the potential regulation of the period of labor stoppages underneath hearth from criticism | EUROtoday

HASEven earlier than its arrival within the hemicycle, the Social Security finance invoice provokes the anger of the opposition. At concern: article 28, which might permit the federal government to set by decree most durations for the primary work stoppages prescribed by medical doctors. The goal said by the manager: to stem the surge in the price of each day allowances, up 28.9% between 2010 and 2019, then one other 27.9% between 2019 and 2023, excluding distinctive measures linked to Covid-19.

The textual content thus gives for “limiting in principle the first prescription to 15 days in the city and 30 days in the hospital”, even when these durations don’t seem explicitly within the regulation. The stops can then be prolonged, however medical doctors will now have to point the medical cause for the cease on the shape, with the intention to facilitate checks by Health Insurance.

Long-term shutdowns will not be spared. The government desires to restrict the compensation interval for a similar work accident or occupational sickness to 4 years. Another new characteristic: the removing of the obligatory return to work examination, supposed, based on the federal government, to “promote a rapid return to work”.

“A logic of suspicion towards caregivers and insured persons”

Article 28 provoked a burst of deletion amendments within the ranks of the opposition. On the left, La France insoumise deputies denounce “a catch-all article which aligns regressions in terms of the rights of policyholders and workers”. According to them, this measure “will only produce an increase in consultations, in the midst of a crisis in medical demographics and access to care”.

To Discover



Kangaroo of the day

Answer

Socialists, communists and environmentalists are additionally calling for the system to be abolished. For the latter, these restrictions “risk leading to the opposite effect to that sought”, by “dissuading employees from resorting to a legitimate stoppage, with the consequence of a worsening of their state of health and, ultimately, an increase in medical and social costs in the medium term”.

Same story with the Liot group, which denounces “a logic of suspicion towards caregivers and policyholders”. The deputies imagine that “the multiplication of work stoppages […] can be explained by numerous causes” and that by “simply reducing the limitation period or compensation, the risk is not to treat the cause, but only the consequences”. This controversial reform is already shaping as much as be one of the vital explosive factors within the debate on the Social Security funds.