The more the government’s rejection reform is dissected, the more the social injustice of the project comes to light. Not only iniquitable and unjustified for all workers, the reform is discriminatory towards women.
Double pain: women already retire later and receive lower pensions, tomorrow they will be more affected by the posting of the age of departure.
Seven more months for women born in 1966 instead of five for men of the same generation, 9 months if they were born in 1972 compared to 5 months for men, 8 months compared to 4 for men of the 1980 generation.
These are the concrete effects of the pension reform, which is being revised by the impact study accompanying the bill presented to the Council of Ministers on 23 January.
Commissioned by the government, the study shows that women will have to put off the age at which they retire, much later than men.
“The government is taken in the jar of jam. It is a new demonstration of the social injustice of the project, it is very serious,” says Sophie Binet, Deputy Secretary General of the Cgt des cadres et techniciens (UGICT-CGT), and pilot of the collective Femmes-Mixité within the confederation.
Interviewed by La Chaîne parlementaire, Franck Riester, the minister for relations with Parliament, was forced to admit it: “Women are obviously a little penalized” (…) We absolutely cannot accept it. (…) It has never been said that everyone is a winner, we ask the French for an effort.” To the French women in particular…
The situation of women is aggravated
Already today, women and men are not equal to retirement. Careers are shorter for women, and that is why the new reform will have a negative impact on women. Because all the reforms that consist in lengthening working hours are at a disadvantage among women, more than that of incomplete careers: 40 per cent retire with an incomplete career.
More people work part-time, have chopped careers because, with the arrival of children, it is overwhelmingly they who suspend their careers or even interrupt them. And to top it all off, “their wages are lower on average than those of men,” the study says. The difference is 28% on average, which affects the amount of pensions, 40% lower on average than men (28% if reversion pensions are included).
The reform does not address these inequalities and further aggravates the situation of women. Already today, about 20% are waiting for the automatic cancellation of the haircut at the age of 67 to retire. Against 10% among men.
“The government is instrumentalizing the cause of women, buts that they will be the big winners of the reform: it is feminism washing. It does not correct inequalities, either in terms of wages or pensions,” denounces Sophie Binet. Proof by the figures for the impact study, and this time, it cannot distort it.