The social partners and the presidential election

Download article in original language : FR0204106FFR.DOC

Prior to the first round of voting in France's presidential elections on 21 April 2002, trade unions and employers' associations entered the debate. This feature reviews the social partners' various positions and demands, as well as some of the candidates' proposals in the areas of social affairs and industrial relations.

The first round of France's presidential election was held was held on 21 April 2002, with the two candidates winning the greatest share of the vote proceeding to a run-off on 5 May. This feature examines the positions of trade unions and employers' associations in the run-up to the first round of voting. It was written before the vote on 21 April, which saw the incumbent President of the Republic, Jacques Chirac, the candidate supported by the conservative Movement for the Republic (Rassemblement pour la République, RPF) and - to widespread surprise - Jean-Marie Le Pen, the candidate supported by the extreme-right National Front (Front National), topping the poll and proceeding to the second round. Lionel Jospin, the Prime Minister in the current coalition government led by the Socialist Party (Parti Socialiste, PS), came only third in the first round of voting and was thus eliminated.

The social partners kept a relatively low profile at the beginning of the presidential campaign, but began to make their voice heard as it progressed. The various issues, such as safety and fighting crime in particular, initially raised by candidates did not fall directly under their jurisdiction. However, as soon as debate turned to pensions, taxation and the overhaul of specific ministerial departments, the various unions and employers` associations decided to get involved in the debate.

Background

As a rule of thumb, both trade unions and employers' associations refrain from supporting any of the political parties or, as is the case in presidential elections, candidates either affiliated with or running on the ticket of a particular party. This being said, affinities have long existed with political parties. Prior to the early 1980s, employers' associations did not attempt to hide their links with conservative and centrist parties and parliamentary groups, while the General Confederation of Labour (Confédération générale du travail, CGT) maintained a privileged relationship with the French Communist Party (Parti Communiste Français, PCF), with several of its senior officials sitting on the leadership bodies of the party. The powerful National Education Federation (Fédération de l'éducation nationale, FEN) trade union shared leaders and political ideas with the PS. Lastly, the PS and the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (Confédération française démocratique du travail, CFDT) developed closer ties in the 1970s.

The active role played by the PS in most French governments since the early 1980s, the collapse of the Soviet Union and its allies and the decline of the PCF, have all brought about a lasting change in the relationship between the trade unions and employers' associations on the one hand and political parties on the other, especially those on the left of the political spectrum.

In the past few years, the relationship between the Jospin government and some trade unions and political organisations became significantly strained over talks on the 'industrial relations overhaul' initiative launched by the Movement of French Enterprises (Mouvement des entreprises de France, MEDEF) employers' confederation (FR0002143F), especially when the government refused in 2000 to endorse an agreement on unemployment benefit reform (FR0009190F) negotiated by the employers and some union confederations. CFDT, along with other unions and employers' organisations that had signed the deal, criticised the government for failing to empower the social partners to negotiate solutions to various problems. Even before then, the relationship had been strained when all trade unions and employers' associations opposed government attempts (FR9910112F) to use part of the surplus in the social security fund, which is jointly managed by the social partners, to finance subsidies for private companies related to the introduction of the legislation on the 35-hour week (FR0001137F).

Employers' associations seek right to take part in election debate

The Jospin government's decision in 1997 to legislate to implement the 35-hour working week resulted in a direct face-off with CNPF, MEDEF's predecessor (FR9710169F). MEDEF has continued to criticise severely what it sees as unacceptable state encroachment in an area over which the social partners have jurisdiction. Indeed, this jurisdiction has never been clearly defined in France. The president of MEDEF, Ernest-Antoine Seillière, has sought the right to 'participate' in the political debate. This led to an extraordinary MEDEF congress held in Lyons on 15 January 2002, which passed nine resolutions calling for major change in areas such as working time, industrial relations, training, social security and taxation, aimed at launching a debate with both trade unions and political parties in the run-up to the presidential and parliamentary elections in the first half of 2002 (FR0202103N). The president of MEDEF also met with most presidential candidates, but not with Prime Minister Jospin.

Overall, MEDEF has been critical of the 'lack of backbone' shown by all the presidential candidates in terms of the reforms which it deems essential for the French economy. These include overhauling the pensions system, implementing a minimum level of service to be provided by public services during strikes, and cutting funding for the civil service and the healthcare system.

Even if some of MEDEF's demands found their way into the manifestos of several presidential candidates, the organisation did not wish officially to 'label' these candidates as its preferred options. However, MEDEF was pleased to see that its demands found some favour with the public. According to a MEDEF-sponsored poll, the vast majority of people polled (59%) deemed it quite 'appropriate' that MEDEF use the election campaign to publicise its economic and social demands. An even greater percentage of people interviewed supported the various initiatives demanded by MEDEF. However, it should be noted that for the purposes of the poll, people were only asked about the major aspects of these proposals, which concern the creation of a training savings account or relaxed implementation of the 35-hour working week. The idea of enhancing collective bargaining rather than legislation was also very well received (71% support).

Criticism from Chirac and changes in Jospin`s position

President Chirac has taken on board in his re-election campaign some of the criticism that MEDEF has continually levelled at the Jospin government over its failure to consult employers' associations. Some of Mr Chirac's most high-profile political supporters have also developed proposals designed to enhance social dialogue. These include former employment minister, Jacques Barrot (quoted in the Le Figaro newspaper on 13 April 2002) or Jean-Pierre Raffarin, who has called for 'new industrial relations governance' (quoted in Libération on 18 February 2002).

Whereas Prime Minister Jospin had earlier appeared ready to ignore criticism, when on several occasions the government managed to impose its approach on the social partners - in keeping with its concept of how to maintain 'social order'- he seemed to alter his position during the election campaign. In a book-long interview, entitled Le temps de répondre, published to coincide with the start of the election campaign, Mr Jospin renewed his criticism of the CFDT general secretary, Nicole Notat, for her trade union's 'privileged partnership with MEDEF', which was hostile to him.

However, he also rejected any interpretation of the government's attitude as hostility towards addressing social issues through negotiation between the social partners. On a practical note, in his book, Mr Jospin set out his intention – if elected President - to organise a major 'tripartite economic and social conference' with trade unions and employers' associations as early as summer 2002. This conference would deal with burning social issues, such as pension and social security reform and vocational training. Some of these issues were supposed to have been the subject of bipartite negotiations within the framework of the 'industrial relations overhaul' process. However, disagreement between unions and employers' associations meant that these negotiations had to be suspended (FR0111123F).

The groundwork for the development of closer ties between Jospin and the trade unions was carried out in a series of meetings between a delegation of Jospin campaign officials, headed by Jean-Christophe Cambadélis, and the leadership of the main unions. In an attempt to entrench the closer ties developed with CFDT, Lionel Jospin met the current general secretary and her most likely successor, François Chérèque.

CFDT manifesto and Jospin's reply

In a 'manifesto ' adopted by the CFDT's executive council on 28 February 2002 and officially unveiled on 1 March, the union confederation set out seven 'demands' for presidential candidates. These included:

1. shared responsibilities between the government and the social partners. CFDT demanded 'specific commitments', including the redefinition of trade union representativeness rules, criteria for the validity of collective agreements and procedures for consultation between the government and the social partners. These demands stem from issues dealt with in the common position on collective bargaining reform agreed by the social partners on 16 July 2001 (FR0108163F);

2. 'new commitments to extend and enhance' job creation. These include applying the reduced working week across the board;

3. pension reforms guaranteeing the ratio between the pension and previous pay, and full pensions after a 40-year contribution period;

4. increased leeway for the joint-management of sickness insurance funds by unions and employers' associations;

5. modernisation of government to improve efficiency, and the replacement of retiring public employees by new recruits;

6. taxation reform, - not simply tax cuts (an idea deemed as 'dangerous'), but rather the development of a fairer taxation system, which would require that the incremental taxation system be maintained; and

7. commitments designed to boost the European Union's role as a major stakeholder in 'world governance' and rule-setting at a global level.

Commenting on this manifesto, Ms Notat stated that the first demand stands at the heart of the CFDT approach. She spoke out against the French political culture which allegedly gives the government 'absolute control over social issues'. CFDT considers this concept to be 'an endangered species', a source of government inefficiency and a 'limitation on the effectiveness of the social partners'. Ms Notat went on to say that under the current system, the social partners are relegated to a role of lobbyists rather than empowered stakeholders. She also condemned a perceived shift towards the promotion of special interests and demand escalation, which undermine the common public interest. By stating that Mr Chirac had gained a 'slight lead' over Mr Jospin in terms of asserting the autonomy of the social partners, Ms Notat indirectly pointed to the fact that the CFDT manifesto was mainly addressed to the current government and Mr Jospin. Lastly, she put forward her own vision of confederal trade unionism as the 'architect of collective interests which participate in the public interest'.

In his reply to the CFDT manifesto, Mr Jospin clearly positioned himself closer to the CFDT vision and even its terminology. He demonstrated his intention to distribute more effectively responsibilities between the government and the social partners by coming out in favour of 'substantially strengthening social democracy by enhancing the role for trade unions, civil society and a collective bargaining rather than legislation-based system'. He also referred to key issues raised by what has come to be known as the 'second left', a movement made up of CFDT and the former 'Rocardist' minority within the PS.

Mr Jospin backed up his reply to the manifesto with public statements, in which he conceded that although the trade unions 'represent specific interests', it is appropriate for them to have their 'own vision of the public interest'. Unlike Mr Chirac, Mr Jospin also addressed topics that had previously been considered 'off limits'. These included the need to overhaul trade union representativeness criteria so as to allow majority-based collective agreements (FR9909104F). Consequently, he took the risk of upsetting those trade unions which are opposed to such a move.

Other positions

CGT forwarded a 'memorandum ' to the various candidates. It addressed the whole range of social topics such as pensions, working conditions, purchasing power, taxation, industrial policy, workers' rights and social democracy. Bernard Thibault, the CGT general secretary, also raised these points in various press interviews. He stated that it is essential for politicians and lawmakers to take action on workers' rights and employers' obligations. He challenged the idea that legislation hinders collective bargaining, focusing instead on what he called 'the employers' revenge mentality' and MEDEF's perceived refusal to commit to a genuine negotiation process. He advocated that the principle of retirement at 60 be retained and that the research recently carried out by the Pensions Stewardship Council (Comité d'orientation des retraites) be used as a basis for the consideration of possible overhaul options (FR0201112F).

On 26 and 27 March 2002, the General Confederation of Labour-Force ouvrière (Confédération générale du travail-Force ouvrière, CGT-FO) issued a 'formal statement ' urging all presidential candidates to: safeguard the future of the welfare system and the principle of retirement at 60; promote sustained growth in order to provide jobs and income for all; develop a fairer taxation system; and maintain robust public services. On the issue of social dialogue and collective bargaining, CGT-FO called for the current structure of agreements to be maintained. It also urged: the articulation of legislation and negotiated agreements while maintaining the current procedure for the extension of collective agreements; the enhancement and simplification of the procedure for challenging collective agreements; and the elimination of the workforce-size threshold for appointing union delegates in small companies. However, CGT-FO did not agree that only collective agreements signed by unions representing a majority of relevant workers should be recognised as valid.

The National Federation of Independent Unions (Union nationale des syndicats autonomes, UNSA) sent out a 'manifesto' to the various presidential candidates, which mainly focused on the overhaul of the French collective bargaining system. UNSA suggested that majority support be made the standard for the validation of agreements both in the private and public sectors. It also called for the repeal of the 1966 decree on trade union representative status and suggested that the legitimacy and representative status of unions be directly based on workplace election results (FR9909104F). UNSA has published the various candidates' replies to its manifesto on its website.

In spite of the fact that the French Christian Workers' Confederation (Confédération française des travailleurs chrétiens, CFTC) and the French Confederation of Professional and Managerial Staff-General Confederation of Professional and Managerial Staff (Confédération française de l'encadrement-Confédération générale des cadres, CFE-CGC) are opposed to overhauling the criteria governing unions' representative status, they were pleased to see that both Mr Chirac and Mr Jospin were promoting a greater role for collective bargaining.

CFE-CGC published its own proposals on industrial relations and social affairs, and the responses of some candidates, while refusing to take a formal position in favour of one of them.

Commentary

No matter what the final outcome of the presidential elections, clarification and redefinition of the respective role of the government and the social partners in terms of industrial issues is to be expected. The two main candidates in the first round of voting (prior to Mr Jospin's unexpected elimination) were indeed in favour of 'giving renewed importance' to the role of collective bargaining and of changing the ground rules. It remains to be seen whether these amendments will be sufficient to enable agreements to be struck between social partners or between the government and the social partners on issues dogged by deep-rooted disagreement. Nevertheless, there are undoubtedly opportunities for the government to involve the trade unions and employers' associations in structural reforms in such a way as to avoid the major conflicts that the Chirac-Juppé government had to face when it attempted to overhaul the welfare system in 1995, without consultation with the trade unions. (Maurice Braud and Udo Rehfeldt, IRES)