well in the UK that hasn’t been the case for 20-30 years. Public service jobs used indeed to be often as you’ve mentioned. But since things got tougher around 2000 give or take, public service jobs quite often have better pay, better conditions and considerably more job security than the private sector. Shakeouts etc nothing on a scale compared to life in the private sector.
No idea about France, workers of all sorts seem better protected here but one does get the feeling that there are extra benefits to being a functionary here too.
Pedigree miniature poodles are exceptional dogs: not just très mignon, but highly intelligent, lively and spirited, they’re great fun to be with and have a much longer average life span than big dogs. They’re also welcomed and respected everywhere in France from Air France cabins to upmarket Parisian restos (where they’re often offered their own chair).
Sadly, they’re also comparatively rare, yet are so French (which may be why ‘poodle’ is also an English derogatory term).
Our architect who was moving back to Cluny wanted to rent a farmhouse but was refused because of his profession.
The owner only let to fonctionnaires because she knew she would get her money.
The quintessential liberal attitude: congratulate yourself on your concern for others, which, in the end, doesn’t actually count for anything at all.
It is Orwellian newspeak to call Macron’s project of law a “reform” when it is more properly a “confiscation” of benefits for which the participants have already paid. Moreover, the lifespan of the lower paid half of the workforce hasn’t increased much, if any. Therefore, if there is going to be a funding shortfall at some point in the future, it should be the upper half of the workforce that should pay for it, either in higher payroll taxes or delayed benefits.
I find it odd that the discussion here focuses exclusively on confiscation of benefits as a funding solution without considering raising taxes, especially on the most well-off.
With the UK being a far, far worse case in point given the financial markets they host and the volume of transactions in them. Where tiny, tiny transaction charges on the massive capital flows
they host could transforn life for the people without scaring off the flow owners concerned.
But unfortunately, looking round the world, even sideways at other European countries, confiscation of what’s been earned by the un-wealthy has been the way chosen by governments.
In fact at 64 I think the books will still be far from balancing if the French government continues to also refuse to allocate other finance. In fact I’d say they’ve only got half the job done and another round will be necessary very soon on current funding basis.
Like so many things in labour protection and other protections and support I wish there was more awareness amongst voters, particularly the young, of how much the French government does to delay and soften the impact of negative forces operating worldwide, on its citizens. They have no idea how bad it can get. We from the UK have had more exposure to these forces and our government has not done as much to protect us.
Yes, it’s unfortunate that inequality is on the rise in the EU with the connivance of governments, but the other EU members do not have the history of regimes toppled by public protest with heads on pikes that characterizes the French.
Yes, undoubtedly. Baby boomers in an essor of retirement everywhere around the world.
Baby boomers are indeed the pig-in-the-python, but that is not the main reason for possible shortfalls in the future, at least with respect to US Social Security, which is the system I am familiar with. At least half of shortfalls in SS funding is due to companies having contrived methods of compensation to escape the payroll tax, which is the unique funding source for SS. These kinds of compensation include tax-deferred retirement accounts funded with payroll deductions such as IRAs and 401k accounts, Health Savings Accounts, stock options, and others. Payroll tax is not collected on any such transfers, neither from the worker nor the employer. At one time 93% of compensation was subject to payroll tax in the US, but it’s now down to 83% IRRC.
So, that’s one example of the kind of problem created by policies that benefit the upper echelons that end up being paid for by confiscations of the less well-off, all in the name of economic necessity.
Seems unlikely. Combining the left groups with the RN appears to leave a motion of censure about forty votes short. Macron has threatened to dissolve the Assembly if a motion of censure were to pass, but that is probably a bluff, since Macron would certainly lose seats, probably to the benefit of the Le Pen.
The only benefit for us is it is difficult to sack us. Our salaries have been frozen for the past 12 or so years and we do more and more things we aren’t actually trained to do. But I think we can’t really complain because after all it is a choice we make.
I became a fonctionnaire because it was convenient for me and luckily I was qualified enough to sit the competition (you need a master’s degree at least, Bac+5) while bringing up 5 children on my own with zero input from their father, but lots of people chose the job for other reasons and are fairly justifiably sour about it now.
My French family think it’s a rubbish job.
People at 64 are , in the main, perfectly capable of a days work. At least they are in the rest of Europe.
Is there something different in France, apart from always wanting more without considering the consequences.
What message are you sending to potential investors in France?
I am way past my sell by date and honestly wish that I could carry on working but my body says no,
We are all responsable for ourselves and some people forget this and look to goverments for support.
Once again the word selfish comes to mind.
Where precisely in my contract as a human being does it say that? For that matter, where exactly is my contract for being a human being? I don’t necessarily disagree with what you’ve said, but this sort of certain thinking and statement of fact easily becomes a slippery slope. Presumably disabled people shouldn’t be given funding to buy aids or make home adaptations to be able to live independent lives because we’re all responsible for ourselves? They can just sell a kidney or two (assuming those aren’t some of the bits that are broken) so they can afford to buy them themselves. I’m being facetious but personal responsibility, while very important of course, goes hand in hand with playing the hand that we’re dealt, some aren’t as lucky as others, and some perhaps are never able to take responsibility for themselves without at least some kind of a leg-up.
On the whole, I approve of the French attitude of, shall we say, letting feelings be known.
My local town is Montmorillon in 86. About 15000 souls, sleepy, always trying to increase business.
Today when I tried to do the week’s shopping, all roads to the town centre were blockaded by anti pension reform protesters. The result was that I had to take my custom to a grand surface in a neighbouring town.
I’d love to know what the protesters were trying to achieve…
Glad to hear that you found the one hard working civil servant, while the rest of us sit on our backsides polishing our gold-plated pensions. (Other lazy stereotypes are available).