By Bernard FRIOT,
As in all European countries - with their specific - the issue of pensions is on the agenda. Depth reflection is necessary. The contribution of this text by Bernard Friot is very useful. Bernard Friot was published in March 2010, Editions La Dispute a book titled "The issue of pensions." This book renews the look on the "happiness of the retiree, who enjoys the" wages continued, "and whose work is finally released from the capital. Bernard Friot book by its analysis. He did it first Red Square for the magazine.
*****
I appreciate the opportunity to speak here of the book I published in March. The central issue of pensions is the emancipation of the working of labor value. All the necessary institutions already exist to this emancipation. They are the result of a pragmatic construction. They must be given now to a theoretical density as the foundation of an alternative discourse to the dominant pitch. On pensions, the case heard and seems not to suffer from the debate: there is a pension problem. A demographic problem, first. With the passage of an asset for a retiree to double within 50 years, the matter under the President of the MEDEF (French employers' organization), would be "neither right nor left, but arithmetic.
An accounting problem, then: the current deficits and especially such that would be provided in an emergency "rescue the PAYG system" by reducing its benefits, "complete" by capitalization.
A moral problem, at last: he would restore the "solidarity intergenerational "because we would be taking us up rights that will force our children to pay us in the future pensions of a too high level view of what they can produce. And Mrs. Parisot (MEDEF president) is not the only one we say successive governments right and left telling us for twenty years, the experts we repeated reporting relationships, and consensus is shared. We must fight to break this consensus. This is the meaning of this book. The result of my research and my reflections can be summarized in the following proposals.
1. The goal of reformers is to terminate pensions as "wages continued"
reform pursued with great continuity through a series of regulations and laws by successive French governments since 1987 is to to terminate the pension system as "wages continued." This is alongside Medicare the central component of "socialized wage" that I made history and theory in a previous book [see And the payroll tax will create jobs (1999) and Powers of the wage: employment and social protection to the French - 2008].
After abandoning the system of retirement savings by the Vichy government in 1941, the pension for private sector employees will gradually move towards the "continued processing" of the public. The rights of civil servants based on their classification (rank) and not on their job (their position): attached to their person, their rank does not go with them out of business and their pension calculated on the basis of their last (and best) salary is continuously upgraded by the current value of the index that was used to their calculation. It is the continued salary, and this model of public service will be implemented in companies with status (SNCF, EDF-GDF, to take the most important). As a replacement for higher wages of the person, indexed on the average movement of wages, it is the horizon for employee · e ⋅ s private sector whose pensions will approach the wages continued with reference to the 10 best years and indexing wages. This growth is ensured by a steady increase in the contribution rate from 8 to 25% of gross salary ente 1945 and the 1980s. Just before the reform, the sample of retired international regimes gives the replacement rate of final salary pension income by the first net full career retirees born in 1930: it is an average for the private sector, 84%. Certainly, all retirees do not have a full career, especially women, but women can expect, with the improvement in the employment rate of cohorts reaching retirement in the 2000s, a significant improvement in their situation . It is women that reform, which stops this progression is first.
What justifies talking about "reform" is the singular consistency determination reformer governments, both left and right, who share and pursue a project made clear since 1991 in the White Paper of Michel Rocard. Discerned: Chirac indexes the pensions of private sector prices by regulatory action Balladur from 1987 until 1993 into the law for five years, legislation that perpetuates Jospin in 1998, Raffarin that extends to the public in 2003 Fillon and special schemes (SNCF, EDF-GDF ...) in 2008.
Rocard in 1991 sets out the principles of separation between contributory and non-contributory, curing conditions of full retirement at age 60, to extend the period of wage Reference and lengthening the duration of a full career as Beregovoy, who tabled the 1992 bill did not have time to implement and realize that Balladur in 1993 as a first step complete Raffarin 2003. Juppe spleen in 1995 reform of the special Fillon realizes that in 2008 his law on pension funds has no implementing regulations when it loses power and the repeal Jospin to create a reserve fund and a formula salary savings that will die in retirement savings that implements Raffarin, with the added bonus of compulsory pension fund Public Service. Jospin refuses its Communist allies a law making possible the full retirement before age 60 for workers with long careers because it intends to make the currency exchange reform regime officials that its failure in the presidential elections will not give him the opportunity to carry out, but that Raffarin is negotiating with the CFDT a famous May 16, 2003 ... against retirement before age 60 for workers who have contributed forty years. Jospin installed in 2001 a Guidance Council retreats from the repository that produces consensus for reform, from 2003, 2008, and the next he just drawn the broad outlines in his report of January 2010.
reform can be summarized in two central aims: to give a halt to the movement quantity of continuation of salary in the pension at age 60 and qualitatively, releasing the pension salary to bind to savings, deferred income and allocation guardian, three forms of decidedly non-salary resources.
2. What a retiree?
A retiree is not an "old". Some decades in fact, in everyday language, government officials or senior executives, who first attained retirement, were not designated as "old," a term reserved for workers or employees who have received a pension with a real replacement rate of their salary than in the 1970s. Even today, the "old" means more a woman than a man, not primarily because older women are dying, but because they can access more easily to the pension.
A pensioner is even less an "old" and even longer a "retired" it affects a large share of his salary of activity. And this board is a salary for life. Whatever he does, this wage is irrevocable. It touches every month without fear of losing accounts and without him being asked about its legitimacy. And what does he do with this salary for life? If healthy, he has maintained his professional life, or created from a social network project leader, he works. These are retirees who say they "have never worked so hard," they "have never been happier to work." While it is where a large minority, but on almost fifteen million retirees, it made the world! This makes children see their grandparents happy to work when they find that their parents, they deplete it, torn between bitterness, anguish and rage.
And if the pension reform had to do with the contradictory experience of happiness and unhappiness at work? What is the secret of happiness retirees to work? Between the conditions under which workers and retirees are working, what is the difference that explains the source of unhappiness for some is a source happiness to others? This difference is obvious: the salaries of retirees are irrevocable, they are unemployed and do not appear on the labor market, they do not produce under the dictatorship of the working time: in a word is their personal qualifications they deploy.
Then the "save pensions!" Reformers took a different direction. Not cope with an aging population and a shock which my book shows that they are fantasies, but bring back the old home. Reaffirm that the retirement of leisure time after a well deserved long working life. That work is a matter of employment and therefore employers and the labor market. That serious things are between shareholders, executives "talented" and editorialists, economists, and he must let the seniors play in the sandbox of their "activities". Remind employees that they are not holders of a qualification entitling them to scrutinize the purposes and means of work, but a livelihood generating a right to a deferred income after their last job. Brief return the record straight on capital.
3. What we said about reform of capitalism
Capitalism is this specific form of organization of production that the measure - which gives it value - the average working time needed. The work has no value. It is, in its abstract form present throughout the production value measurement. Goods worth the time and effort needed for their production, not the individual time, but time reveals that the average price at which they exchanged. Only capitalism measure output per work, because it was built on the basis of an abstract social: Report exchange between sellers and buyers of "labor force" dedicated to producing the goods, that is to say, goods or services measured not by their usefulness, but by how much work they incorporate abstract. The labor market defines individuals as labor force "job seekers".
These forces work can be implemented at the initiative of employers who buy on the market and implement them according to the logic of the work value for the production of goods, only generating profit. For there to be profit requires that all workers and products, will be transformed into a commodity, and thus whether the common denominator of these goods, namely the time of abstract labor needed to produce them, which becomes the measure of all things. Hence the dictatorship of the working time that will introduce competition intercapitalist. The organization of production on the basis of such an abstraction is marked by a fundamental contradiction: it empowers the capital from the traditional way of working, which is the source of infinite momentum in the production of goods, while being widening effects of the exploitation of farmers dispossessed their creative abilities and destined to produce goods that elude them.
Today, we are much richer that forty years ago (the GDP has doubled in constant euros), but we are much worse this crucial dimension of our lives is work. The finding of a broader consumer no longer offset the bitter experience of uncertainty, disinterest, disdain and fatigue at work, all that doubt was installed on the consumption of products whose growing merchant affects the quality or purpose. Briefly, aporia of a dynamic production that mutilates people astray and products are now bursting into the open.
Happiness at work is that retirees, particularly, with the assurance of a salary for life, they work free from the yoke of labor value. This experience is massive, but unspoken in public space: the number of pensioners living as a privilege even they are embarrassed when they compare their happiness at work and the misfortune to work as an "asset". It is important that private happiness becomes public, demonstrating that the experiences of retirees at work can become the universal standard.
4. The personal qualifications of retired frees the work of "employment"
wages continued based on personal qualification. In the significant minority of retirees who are at work, in forms and objects they choose, there are people that engage three assets: a pension in real wages compared with their best, they recognized capabilities will cross able to transpose (the manager of a small company that will become a judge at the Commercial Court or the teacher of accounting treasurer of an amateur sports club), a personal network of peers that usually they had made before retirement, or they could build in the early years of retirement.
These are the three essential ingredients for personal qualification, which is attached to the person, not employment, and who can actually implement in freedom: the absence of One of the three makes it more difficult to "second career" retirees. Armed with a personal qualification, retirees are able to work off the shackles of work ethic: they do not need to appear on a labor market nor to submit to an employer, or to transform their production into a commodity. The activities of retirees are they work? Yes if it disassociates the work of employment. There is no essence of the work, which is designated as "work" is contingent, very different from one society to another or from one century to another. It is constantly the subject of public debate. The logic of employment means that any work that falls outside the measurement time does not really and has not be paid. However, because employment, which reduces people to the labor force subject to work value has been, historically, the vector of the socialization of wages through the payroll tax and qualifying positions, the definition of Work is now torn between employment and wages socialized.
"Work", is the part of our business dedicated to producing goods to supply the capital (employment), or is it part of our business that implements our qualification (salary socialized) ? The recent employment of a whole series service activities for people turned them into work, and the worst way for the last wave of them, home services, modern processing jobs jobs because the wages associated with these jobs socialized is low. Contradictorily, the finding that the pension is close to a salary continued to be perceived as work activities for pensioners carried out any work. And draw all the consequences for the change of meaning of work which carries the fact of assuming such work activities delivered in the labor market and work value. We can, from the experience of retired, impose a different basis of social recognition of work: no longer use, but the qualification of people.
5. The confusion around the "intergenerational solidarity"
The traditional argument that the retirees are not working said they depend on the work of the assets which would be responsible for the pension contribution. This argument is false. The prenotion who wants that "active fund inactive", and that the payroll tax is a "tax on work" is based on confusion between money flows and value streams. The value has its support in the wealth produced, money is an expression of value but not its support. The work of retirees creates wealth that is assigned a value, and pensions are the monetary expression of value. The value attributed to the work of retired merchant has no measure, it is measured by their personal qualifications, which, as with any qualification, is associated with wages, pension.
The illusion of "social transfer" as a transfer of value from one group to another, comes from the creation mode money in our capitalist economies. The form required in the capital for the creation of money is crucial because the tyranny of labor value, key extortion of profit is possible only if the production is commercial. Do not create money that during the anticipation of sales of businesses, so it have the force that constantly imposes the law of capital. If only goods are an opportunity to money creation, then any recognition of non-market work, any recognition of the work not subject to work value, has two consequences. On the one hand, it leads to higher commodity prices, which should include recognition of additional work that does not find its direct recognition, and this increase is always denounced as an obstacle to competitiveness in times of global competition to cut corners "costs of labor." On the other hand, this recognition is actually by "transfer" money in the form of taxes and social contributions that are permanently disqualified as "tax burden".
This expression of combat based on the erroneous equation of flow cash flow and value. As money is created on the occasion of the price assigned to goods of capitalist enterprises (through the expectations of this award by banks lending to these companies), which measures the value of the wealth created by Retired passes through these goods, and thus a flow of money going to hold employment in the capitalist sector to the pensioners through the pension contribution. But it is not a transfer of value: what are the retirees who produce the wealth that is assigned the value corresponding to their qualifications.
6. The population problem is a fantasy, the increase in employer contribution rates is possible and necessary
The consensus on the existence of a demographic shock, the argument founder of pension reform, rooted in the absurd belief that our society ages and the ratio between the generations is a major social issue. Yet the concepts of generation and age, who obviously have a meaning in the field of biography or that of family, have no relevance in the society. Today, including in a statistical framework that is inactive retirees, long-life societies are more productive than firms with low life expectancy, whose GDP per capita are lower, which destroys the demographic argument. And, as regards the production of wealth, and retirees are not in a report generation: they have the same status of employees paid to the qualifications, except that employees work in subordination to an employer and Retirees not.
But it is precisely the extraordinary originality of the retirement pay that is continued solved the "problem of old age" by transforming the "old" by employees. Continued salary as a pension is the first denaturalization of extent of a feature biography, and its abstraction also carries a strong enrichment of citizenship. We understand that "the return of old" (older people will say of course) is the horizon obsessive reformers, they are constantly feeding back the generational issue. Because the bulk of the business reforms since the White Paper Rocard is painting apocalyptic giant deficits that the aging population will generate in pension plans division.
is a fantasy construction, including if we think in statistical ranking executives in the inactive retirees. On the one hand because a demographic report is not an economic report: that the ratio of over 60 years will double the 20-59 years of no interest, since the ratio of unoccupied the occupied (the only one who has an economic significance) will remain relatively stable over the coming decades. On the other hand, because the demographic shock is based on the assumption of no productivity gains. Now we can produce as much an asset with for a retiree with two active retiree.
The argument that the declining share of the employed make it impossible to finance pensions for apportionment is as absurd as if we had predicted in the early 20th century famine in France of the 21st because by farmers would be reduced to less than 3% of the population. For over sixty years, our pension plans by socialization wage show that we have assumed no growth of the weight problem of pensions in GDP well above its future growth. Over the past fifty In recent years, pensions were increased from 5% to 12% of GDP, while during the next fifty, they should increase from 12% to 20% if one removes the reforms undertaken since 1987: the weight of pensions been multiplied by 2.4 between 1950 and 2000, there should be only 1.7 per 2050.
Unless calculations are based on a perspective that no stagnation of GDP reformers does this deceleration (when the speech involves a demographic shock acceleration fantasized) obviously means an easier tomorrow absorb the increased weight of pensions, even though it has been easy so far. This facility is simply explained: the GDP volume doubling every forty to fifty years, the fastest growth of any of its elements is accompanied by progress, not regression, wealth available to other components. Increases in GDP, there is no need to strip the assets to dress retirees.
7. The fight against retirement savings should continue
The demonstration of the harm of financial accumulation, which resulted in no investment growth, but contributed greatly to the bubble, does not reformers continue to argue for retirement savings with two arguments. The first is "intergenerational equity": the rights to pensions is that the generation today is at work will be an excessive burden on future generations. This requires that each generation, at least partially finance their own pensions savings which will be liquidated upon entry into retirement. Especially since - Second argument - the work will fail to meet the needs relatively (we recognize here the rhetoric of the "demographic problem"), and we will be happy when the famine to have saved the money we can then liquidate to offset the deficit work. Both arguments are wrong.
The money deposited in savings used to buy financial stocks which were in themselves worthless. But - and this is the origin of belief in their ability to freeze the value - they are titles of ownership with rights to argue about money outstanding on the day they will be liquidated. If the currency does not exist prior to this change currency securities, the securities are worthless. Now it is routine work that makes possible the creation of money prior to the liquidation of securities.
other words, assuming that pensions are insured by the savings of pension funds, sale of shares necessary for the transformation of savings into pensions in 2040 will depend on the currency will then have assets willing to buy to establish themselves rights. This coin will be the equivalent of what they have produced by their year's work 2040. In this case, saving is useless because the assets could be assigned to a regime breakdown that currency used to purchase securities. That either distribution or capitalization, is still the year's work that produces wealth equal to the money that finances the pensions of the year. The savings can therefore never be a substitute for work, or allow each generation to fund its pensions. His promotion is in fact based on two things. On the one hand, ownership of securities can puncture of money on the work of the world, while the distribution is reduced to the national space policy rules of labor law: the magic of imperial thinking. On the other hand, as the stock performance is outside the acute financial crisis, higher than the growth rate, the pension is growing faster than wages and thus that the pension contributions, which are progressing more slowly than the rate Growth: assert in favor of capitalization that is more cost saving than contributing is very ingenuously confess that any retirement savings is a flight on the work of others, and is infinitely more profitable to have a portfolio of securities work.
Promote the use of property involves tackling the lucrative property, whose salary as a pension shows the futility continued. Lucrative property is defended by reformers in the name of the investment, which means, they say, investors. Now what is an investor? Everyday speech, carefully maintained by the scholarly discourse, said he brings a needed capital. Nothing is further from the truth. An investor does nothing. An investor who "provides" for example one million euros for a company not a million euro banknotes in a suitcase, nor the titles he bears are endowed, by a curious metaphysical, of any value: they are profitable titles which will give him the right to puncture a million on the value assigned to work today. An investor is a parasite that has the right to puncture a portion of the value of contemporary producers to transform and expropriated the labor force and compel them to produce the goods he has decided to produce short, to work under the yoke of labor value. An investor is robbing us and alienates us in the same operation.
In the successful experience of the pension contribution was the large-scale demonstration of the desirability to move from financial investors. This contribution is the way to ensure no commitments massive savings and long term, comparable to the investment. On the model of social contribution, we can not fully fund the savings investment. If it is possible to fund the pension to the benefit schemes and pensioners without any logic savings and loans, it is possible to finance investment in the same way by assigning a fee economic wage (about 35% of gross salary), levied on value added products such as payroll or direct salary. This fee would be collected by investment banks that would finance without interest rates, since there would be no private accumulation of capital. Financial accumulation, credit, loan interest, exchange, these institutions can be replaced by transposing to finance the investment experience of the social security contribution, which is obvious since any investment is financed from current production. Social contribution has freed our daily individual moneylenders, the economic contribution rid our everyday lives of the scholarship and bankers.
8. The "deferred income" and "national solidarity" reinforce the institutions of capital
The reform attempts to stop the rise of this institution pay by changing the direction of pension plans in distribution: of a pension distribution to ensure the continuation of salary to a pension distribution providing deferred income doubled to national solidarity. For this pair, it shall reinforce the institutions of capital.
There are indeed two contradictory forms of pension plans division, the wage and pension scheme. The board as a continuation of salary (salary system) is based on maintaining the personal qualifications of the employee or retiree on the allocation of private average skills of its best uses: it raises people as employees equipped with a capacity to produce. Instead, the pension as deferred income (insurance scheme) is based on rights proportional to the contributions of career with purchasing power guaranteed: it raises people as employable with an earning capacity. The heart of the pension reform is to shift from first to second form of distribution. It has to do three levers: the freezing of rates of contributions, indexation to prices and the rise of contributivité understood in the sense of "individual actuarial neutrality" (for each, total contributions to the career be equal to the total pension). A contribution rate which is stabilized over the long term based on distribution according to a calculation strictly contributory pension whose purchasing power is guaranteed by its indexation on prices are the three characteristics of a deferred income. His promoters know that, based on a single calculation without compensation rules (like validations quarters without contributions) and taking into account periods of very low wages in professional careers, it leaves all those resources and especially all those were unable to provide a sufficient contribution account. This is why the promotion of actuarial neutrality is always coupled with a plea for a broad national solidarity funding, alongside the deferred income, a "contributory minimum" Guaranteed and "non-contributory benefits (minimum pension, subsidies for children). The speech is as reformer with the dual virtue of justice strictly contributory benefit and solidarity with the "poor". There is a considerable decline compared to the wages continued.
Regression in justice, first. Making the board's consideration of my past contributions, and thus subject of my work, not the news of my qualifications (and therefore my work emancipated) assumes and reinforces the labor market, employment, goods The subordination and the lucrative property. Denied in its qualifying producer, providing employable is maintained in a state of minor economic constantly to thank you for the employer who poses as a holder of a livelihood which he derives income. Foresight is what remains when the employee was stripped of the essential qualification. The proliferation of notional accounts when necessary to ensure security and ability to bounce back to a worker placed, including within his company, a labor market that continually submit to the suspicion of distance to the Employment he holds or to which he applied.
The salary system is instead carrying the award of a qualification to each person, without exception, under any pretext whatsoever, with an indefinite continuation of salary. The contribution of each to its resources based not on its ability to save part of the gains made as a labor force (the "contributivité" reformers), but its ability to participate in the definition of objects released from work the goods and labor value. His report in the future then rests on the support of his qualification and not a heritage that can provide alternative income to the remuneration of jobs: in fact, the distinction between employment and out of work, incorporating the binomial compensation / pension, is exceeded in the continuum of the qualification. This new continents of the deployment of human personality to discover. Conversely, the regime of foresight locks us into the capitalist past.
regression in terms of solidarity, then. The invitation to solidarity with people victimized is probably one of the most perverse aspects of the reform. By asking people as "poor," "victims" entitled to solidarity, it naturalizes the disqualification of producers inherent to capitalism. Capitalism is the shareholder and the "leader of great talent" he has placed at the head of the company the only players, the only subjects of production. Employees are then reduced to a minor social status of victims if they fail to maintain their employability: victims of the inevitable job losses and no less inevitable relocation, victims of inadequate training, victims of the crisis. Many victims are entitled to national solidarity, government responsibility. The couple shareholder / victim is thus continuously reactivated, naturalized, because it is essential to maintaining the institutions of capital. There is no possibility of a proprietary profit or tyranny of the value of work without a denial - which precisely defines the victim-law of the qualification at the heart of wages. While in contrast the wage solidarity based on the promotion of skills for all, founder of solidarity between equals: not that of the sighted to those they will be called poor, but of political deliberation in the award Qualification for everyone and for the sake of its being exercised.
9. Progressive development of pensions is a political
In terms protest, the progressive development of pensions as earnings continued to assume an argument with a negative component and one positive.
The negative aspect would be to deny everything that impedes the continuation of salary and deferred income supports the binomial / national solidarity: - stability or even decline for low wages, contribution rates - indexation Prices wage taken into account in calculating pensions and pensions paid - the listing of contributions in individual accounts as of ARRCO AGIRC and the lens shift manager replacement rate Match wage to the rate of return on contributions - the distinction between the contribution and the share of non-contributory pension, the CSG and the Old Age Solidarity Fund, the minimum contribution, the challenged subsidies for children and reversion - the individual actuarial neutrality as an ideal of justice with reference to the pension to the entire workforce and not just better salary - The abandonment of legal age (except as age floor should be raised beyond 60 years) and longer duration of assessment, Premiums and discounts - the distinction between state pension and pension professional, employee savings. The positive aspect should have three pillars: - promote the affirmation of the pension as earnings continued in the current regimes: no pensions below the minimum wage, wage indexation, the annual increase rate of employer contributions (and income if the gross salary is increased in proportion), calculation of net pension on the basis of 100% of net salary for a better career fully validated 150 quarters, no discount liquidation of retirement at age 60 or the date of cessation of business whichever is later (or earlier at age 60 for arduous work) - to push a policy to support the personal qualification of retirees in the public sphere and not just private, individually and collectively not only: their support networks of peers to help them define objects of work, to form or join labor collectives, funding projects. It is encouraging retirees to business and thus invent new ways of production released of work value. Such liability is certainly very happy, but needs a political device to be exercised, including the rights associated with a political age are a decisive factor: 60 years of age into retirement, has become a age policy.
10. A single claim: the personal qualification for all
is the third axis of the positive component. Freedom and happiness of retirees to work must be the result of all those who are at work, and this is the condition of their remaining in the pensioners themselves. Following their example, the personal qualification must replace all employment as a support for social and economic rights. We measure how much this proposal and the earlier re-evaluate the role of pensioners, which assumed to rely strongly on their employee status to end their treatment as "seniors" called him by the reformers.
The personal qualification, new media rights now enshrined in employment, is a collective right (like the pension, the amount of which is personal, is a collective right). It is already anticipated among pensioners and in the public service. It will be awarded to any person, for example at the end of high school, and it progresses without breaks or reversals until his death. It has four interrelated components: - certificate (not certified school because the school but does not qualify) for control of a set of cross-cutting capacities in several business fields belonging to the corresponding eg to the six or seven agreements in inter- debate today (communication, education and culture, energy, transport, ...) to go beyond the conventional fragmentation - a wage level corresponding level of proven capabilities, for example, in a hierarchy of skills 1 to 4 corresponding to a salary scale of 1 to 5, a first level qualification with a salary starting at 2000 euros net per month, a second level with a salary starting at 4000 euros, a third level starting salary of 6000 euros and a fourth-level starting salary of 8000 euros for a wage hierarchy from 2000 to 10000 euros net. - A network of peers to be permanently socialized within the scope of the qualification for which it holds, for example, a professional association, a network of local actors, an international network specialists, who are the support of trade, services, enactment of rules of practice and their control, sharing of tools, training, recovery activities of individual members. - The right to a representative institution to enforce its rights to respect and progression of their qualification. Qualification (and therefore the salary that goes with it) is an attribute of the person, it can not be withdrawn and it can only grow in life. The personal qualification is the opposite of career security, leaving the bare minimum rights transferred to employment the person because it is the rights associated with certain secure mobility of workers to constantly prove their "employability" (savings accounts for training, pensions, health coverage, the right to reclassification ). She is also the opposite of universal income. Universal income (within the meaning of universal distribution of a package of higher or lower depending on the project level, say between the RMI and the SMIC) has provided people as bearers of needs that could be for a first stage, financed by the income of a collective heritage that the state is the guardian and on which everyone has a right to draw. In this endorsement of an institution as fundamental as capital property profit, revenue Universal adds that, "first check, lump, constitutive of individual resources, it calls a" second check ", according to the contribution of individual production and thus will strengthen the workforce and work ethic. Universal income is wages and universal antagonist, who delivers us from the labor market, the disqualification of producers posed as beings with needs, the fiction of income, employment and value of the property for profit.
We measure how the personal qualification is creative equal. It removes the labor market and thus the subordination of job seekers to employers, it makes everyone access to the status of joint holder of a qualification and salary related thereto. It unifies the top claims of retirees, students, civil servants, the unemployed, the entertainment, private sector employees, including those of very small (very small) and all the deserts union of independent workers. In particular, it can take action to promote the public by claiming the extension to all employees the distinction between rank and position, which means for all, recognition of qualifications, lack of unemployment, individual control of mobility. As it is true that the production of all goods and all services should be provided by employees released from employment and merchandise!
11. The need for a strong vision of the institution itself as wage policy
It is time to leave the conventional discourse of wages found to labor remuneration subject. Fight argument Reform is impossible without a strong vision of wages as a political institution that enriches citizenship by assigning each person a personal qualification and the financing of the wage economy. We join together in an entirely different perspective than full employment. Our qualification and hence our wage should no longer depend on employers' decisions on the labor market. Nostalgia for the good job is not good adviser to help us cope with the processing jobs in jobs that operating the reform. Overcoming the reform will not happen in a return to true full employment.
Because we have something better to do than to revive the progressive phase of the job when, in the late 1970s, it was the matrix of wage socialized because it was the exorbitant price of subordination to the employers.
It is not "secure" the condition of workers. The vocabulary of security has internalized the fact that in capitalism the social workers are minors: they are disqualified as producers, and they are entitled not to the direction of the economy but to income security and the employment. The issue of pensions, It is precisely out of the claim of income security and employment to promote a new figure of the worker to support our common aspiration to run the economy and finally out of the economy of labor value .
Qualification is thus an attribute that enriches political citizenship, as well as the right to vote. Just as universal suffrage has opened to each age of majority politics and founded the first stage of citizenship, universal qualification open to everyone age of majority and pay an extension based qualitative citizenship.
(March 10, 2010)
0 comments:
Post a Comment