1 / 19

Anne Eydoux, CRESS-Lessor, Rennes 2 University & Center for Employment Studies (CEE) ‏

Anne Eydoux, CRESS-Lessor, Rennes 2 University & Center for Employment Studies (CEE) ‏ Mathieu Béraud, GREE-2L2S, Nancy 2 University Second ASPEN/ETUI-REHS conference - Activation and security March 20-21 2009, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.

vienna
Download Presentation

Anne Eydoux, CRESS-Lessor, Rennes 2 University & Center for Employment Studies (CEE) ‏

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Anne Eydoux, CRESS-Lessor, Rennes 2 University & Center for Employment Studies (CEE)‏ Mathieu Béraud, GREE-2L2S, Nancy 2 University Second ASPEN/ETUI-REHS conference - Activation and security March 20-21 2009, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic Activating the unemployed and modernizing Public employment servicesCurrent challenges regarding security and flexibility

  2. Introduction • Purpose: question French current employment policies aiming at • activating the unemployed • modernising Public employment services • promoting flex-security • Focus on 2 questions • How does the activation strategy influence the labour market segmentation? • Does it contribute to a reconciliation of flexibility and security?

  3. Methodology and overview • Methodology • Theoretical / policy survey • Empirical inquiries in 30 labour market operators (public, private in the profit/non profit sector)‏ • 6 researchers, 3 University teams (Paris 1, Rennes 2, Nancy 2)‏ • Overview • 1. The French activation regime in a comparative perspective • 2. Recent institutional change in France • 3. Recent reforms and current challenges regarding the LM segmentation and flex-security

  4. 1. The French activation regime in a comparative perspective • Different activation models in Europe • The promotion of an « active social state » at the european level • What kind of activation in France ?

  5. Activation models in Europe • Comparative researches underline the diversity of welfare regimes and activations models • A dual representation of activation models (Barbier 2002)‏ • liberal (confidence in market forces / UK)‏ • universal (social welfare through public policies / Dk)‏ • 2 approaches of activation (Barbier 2006)‏ • « generous » versus « punitive » • How to characterise continental countries / Fr?

  6. Toward an active social State • «  Active social State »: a new interpretative framework that • Aims at reconciling social welfare and activation (the promotion of a fully active society)‏ • Insists in the need of a new balance between flexibility and security, rights and duties • promoting individual responsibility, work values and financial incentives • Defending State's responsibility regarding employment • A compromise between a liberal and a social democratic approach of activation

  7. What kind of activation in France? • Shift in the French activation strategy (early 2000's)‏ • Generalisation of personalized job search support • SMP: Monthly personaliseed support since 2006 • Changing rights and duties for the unemployed • Reinforcement of control and sanctions, « adequate / reasonable job offer » • New « policy for employment » (L'Horty 2004) • « making work pay » strategy for the assisted / unemployed • Ex: RSA (Active solidarity income)‏

  8. What about flex-security? • A strategy to reconcile flexibility and security ? • Activation policies promote flexible employment contracts • for instance the New recruitment contract, CNE in 2005 • And the law for modernizing labour market in 2008 • Some measures tend to secure transitions • by improving the level or duration of unemployment compensation • A strategy to secure labour market transitions ? • ... versus a making work pay strategy? • Who is responsible for employment? • The individual / the State ?

  9. 2. Institutional change in France: between rationalisation and inconsistency • Institutional changes (in PES) have been associated to the shift in activation strategy • To make the PES more rational and efficient • These change reshape the labour market segmentation (LMS) in an inconsistent way • Reproducing the existing LMS and statutory inequalities

  10. Restructuring the Public employment services (PES)‏ • The complexity & resulting inefficiencies of French PES are underlined in official reports • Marimbert 2004, Balmary 2004, Cahuc & Kramartz 2005, CERC 2005, etc. • Recent changes reflect these preoccupations • Law for social cohesion (2005)‏ • end of the ANPE's monopoly & extension of PES (3 circles)‏ • ‏Fusion between the ANPE and the Unedic (2008)‏ • creation of the Employment Counter • Joint responsibility for employment (State + PES)‏ • But governance & coordination problems remain

  11. The fusion of ANPE and Unedic: current challenges • Creation of the Employment Counter (Dec)‏ • As shown by experiments in Employment houses, it poses • Technical problems (availability of the electronic file DUDE)‏, practical problems (ANPE and Unedic employees have to do the same work...)‏ • Remaining statutory differences: equal pay for equal work? • It also creates conflicts (and strikes)‏ • An improvement of the efficiency of PES?

  12. Remaining coordination/ governance problems • Competition rather than coordination • ANPE / Pôle emploi: 4000 subcontractors • Adecco: a diversification strategy • Subontracts with the ANPE for competencies assessment • Since 2006: coaching, job-search support • Contracts with local authorities for the assisted • Retravailler: a threatened position • A traditional non-profit actor • Challenged by private actors • Institutional complexity remains

  13. 3rd CIRCLE Public and private organisations 2nd CIRCLE Local actors FIRST CIRCLE Employment Counter (ANPE + Unedic)‏ AFPA Ex : Missions locales, Municipalities Ex : Associations, temporary agencies The 3 circles of French PES

  14. 3. Recent reforms and current challenges regarding the LM segmentation and flex-security • Redesigning unemployment benefits • Reducing the labour market segmentation and the statutory segmentation • Reconciling flexibility and security

  15. Redesigning unemployment benefits • A dual / segmented compensation system • Insurance / solidarity • Assistance is a «third floor» • That produces LMS for the unemployed • Differenciated treatment reflecting the LMS • More benefits & subsidies for the insured • A new compromise (2001) soon contradicted • More generous allowances / reinforced duties • 2003/2006: diminishing allowances • The reform of Dec 23, 2008 maintains the statutory segmentation

  16. The insurance/solidarity schemes and social aid

  17. Reducing the labour market segmentation ? • How do recent changes impact the LMS? • Reinforcement of the segmented treatment of the unemployed? • Private actors dealing with the unemployed having the highest employability • While public or non profit actors care for the other unemployed • The reforms of 2008 • Maintains the segmentation of unemployment benefits (insurance/ solidarity/ assistance)‏ • But aims at reducing statutory segmentation for activation measures

  18. Reconciling flexibility and security? • Security, the undelivered goods • Recent reforms aim at promoting a French flex-security • The Individual right to training (DIF), 2004 • The New recruitment contract (CNE), 2005 • The law for the modernization of labour market, 2008 • Not a success story • these reforms hardly promote income and LM transitions' security for precarious workers • Making work pay versus securing transitions and incomes

  19. Conclusion • French activation strategy • Remains midway between a liberal and social-democratic model • Includes major institutional reforms • Recent institutional changes and policy reforms remain insufficient • To reduce the complexity of French PES • To cope with the statutory segmentation of the unemployed / assisted • To secure labour market transitions • These problems still constitute the current challenges of the French strategy

More Related