What a beautiful sight.....
![]()
No matter what your opinion of Macron is, he's a pretty clever politician
What a beautiful sight.....
![]()
As a Dutch person: they are.
'Modernizing' the job markets just meant worse and worse conditions for workers. Nobody can afford homes anymore (even rentals are hard) because banks and tenants don't want to do deal with the uncertainty. No mortgages, no rents.
Of course every country will discover this when it's already too late, just like we did. Change and streamlining is needed but the last one you should trust with this are liberals.
Macron's track record has been flawless so far aside from the 'kwassa-kwassa' Comorian joke.
I'm gonna puke.
And btw, it's pretty clear Macron won't need to govern by ordonnance now, with close to 400 deputes there's barely a need for debate.
I understand this is difficult to compare, but by American standards, Marcron is somewhat to the left, right?
I read through his policies, and it seems relatively leftist by American standards (obviously not for France though). Is this accurate, or am I missing something in his policy plans?
I guess that when the spectrum is stretched by both extremes most people end up in the centre anyway.
Plus, how is that abstention protest working so far?
Not really related. The ordonnances allow him not to a debate - and the possibility to amend the law - in the Assembly or in the Senate, which doesn't have any En Marche Senator, group or majority. In other words he wants to do ordonnances because he believes the parliamentary debate/procedure is too slow and unecessary since he won the election recently.
The lack of debate and plurality of opinions in the Assembly is still an issue though, especially if you count the PS and LR MPs that agree on most of Macron's agenda...
It's hard to compare. He could be a center-leaning Republican or Democrat, but again, that depends what standards you take (when basically). On an ideological basis he's clearly in the lineage of the New Democrats lead by Clinton in the 1990s ("third way" and everything), which removed some of the most important left ideological stances - that Sanders tried to bring back but failed given the power of the New Democrat consensus in the DNC (from what I've read in american leftists reviews)
This is so stupid, in some places there were something like 26 candidates to choose from.
People who had an issue with the system fielded candidates all right, if you abstained it's not because no candidate suited you it's because you didn't care.
PS is a non factor in the Assemblée now, it's done.
They still have legacy influence with the Senators, Mayors and all but they're pretty much done.
The way it is now, there's literally no difference between ordonnance or following the regular process except for a timing issue.
The Assemblée National has the last word anyway and the Senate cannot impose something that the AN would want out.
Effectively Macron has full power regardless of the Senate, Congrats on all the parties that are not LREM you effectively gave Macron a blank check.
It's not easy to compare but I'd still place him slightly left of people like Obama and Clinton, if only because of some things in place right now that would be considered very leftist in the USA.I understand this is difficult to compare, but by American standards, Marcron is somewhat to the left, right?
I read through his policies, and it seems relatively leftist by American standards (obviously not for France though). Is this accurate, or am I missing something in his policy plans?
Blaming the non-voters, not trying to understand the whole picture, here we go again <3
It's not like some of us tried to explain it a thousand times in the OT haha
I just explained to you that was the whole point of the ordonnances according to Macron (no debate in the Senat, no two screening of the law in both chambers etc). So I don't understand your point. Anyway.
Good article (suspect you might have seen it alreadyI'm center-left. The Danish employment system, easy hiring and firing with high taxes and strong welfare guarantees, is what I hope everyone ends up doing.
Macron now has absolute power. It'll be really exciting to see what France ends up looking like with a few years of him in charge.
Does France (or Canada for that matter) have the same NIMBY issues you see here in the states? Here in the US, it's very difficult to address this from a national level, it usually has to be states overriding localities and preventing locals from zoning out "undesirables".If looser labour laws can help France get full employment and a stronger economy it'd probably be a net benefit for the welfare of the French people (with the government now having more money for stuff). My general theory is that countries should strive for the strongest labour laws they can have while managing to maintain full employment.
But the most important thing in the En Marche platform, in my opinion, is increasing the supply of housing. And this is something that can get broad support, versus the labour reforms which are sure to be very controversial. People want housing (bold statement, I know) and affordable housing would be really good for improving people's abilities to move for better jobs and career advancement.
Does France (or Canada for that matter) have the same NIMBY issues you see here in the states? Here in the US, it's very difficult to address this from a national level, it usually has to be states overriding localities and preventing locals from zoning out "undesirables".
And I'm telling you that whatever the Senate tries to put into laws in the Senate could be removed by the AN. The debate in the Senate will not interest anyone (because let's be fair it never did).
So yeah the regular method is functionally identical to Macron's alledged ordonnance except it's longer and more wasteful.
I'm center-left. The Danish employment system, easy hiring and firing with high taxes and strong welfare guarantees, is what I hope everyone ends up doing.
Macron now has absolute power. It'll be really exciting to see what France ends up looking like with a few years of him in charge.
Again : the main advantage of the ordonnances is the speed and it changes everything because the longer a controversial law is on the floor of both chambers, the longer you risk having lots of protest and uprising in the streets - and the right-wing Senate will hold the floor so that Macron and his PM are in trouble mediatically.
Besides it reduces the "risk" of having a more balanced law though the right to amend of the MPs - which means it isn't "functionnaly identifical" : amendments are a key parliamentary power and there aren't any with ordonnances (so you're clearly wrong here on a factual basis and it's not the first time)
Question: My younger sister is currently being sexually harassed by a superior at work but is too afraid to tell HR or management because she's afraid of retaliation. Do you consider that acceptable?
I have been fired from a job before because I refused to work unpaid OT. What about that?
These are things that happen all the time in America, a nation with zero employee protections. these are the consequences of the systems you're advocating. I would like to see you defend them.
Now this is what winning looks like.What a beautiful sight.....
![]()
I'm pretty sure that in France these situations can't happen.
Firing someone for refusing to do unpaid OT is illegal even.
Actually unpaid OT is illegal.
Literally no one in this thread is advocating for an American-style system, and Macron isn't either.These are things that happen all the time in America, a nation with zero employee protections. these are the consequences of the systems you're advocating. I would like to see you defend them.
How about discussing France and the actual proposal instead of a straw man youve constructed based completely on your experiences in another country?Question: My younger sister is currently being sexually harassed by a superior at work but is too afraid to tell HR or management because she's afraid of retaliation. Do you consider that acceptable?
I have been fired from a job before because I refused to work unpaid OT. What about that?
These are things that happen all the time in America, a nation with zero employee protections. these are the consequences of the systems you're advocating. I would like to see you defend them.
Its illegal in the U.S. too.
Which is irrelevant when the employer can make up any bogus reason for why they fired them ("they just weren't a good fit for our company culture"). The real reason never has to come to light unless the employer was incredibly stupid and left physical proof in an e-mail or message chain.
Where are you from ? Firing someone for "Not fitting into the company's culture" seems like a sure way to the prud'hommes court.Its illegal in the U.S. too.
Which is irrelevant when the employer can make up any bogus reason for why they fired them ("they just weren't a good fit for our company culture"). The real reason never has to come to light unless the employer was incredibly stupid and left physical proof in an e-mail or message chain.
How about discussing France and the actual proposal instead of a straw man youve constructed based completely on your experiences in another country?
No one is proposing removing restrictions completely. Theyre just trying to make them not as oppressive as they currently are.
Where are you from ? Firing someone for "Not fitting into the company's culture" seems like a sure way to the prud'hommes court.
Ce qu'il faut bien comprendre, c'est que l'objet de cette mesure n'est pas de plafonner les indemnités de licenciement justifiés, mais des licenciements non justifiés ou sans raison valable. C'est-à-dire dans le cas d'employeurs prédateurs qui cherchent à acheter une entreprise pour récupérer ses brevets, sans se soucier des salariés. Ou encore des actionnaires qui attendent de gros bénéfices et qui pensent qu'en licenciant, on les fait augmenter. Vous pouvez aussi avoir le cas d'un salarié qui ne plaît pas à l'employeur et qui est débarqué sans raison. Des salariés plus âgés licenciés pour être remplacés par des stagiaires... Bref, ce sont des motifs interdits. Y compris dans les autres pays et selon les conventions internationales. C'est pour ces licenciements qu'il est prévu de plafonner la sanction. Et la plafonner, c'est la rendre parfaitement prévisible. Et même si c'est un niveau un peu plus élevé, pour une grande entreprise très profitable, pouvoir se payer un licenciement sans justification, c'est tout à fait abordable.
C'est un véritable changement de philosophie. Il faut être concret : si vous avez un plafond, vous avez une somme prévisible. C'est donc la possibilité de pouvoir licencier, sans risque, un salarié.
Actuellement, lorsque vous avez des plans de départs volontaires, les sommes accordées aux salariés sont souvent supérieures à un an de salaire. Pour ne pas avoir de souci, les employeurs sont prêts à mettre de l'argent sur la table, mais ils demandent aux salariés s'ils sont d'accord. Là, le gouvernement va permettre de faire des plans de départs volontaires sans demander l'avis des salariés. On pourra virer les gens comme cela, d'un coup de tête, sans aucune procédure, sans aucune motivation : "Voilà votre chèque, vos un an de salaires. Et de toute façon, légalement, vous ne pouvez pas avoir au-dessus."
Il ne faut pas sécuriser les gens qui violent la loi, mais les insécuriser et les dissuader de violer la loi. En l'occurrence aujourd'hui, c'est la décision d'un juge qui parfois, peut condamner l'employeur à verser de grosses indemnités. Cette potentialité-là est dissuasive. Ce qui est vraiment choquant, c'est qu'en résumé, on supprime la prohibition des licenciements sans justification. C'est ce qui est réclamé par un certain patronat.
This.
I am a flaming lefty in the US, but, as a French person, the French system needs much modernizing and I think Macron will be the one to do it. Hopefully.
Safety nets are needed, but the way they are implemented in France tends to paralyze hiring. Sundays and evenings needs to be fully open for work, among other things.
Let's remove barriers to employment, keep needed benefits and safety nets, and modernize the whole dusty juggernaut that is the French gov.
People in the US are employed at will, and can be terminated on the spot. You can buy a house just fine (if your credit is ok that is).As a Dutch person: they are.
'Modernizing' the job markets just meant worse and worse conditions for workers. Nobody can afford homes anymore (even rentals are hard) because banks and tenants don't want to do deal with the uncertainty. No mortgages, no rents.
Of course every country will discover this when it's already too late, just like we did. Change and streamlining is needed but the last one you should trust with this are liberals.
Born in France, worked in France, now living and working in the US as a naturalized citizen.With all this talk about modernization, it begs the question, where are you now and what are you modernizing too?
Let us not go blindly down a myopic path now.
With all this talk about modernization, it begs the question, where are you now and what are you modernizing too?
Let us not go blindly down a myopic path now.