“”Punish the unemployed” is above all a political signal sent by the governments “

Forum. The principle of compensation of the unemployed is the same since the invention of insurance funds (mutual or municipal) in Germany in the Nineteenth century. The unemployed can be provided collectively, but also checked (with the employers, when the latter were involved in the management of the funds) that the insured sought actually work. In 1896, in Cologne, the insured had to “point” twice a day. We could not afford to have cheats.

The government Philippe has revived an old antiphon, like many of its predecessors

This principle has persisted with the adoption, in several countries, what has been called the ” Ghent system “, the name of the belgian town where it was put into practice : the fund is managed by the unions of the unemployed, which will self monitor between them, somehow. Denmark, despite recent reforms, has remained close to this principle. In France, on the other hand, the control of the job search is not the fault of the unemployed or their trade union representatives, but of the administration.

The government, however, Philippe has revived an old antiphon, like many of its predecessors : it intends to increase the severity of the sanctions and informs the multiplication of controls. The separation between administrative penalties (cancellation for absence to a meeting you control) and sanctions pronounced by the prefect is going to disappear, and with it a guarantee for the unemployed.

“Fraudsters harmful ”

Citizens are not well informed may think that the controls and sanctions are fair and effective. But, to know if this is the case, there is a need for specific studies on this subject. However, neither the Unédic nor the government have provided, since 1991, a count of the number of penalties, or assessed for their effectiveness. This law of silence remains one of the great scandals of the social sector French. The researchers are reduced to conjectures, or…

Leave a Reply