Unemployment insurance: the Senate abolishes benefits in the event of repeated refusal of CDI after a CDD

The debate was tense between the right and the left of the Senate hemicycle on October 25 on the conditions of access to unemployment insurance, during the examination of the bill of “emergency measures” for full employment. The upper house, dominated by a right-wing and center majority, voted in favor of an article added last week during work in the social affairs committee.

This restricts unemployment rights in the event of repeated refusal of stable employment. A job seeker who has refused, during the last twelve months, three CDI proposals at the end of a CDD, for the same job with equivalent remuneration, will not be entitled to payment of the allowance. unemployment insurance. However, the case of people employed on permanent contracts during the same period would not be affected.

An amendment, closing unemployment insurance from the first refusal of CDI, rejected in extremis

The hemicycle almost hardened this article by adopting an amendment by senators LR, carried by Laurent Duplomb and Bruno Retailleau, depriving an employee of the allowance from the first refusal of a CDI at the end of a CDD under conditions similar. “The sense of history, when you make a CDD, and when behind it is offered a CDI, it’s more of an advantage than a disadvantage”, exclaimed Laurent Duplomb. Senator Jocelyne Guidez of the Centrist Union said her group would not support the measure. She was rejected on the wire: she received as many votes for as votes against, according to the count announced by the chairman of the session Alain Richard (Renaissance). A tie does not allow adoption.

The left fought against the article closing the benefit of unemployment insurance after three refusals of CDI in one year. “This article does not prolong the policy of permanent suspicion towards job seekers allergic to work, addicted to benefits”, quipped Raymonde Poncet Monge. “I would like to know what statistics you are basing yourself on,” added socialist Monique Lubin, worried that the article would penalize people who refuse to commit indefinitely to jobs that would not suit them. For the communist Laurence Cohen, this article constitutes a “particularly regressive device of the senatorial majority”.

The rapporteur (LR) Frédérique Puissat mainly justified this provision by the Labor Code, according to which the benefit of unemployment insurance is open to workers whose “deprivation of employment is involuntary”. “We cannot make life choices that are paid for by insurance systems,” she argued.

Fears of “gasworks” in government and among marchers

The government opposed the measure defended by the senatorial majority. “There is no reason to sanction” this type of employee “if he refuses to continue or extend, as soon as he himself has kept all the commitments made initially”, objected Olivier Dussopt. The Minister of Labor also exposed practical difficulties, referring to an “extremely cumbersome procedure for companies and for Pôle Emploi, in terms of declarations”. “We are setting up a gas plant for employers,” added Senator Martin Lévrier (Rally of Democrats, Progressives and Independents, group of the senatorial majority).

The argument did not waver the senatorial majority. “At some point, when you have ambitions, the will, the somewhat operational side is a detail. It’s up to us to solve it, ”replied rapporteur Frédérique Puissat. According to the text of the Senate, the employer must notify the CDI proposal in writing to the employee and send it to Pôle emploi. According to the Senate report, “this transmission could be carried out in a dematerialized manner via the end-of-contract certificate so as not to create too heavy an administrative burden for companies”.

Temporary workers who refuse a CDI on their job deprived of unemployment benefits

The hemicycle adopted an amendment by Emmanuel Capus (Les Indépendants) to “secure the device”, valid only in the event of a proposal for a permanent contract with equivalent remuneration. The amendment specifies that this notion must be understood as equivalent working hours. By considering that such a proposal made sense, the government does not exclude the scenario in which the deprivation of compensation for refusal of CDI would survive the debates in the National Assembly. “If in the case of the parliamentary shuttle, these provisions were to be maintained, the clarification provided by Emmanuel Capus may be useful”, acknowledged Olivier Dussopt.

After this article, the Senate then adopted another amendment from the LR group. It excludes from the benefit of the unemployment allowance, the temporary workers who would not accept a CDI that a company would offer them on the position they occupy.

Leave a Comment