All play today with the codes of the sportThis time a global cooperation is neededBerlin pushes the purchasewith des cleanvehiclesThe task is immense but the path is narrowStock markets are still in hue and to diaIt would have been easier to listen to usThe whole being valued at 65 billion a yearFor the CEO of Bourbon the indicators are indeed well orientedEstablished physicians are less concernedInvestors they do not snapped his titlesOnly French creation that no other country in the world is interested in copy us: the approach of the presidential election, Nicolas Sarkozy (week last France 2), Thierry Breton (again yesterday in "Les echos") and many other personalities from the right should miss an opportunity to berate the 35 hours, this curious exception française, guilty, in their eyes, to be responsible for the loss of competitiveness of our economy. The Minister of the economy, in particular, continues to assert that they have already "cost two points of GDP growth". The French, explains, the already paid three times: by smaller increases in wages, by an increase in the prices of goods and services of proximity and the increase in public debt.
Ten years after their establishment, the 35-hour will be one of the keys to the presidential campaign debates. Between, on the one hand, the creations of jobs that they allowed and, on the other, the cost to the economy, the economic balance of the reduction of working time remains the subject of fierce controversy.
Employment
The 35-hour would have led to the creation of 350,000 jobs between 1998 and 2002, according to a study published in 2003 by the Dares statistical Directorate of the Ministry of labour. That is the generally accepted figure. Initially, the context was indeed carrying, from 1998 to 2000, annual GDP growth ranging between 3.5 and 4. "In this context virtuous, the measure is passed as a letter in the mail from companies who have continued to create jobs", says Marc Touati, Chief Economist at Natixis.
But, since 2003 and the brake to the assisted contracts, the evolution of job creation is very low (0.1 in 2003, 0 in 2004 and 0.4 in 2005), some economists saw a finish 35 hours. "A growth rate equivalent, never we not created so few jobs in France", notes Marc Touati. "The transition to the 35 hours has involved an acceleration in the minimum wage, which added the cost of low-skilled labour that productivity has evolved as fast", says Mathieu Kaiser, an economist at BNP Paribas, which also points the necessary reorganization of the work as temporary hiring. Arguments rejected by Eric Heyer, Deputy Director of OFCE, that weak job creation is first linked to the lack of dynamism of the economy.
Growth
and purchasing power
For Bercy, there is no doubt. The three channels that helped to finance the 35-hour (compensatory relief of loads on low wages, productivity gains and wage moderation) "weigh further on the purchasing power of the French." Eric Heyer said, in response, that the consumption of households has not ceased to increase since 1998 ( 4 in 2003, 4.2 in 2004, 4.1 in 2005) and remains the main engine of the economy. However, many economists are that the savings rate was rarely as low (14.7 of the income available in 2005), indicate that households draw their bottom of wool to consume.
As current atony of the growth, Eric Besson, national Secretary of the PS in the economy, see especially the consequence "trade bad holding cost a point of GDP per year since 2004", but also to "the weakness of the purchasing power of the small categories".
Public finances
To compensate for the harmonization and the increase in the minimum wage, payroll relief were granted to companies. At Bercy, the annual amount of relief to 20 billion a year on sales: "13 to 14 billion for the convergence of the minimum wage on the implementation of the RTT and 5 to 6 billion for profits tax revenues linked to the lower growth." EUR 100 billion cumulative which calculates Thierry Breton, went increasing public debt. The Dares valued at EUR 16.3 billion for only RTT measurements (the Aubry, Fillon and those laws that were ahead). Eric Heyer, are 10 billion leaving each year the State funds in respect of concessions to the 35 hours and which, once that their subtracts the gains related to the 350 000 jobs (more taxes, more VAT,... unemployment benefits less), represent more than EUR 3 billion.
The competitiveness
companies
"With the implementation of the 35 hours, the companies have made very important productivity efforts." "Result, on pedal quickly but not a long time and the amount of work is too low compared to other countries of the world", argues Pierre Nanterme, Chairman of the economics of the Medef. "The productivity improvement resulting from the implementation of the 35 hours was not enough to compensate for the decrease in our amount of work", noted Mathilde Lemoine, Director of economic studies in HSBC France.
French exports accounted for 35 in the euro area in 1997, 35 in 2000, 32 in 2002, 30 in 2005: a "surprising correlation chronological with the implementation of the 35 hours", notes Michel Didier, Director of the COE-Rexecode Institute. In a study published in October (1), Patrick Artus, Director of economic studies at Ixis-CIB, shows that the number of hours worked by potential asset is low, less exports progress. The countries concerned, analyses, "suffered or will suffer" and Governments "will not choice but to increase the annual hours worked and/or the participation rate, especially older employees". With the ageing population, the issue of the challenge to the 35-hour becomes inevitable.
