Going back on it brutally is tearing up the contract. If a change appears necessary, it should be phased in gradually, by negotiation, not imposed.

Have you got any data to back up your sob-sob stuff about poor doctors paying for everybody else? Or did you read it in the Fig-Mag?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 at 01:59:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
my snob-sob as you say has a name "surcompensation" and it is not new it has been created in 1986 but the state that usually was giving the money back decided to stop it unilaterally :

http://www.senat.fr/bulletin/20061218/soc.html

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 at 03:18:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Chirac in his ultra-liberal version...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 at 03:38:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, there are complicated systems of compensation between different national pension schemes that could no doubt be usefully cleared up.

But your "50% of doctors' pension contributions for farmers and SNCF" is nonsense. Look at the document you link to:

Commission des affaires sociales : bulletin de la semaine du 18 décembre 2006 Commission for social questions: weekly bulletin 18 Dec 2006
Le bilan des flux cumulés des mécanismes de « compensation » et de « surcompensation » fait apparaître un petit nombre de contributeurs nets. Il s'agit essentiellement du régime général, pour 5,1 milliards d'euros, c'est-à-dire 6,5 % de ses produits, de la caisse nationale de retraite des agents des collectivités locales (CNRACL) pour 2,6 milliards d'euros, soit plus de 20 % de ses produits, et de l'Etat, au titre de la fonction publique, pour 1,7 milliard d'euros, c'est-à-dire 4 % des charges de pensions du budget. Sont également concernées la caisse nationale des industries électriques et gazières pour 131 millions d'euros (4 % des produits du régime), la caisse nationale d'assurance vieillesse des professions libérales (CNAVPL) pour 371 millions d'euros, soit 32 % de ses produits, et la caisse nationale des barreaux français. The balance of aggregate flows of the mechanisms of "compensation" and "surcompensation" shows a small number of net contributors. They are essentially the general (salaried workers) system, paying €5.1 bn, that is 6.5% of its income, the local government employees' pensions scheme pays €2.6 bn, or over 20% of its income, and the State under the heading of the civil service, pays €1.7 bn, or 4% of the pensions section of the budget. Also concerned are the electric and gas industries' pensions scheme for €131 mn (4% of income), the liberal professions' pensions scheme (CNAVPL) for €371 mn, or 32% of its income, and the barristers' pension scheme.

Doctors, through their scheme (CARMF) pay into the CNAVPL, that pays 32% of its receipts to the compensation and surcompensation schemes. Which pay out to:

Commission des affaires sociales : bulletin de la semaine du 18 décembre 2006
les exploitants agricoles perçoivent en effet à eux seuls 4,3 milliards d'euros et les salariés agricoles 2,2 milliards d'euros, soit plus de 60 % des flux redistribués. Viennent ensuite les régimes des mines pour 1,2 milliard d'euros, des commerçants pour 0,9 milliard d'euros, des artisans (0,5 milliard d'euros) et de la SNCF (337 millions d'euros). [retired] farmers alone receive €4.3 bn and farm labourers €2.2 bn, or 60% of the redistributed flows. Next come the mines pension scheme with €1.2 bn, shopkeepers with €0.9 bn, craftsmen (€0.5 bn), and the SNCF (€337 mn).

So the main subsidies concern branches of activity that have undergone demographic change that has left a small number of payers-in covering a large number of pensioners (farming, coal-mining, shopkeepers and craftsmen). SNCF only receives about 3% of the total (according to my calculation).

So making this a beef against the régimes spéciaux seems unjustified, it really involves branches whose numbers have gone down dramatically, (and not only farmers, for that matter). And the proportion of doctors' contributions is not 50%, but considerably less (32%).

And what doctors' contributions are those? Only the obligatory minimum national pensions scheme payments (doctors will contribute to other schemes that will benefit them exclusively; the national minimum is a social solidarity system). How does that pan out for most doctors? I could give you the details (from a liberal professions' tax handbook, I haven't got a link, sorry), but most will be paying the ceiling, which, for 2006 income, was €4,334. 32% of that is €1,387. These are professionals who average more than €80,000 p.a. in net (of expenses inc social contributions) before-tax income. Sob-sob.

There may be an over-complicated system that needs overhaul, but essentially this is about redistribution and solidarity (and has little to do with the régimes spéciaux, as your document proves). And, if one is worried about privilege and inequality, perhaps one should be concerned about this:


Le Monde

Doctors' (top three) income has risen faster than salaried workers (bottom line, flat for several years). This graph stops in 2004, but the trend has continued since.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 at 05:58:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Another item, of course, is the demographic balance of the SNCF, with about 500,000 pensioners for 100,000 workers. There's an additional payment by the French State to cover that demographic unbalance:

http://www.entreprise-sncf.com/mieux_nous/RA2006/SNCF-RF-2006.pdf


Retraites (contribution d'équilibre - art. 30)

Le système de retraite de la SNCF résulte principalement de la loi du 21 juillet 1909, définissant le régime particulier des agents de la SNCF, et de l'article 30 du cahier des charges de la SNCF définissant, depuis le 1er janvier 1970, les conditions de prise en charge par l'État de l'équilibre financier du régime, dans le respect du règlement européen de 1969. En effet, en contrepartie du versement par la SNCF de cotisations « normalisées » à la Caisse des retraites, l'État verse une contribution au titre de l'article 30 du cahier des charges de la SNCF. Le taux de cotisation « normalisé » est déterminé sur la base de la population des cotisants et des pensionnés de la SNCF, corrigée de son déséquilibre démographique par rapport à celle des régimes de retraite de droit commun. Ce taux de cotisation a été régulièrement révisé jusqu'en 1990. Le décret du 27 février 1991 le fixe à 36,29 % de la masse salariale, se répartissant entre 7,85 % pour la part salariale et 28,44 % pour la part patronale. Par ailleurs, les nouveaux avantages propres au régime SNCF, créés depuis 1990 par rapport au régime de référence, sont à la charge de la SNCF et de ses salariés. Les différents avantages créés portent sur la définition de l'assiette des pensions liquidables (intégration successives de points d'indemnités de résidence, mise en place du nouveau système de rémunération) et sur le relèvement du niveau minimum des pensions. Pour l'année 2006 le taux financé par l'entreprise était de 5,29 % de la masse salariale liquidable.



In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 at 06:20:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Another item, of course, is the demographic balance of the SNCF, with about 500,000 pensioners for 100,000 workers.

A solution: expand the rail network, reopening branch lines and building new ones, and hire an additional 100,000 people to work on rebuilding, expanding, and operating the new services. And it would reduce unemployment, too!

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 23rd, 2007 at 05:19:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, I can see Sarkozy et al actually increasing union membership...
by paving on Tue Oct 23rd, 2007 at 03:21:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
On the subject of how the appalling French welfare state unfairly takes money from one category to hand it out to another (the old Thatcherite refrain), I forgot to mention this one:

all self-employed people in France pay contributions to the national health insurance scheme; the base is their expenses-deducted before-tax income, and the rate is 0.5% up to the Social Security "ceiling" (€31K approx for 2006), and 5.19% beyond that.

But doctors only pay 0.11%, with no increase above the "ceiling". In other words, they get a huge cut in their national health contributions, and other people have to fork out the difference.

fredouil seems to believe these poor individuals are oppressed by "privileged" rail workers etc.

LOL.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Oct 20th, 2007 at 02:00:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series