French labour laws trigger immense protests

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Even the French courts are saying this benefits young people.

The constitutional court didn't say that.
The constitutional court said that the law was valid in the eyes of the constitution, which it is indeed.

Maybe people in France will start to realize it is the unions who oppose this law even though it's good for the country and the people.

That's funny. I have been part of the movement since its inception, when only a few youth organizations tried to stir interest, and had trouble finding a few thousands demonstrators (heck, the first anti CPE demo I went to, late january, we were 30)

Since then, the movement has grown immensely, way beyond the youth organisations', or the unions' scope. Us members of the organizations are overwhelmed by the immense participation, with plenty of spontaneous movements now that the CPE has made it to the news.

The reason why the movement is so incredibly large is because the people are fundamentally against what the CPE represents. The organizations have just enabled this rejection.

[Arrian]

The reason why the movement is so incredibly large is because the people are fundamentally against what the CPE represents. The organizations have just enabled this rejection.

Hey, it's your country. But I think ya'll might be shooting yourselves in the foot.

-Arrian

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
10% seems like a tiny minority compared to the remaining 90%

That reminds me of a "non-political" guy with whom I discussed yesterday. He said that 3 million protestors (the unions' estimate, i.e the largest), was still not that much, because 57 million of French people chose not to demonstrate. In his mind, those who were at work (the demo occured on tuesday) were in agreement with the CPE.

I kindly explained him that even I failed a big demo once, because I was at work that day. And my opposition to the CPE can't exactly be doubted

[David Floyd]

The constitutional court didn't say that.

And I quote:

"The constitutional court ruled Thursday in a case brought by the Socialist Party that the bill -- proposed by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin to help younger workers get jobs -- does not discriminate based on age, and in fact even favors younger workers."

The reason why the movement is so incredibly large is because the people are fundamentally against what the CPE represents.

But the CPE BENEFITS young people. The only organizations it does not benefit are the unions. Opposing it doesn't make any sense, unless you are so committed to strong unions that you are willing to sacrifice employment opportunities for the most unemployed group of people in France.

[David Floyd]

Spiffor, you must at least concede that the inability to easily hire/fire workers in France stunts economic growth, right?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by David Floyd
But the CPE BENEFITS young people. The only organizations it does not benefit are the unions. Opposing it doesn't make any sense, unless you are so committed to strong unions that you are willing to sacrifice employment opportunities for the most unemployed group of people in France.

Geez.

Figure this out: I don't have a stable job. I currently have daily contracts. I can be fired (or more accurately, not re-hired) any day on the whim of my boss. Which is why I'm non-union as well.

How is it possible that someone like me opposes the CPE?

[David Floyd]

Figure this out: I don't have a stable job. I currently have daily contracts. I can be fired (or more accurately, not re-hired) any day on the whim of my boss. Which is why I'm non-union as well.

How is it possible that someone like me opposes the CPE?

I understand you want to have a stable job, but the point remains that without the CPE, unemployment among people your age will remain incredibly high. Isn't it better to have a job you can be fired from than not have a job at all?

[Arrian]

Ah, so THAT's the end-around. Temp workers. Interesting.

It may just be, Spiff, that your odds of attaining a more stable (note: not permanent) job go up if employers have more flexibility.

I live in teh evil capitalistic USA. I've had the same job for 7 years (2 promotions, but the same basic job in the same department of the same company).

-Arrian

[David Floyd]

And again, the Constitutional Court pointed out that the CPE does indeed benefit young people more than it harms them - it isn't just Americans making this point anymore.

[David Floyd]

I live in teh evil capitalistic USA. I've had the same job for 7 years (2 promotions, but the same basic job in the same department of the same company).

Same here. I've had the same job since I was 16, so for over 7 years. I've had 3 promotions and I am up for (and currently interviewing for) a 4th.

Yet I live in an "at will" state and I am not in a union.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by David Floyd
And again, the Constitutional Court pointed out that the CPE does indeed benefit young people more than it harms them - it isn't just Americans making this point anymore.

Duh, it's been the government's position all along. It's an idea the free-marketeer right has pushed for at least a decade. If the government didn't have this opinion, there would be no debate about the CPE.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ah, so THAT's the end-around. Temp workers. Interesting.

It may just be, Spiff, that your odds of attaining a more stable (note: not permanent) job go up if employers have more flexibility.

I live in teh evil capitalistic USA. I've had the same job for 7 years (2 promotions, but the same basic job in the same department of the same company).

-Arrian

Yeah, it is interesting that people will put with with temp job so the few youth that have stable jobs get their jobs more stable.

[Arrian]

I mean, functionally... how is temping better than a non-guaranteed "permanent" position (such as mine)?

-Arrian

[David Floyd]

Duh, it's been the government's position all along. It's an idea the free-marketeer right has pushed for at least a decade. If the government didn't have this opinion, there would be no debate about the CPE.

Is the judiciary in France not independent? I would assume that if you accept as valid the ruling that the CPE is constitutional, you must also agree that the court is capable of opinions independent of those of the "free marketeer right", correct?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Is the judiciary in France not independent?

The constitutional judiciary isn't that much independant, but this time, they didn't make a mockery of their job, as they assessed the constitutional validity of the law. It hasn't been always the case.

I would assume that if you accept as valid the ruling that the CPE is constitutional, you must also agree that the court is capable of opinions independent of those of the "free marketeer right", correct?

The people in the court are entitled to their opinions, and like all the people who have a little window of visibility, they use it to express their opinion. I wouldn't be surprised that most of them are free-marketeers (considering that the president has been a right-winger for the past 11 years, and that the senate has always been on the right), and that they can do a free-marketeer political statement. Not that their political statements have any use: they don't have any authority about the value of the law (only its constitutional validity), and they haven't added anything new to the debate.