The financing of social companions lacks transparency for the Court of Auditors | EUROtoday

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.

The financing of social companions continues to be shrouded in a thick fog, regardless of the measures adopted ten years in the past to attempt to put an finish to the opacity which prevailed on the time. This is without doubt one of the predominant messages formulated by the Court of Auditors in a slightly harsh report made public on May 24. She scanned the affiliation which manages the joint fund answerable for distributing subsidies to unions and employers. This construction, which was to hold out “transparency”n / A “not reached” its goal, in accordance with the magistrates of Rue Cambon, in Paris. To make issues worse, it has freed itself from sure authorized obligations, which has earned it a agency refocusing.

Created by a regulation of March 2014, the joint fund is managed by an affiliation through which representatives of staff and enterprise leaders sit. The intention of such a tool is to “simplify” and of ” clarify “ the circuits of assets irrigating social actors, on the origin of a number of scandals prior to now – for instance that triggered, in 2007, by the “slush fund” of the metallurgical employers. It additionally entails granting credit to organizations that fulfill “missions of general interest”because the Court of Auditors recollects in its report.

The fund in query is funded in two methods: a contribution paid by firms (which is equal to 0.016% of their payroll) and subsidies from the State. The cash thus collected reaches substantial ranges: almost 142.5 million euros in 2022. This windfall is then redistributed to unions and employer actions – the previous receiving, in complete, nearly twice as a lot because the latter . In 2022, the CFDT pocketed 22 million euros, whereas the Medef was granted 13.6 million euros.

“Contestable” process

The managing affiliation, ruled by the social companions, divides the cake. The downside, in accordance with the Court of Auditors, is that the distribution “obeys multiple and parallel rules which make the flow of funds difficult to assess”. An issue removed from being trivial as a result of the variety of beneficiaries is massive, notably on the employers' facet: some 340 sectoral employer organizations obtain help, generally for symbolic quantities (18 euros for a construction defending the pursuits of fishermen- craftsmen…).

Read additionally | Article reserved for our subscribers Social companions need to regain affect misplaced since 2017

In addition, the breakdown of credit is carried out in a way “artisanal”relying, partly, on an info system “unsuitable” (“simple Excel tables”). “Despite the good will of the agents”this example represents “a major risk, the slightest mistake could lead to anomalies in the calculation”.

You have 38.99% of this text left to learn. The relaxation is reserved for subscribers.