The "France Travail RSA Assembly" collective against the RSA reform was
formed in Brest. We interviewed three of its members (hereinafterreferred to as CR). ---- Attacks against RSA recipients
RV: Can you explain the attacks RSA recipients are experiencing? ----
CR: The attacks are part of the full employment reform. The Finistère
department was one of the test departments for this reform, particularly
the component imposing 15 hours of mandatory activity. This is being
implemented gradually. The goal was to implement the 15-hour reform but
also to conduct more widespread and regular monitoring of RSA
recipients. There has been a barrage of monitoring over the past year
and a half. The reform is currently being implemented, meaning that RSA
recipients will have to work 15 hours per week. But it's unclear because
there's no decree yet to frame this reform; they'll be published in
June. France Travail (FT) has been talking to us about this reform for a
year, but there doesn't seem to be any clear framework at the moment.
They're unable to say what we should do during these 15 hours.
In Finistère, there have been presentations of this system by FT or the
Department. It's presented as mandatory, but in reality, this isn't yet
the case - invitations to presentations of the 15-hour week have been
sent to some friends. For the past few weeks, the 15-hour week has been
implemented for recipients dependent on the social pathway via the CDAS
(Departmental Social Assistance Commission). There are broadly two
branches of RSA recipients: those who only respond to FT, and those who
were previously managed only by social services, people considered
unable to return to work immediately. These people have also been
registered with the FT since January 1st, but are also monitored by the
CDAS (social assistance and social security department). They must work
15 hours a month, but this is self-reported. Everything can be included:
doctor's visits, etc. Social workers clearly want to spare people.
Moreover, this only applies to new beneficiaries registered since
January 1st and who meet the social pathway requirements.
RV: There are the 15 hours, and there are also checks? Checks on what?
CR: Some self-employed people have been sanctioned for refusing to sign
the new RSA commitment contract. This contract may require them to be
monitored by a departmental "coach" to achieve their "profitability."
Furthermore, what is clear is that there is a desire to increase
monitoring of beneficiaries. Indeed, a monitoring mission has been
established. At the beginning, several inspectors were recruited, mainly
targeting single mothers (one of the types of people frequently found on
RSA), now there are at least 7 inspectors - with a litigation department
to handle appeals. There are several types of inspections. Inspections
at the FT level, which concern all people registered with FT... and
therefore also all RSA beneficiaries, to see if we are indeed looking
for a job (we must show our applications for jobs) or inspections of
what was recorded in the project with FT (PPAE = Professional Project
for Access to Employment which is a contract with FT). It is completely
arbitrary, it is at the discretion of the inspector, they can for
example force a change of PPAE. These are FT inspections. Another type
of inspection is carried out by the CAF which can concern all people
receiving an allowance, beyond the RSA. These CAF checks are carried out
either automatically without informing the people by cross-referencing
data from different organizations (taxes, declaration of resources to
the CAF, etc.). They identify anomalies for them and therefore carry out
an audit. There are also targeted checks carried out by a sworn
inspector. This inspector can come to the person's home and has
extensive rights, such as being able to communicate directly with our
bank, even if they currently generally go through the person. These
checks can affect anyone receiving money from the CAF, so for "helping
hands," it's better to receive them in cash; some even do everything
like that: purchases or other things. But if this is done too
extensively, there are suspicions because people don't have expenses on
their statements... People have also been bothered for parallel income
such as savings income (even small ones), gifts from relatives, selling
junk on Le Bon Coin. A priori, starting in July, this should be
eliminated for donations from other people. But currently this
additional income can have consequences during CAF checks. For example,
our right to RSA (social assistance) is suspended, or we're even removed
from the program, or, if we overpaid, we have to repay it for failure to
file a claim.
The department also conducts specific RSA checks. They announced they
conducted 3,000 last year, and it's starting again this year. They
require you to provide a document by mail to fill out with information,
bank statements, a tax notice, and proof of address. You can't negotiate
anything about your private life, and it's these types of checks that
have led to people being removed from the program. The number of
documents requested is very high; people struggle to find all the
documents and respond late because RSA recipients are quite removed from
the administrative bureaucracy, and a document is always missing. This
is considered a refusal to submit the documents, which can lead to
suspension of RSA benefits and then removal from the program if the
documents are still not provided after four months. Social workers told
us they've had an influx of people asking for help completing this
paperwork. We therefore recommend sending at least one document. If you
are removed from the program, you can re-register immediately, but you
will be asked for the missing documents.
Official figures indicate that three years ago, there were 18,000 RSA
recipients in Finistère; currently, there are 14,500 left. In 2024,
1,590 will have left the program, and among them, 1,200 were removed
following checks. These are certainly people who didn't complete their
application. Furthermore, some people are withdrawing from the RSA on
their own to avoid the pressure, by going on a training course, for
example. Self-employed people have coaches, and they are pressured to
get them off the RSA, as well as to have a minimum turnover to qualify
for the activity bonus. Some people have refused to sign this contract
that requires you to work 15 hours; you are initially suspended and then
removed. We can give some typical situations: people who have an
activity (like boat trips) or a part-time job or a small farm are forced
to accept increased monitoring by the department, which is equivalent to
15 hours of work. Some refuse to sign the 15-hour contract because they
already have part-time work and are therefore removed from the list.
RV: Is there any information from other test departments?
CR: We've heard from the Paris region. Benefit recipients have
reportedly been forced to work 15 hours. But there has been no
evaluation in the test departments, so no concrete feedback. The figures
that are coming out: the scheme would lead to an increase in the
non-take-up rate. People who could qualify for this scheme don't do so
because they know they'll be monitored, and it becomes a hassle to apply
for RSA. What we understand from the sanction scale being prepared is
the suspension of 30% to 100% of the allowance for several months,
followed by removal from the register if the 15-hour workday is not
respected.
The meeting
RV: How was your collective formed and what are its objectives?
CR: Several of us were part of the Coordination Autonome de Brest and/or
the Entraide-Action collective - an autonomous collective for mutual aid
and the fight against exploitation. Some of our friends were being
monitored, and we had to take an interest in this reform. Our first
objective was to understand the reform. So we attended the information
meetings organized by the FT or the CDAS. But we didn't get any real
answers; no one was able to tell us concretely how it would work.
Getting around the system is complicated because we get very few
responses despite the inquiries we've conducted, as no one seems to
understand (social workers, FT) how they're going to enforce these 15 hours.
To attract people, we set up an FT RSA Assembly. 40 people attended the
first two assemblies. With the Brest Autonomous Coordination, we wrote a
guide to accessing rights, with rules and advice, which was presented at
these assemblies. We also set up mutual aid hotlines. At these
assemblies, some people came mainly to look for ways to stay on RSA, and
so the number of people attending our assemblies was reduced in an
attempt to conduct a more political campaign.
RV: Meaning, a more political campaign?
CR: There were disputes following the checks. For us, the assembly could
be a pressure force, as we had previously done at the CAF level in other
collectives on other issues. Another objective was to politically
challenge the system's very nature. Not just to provide individual
assistance, but to try to disrupt the system's implementation: by
disrupting FT's actions, for example. To show that its implementation
would not be without its challenges and, if possible, to have it
abandoned. Beyond that, the ambition was to tackle the issue of social
assistance and to critique salaried work. But it's difficult to do so.
These reforms (to unemployment insurance and the RSA) target the few
non-salaried sectors, following on from the unemployment reform. We have
to work more for less time to qualify for unemployment benefits, for
example, and this reduces the time we could allow ourselves to escape
salaried employment (with its hierarchy and workload) and rest. The idea
was to counter the discourse of the department president, who claims to
want to "build a working society." We want to try to oppose a
counter-narrative.
RV: Have you taken any collective actions? CR: We've been canvassing the
CAF (Family Allowance Fund), the FT (Financial Financial Institutions),
and the CDAS (National Employment Agency) to attract people and inform
them about the mutual aid sessions we're organizing. The CGT (General
Confederation of Workers) for the unemployed is also doing this, and
we're in contact with them. We've organized an occupation of the
Departmental Council's offices to publicize our opposition to the 3 p.m.
work week and the department's inspections. We've also been defending
the case of a colleague who had been suspended for four months and was
threatened with being struck off the register because he had crossed out
his expenses and their locations on his bank statements. We've tried to
speed things up, but without success. We've also been posting posters
about companies that offer immersion internships. The department has
sent a letter to companies, "Prepare yourselves within the framework of
the mandatory 15-hour work week; our advisors will be able to bring you
more and more people for internships," with a dedicated website that
connects companies and candidates. Business leaders are encouraged to
sign up to receive free labor. We targeted a paramedical company that
made the most "easy immersion" job offers. These are in fact unpaid
internships, lasting from one day to one month full-time. These are the
types of jobs (agribusiness, paramedical, etc.) that are described as
"in-demand" jobs and to which we want to bring benefit recipients. It is
not clear what the people in these internships do, sometimes just
observation, sometimes real work. This is the continuation of what has
been done for 10 years where there are exemptions for so-called
"in-demand" jobs (jobs that allow you to keep the RSA in addition to a
salary for 3 months after hiring), such as for tomato greenhouses or
others, and which use these devices. These are the hardest and
lowest-paid jobs, so there is a need for labor. Our action aimed to
convey that we wouldn't be providing free labor and to warn business
leaders to be careful if they used this system.
RV: Do you have links with other collectives?
CR: We have some contacts with a collective in Rennes and in the
department as well. But there's no national organization, or even at the
level of the greater West of France. These collectives clearly do a bit
like us: mutual assistance through support groups. But there are
currently no concrete actions organized with them. We're going to do a
roadshow in Finistère and a little beyond to present the Brest
Autonomous Coordination guide and the RSA Assembly and see if
collectives could be formed elsewhere.
RSA and Wage Earnings
RV: You mentioned the political relationship to work?
CR: Some people who come to see us do so to work as little as possible.
But at the RSA Assembly, we've never included criticism of salaried
employment in our communications; perhaps that's a shortcoming. We
should question salaried employment, minimum social benefits, etc. And
why we fight on these issues and how we do it? Because there are
concrete effects, and people are in deep trouble.
We talk with FT advisors or social workers; these people are suffering.
But we're in a delicate position with them. They talk to us about
integration, while we denounce their control function and salaried work
for some of us. We want to meet with them to build bridges with them,
and at the same time, we want to break down the narrative between "good
workers" and "parasites on minimum social benefits." This isn't easy for
us to manage.
Especially since the state of struggle is disastrous everywhere. In the
department, at the CDAS, at FT, there's total resignation. Furthermore,
management reminded them of their obligation to maintain
confidentiality, meaning they were not allowed to express their views on
political issues, and therefore not allowed to give their opinions on
the reform.
RV: What are your prospects?
CR: We're going on a tour to present the guide in Finistère, and there
are groups or individuals who are interested. The idea would be to take
concrete action afterward. We'd like to hold a regional meeting to see
if there's enough strength to fight on these issues. Furthermore, we're
continuing to hold office hours and push through certain cases, possibly
going to the Administrative Court, but we need to find a lawyer or
perhaps even look into the CGT (General Confederation of Workers'
Union). The idea might be to win on this front, but that's not our
activist style. Ten years ago, we were able to break some deadlocks
through occupations and applying pressure; today, it's becoming very
difficult. Before, we were able to get management to step down and
create a balance of power. Today, if we simply announce a leafleting
campaign in front of a CAF (Family Allowance Fund), they close the CAF
(Family Allowance Fund) to the public. We need to reinvent solutions to
build a balance of power.
There are also a few of us who are beginning to think about the issue of
unemployment and the RSA (Responsible Social Security) as non-working
time, where we partially escape the constraints of salaried employment
even if we live on very little. We haven't really put these thoughts
into focus yet because they don't address the reality of most
recipients. But we would like to reflect on the implications of the RSA
(Responsible Social Security) system. Indeed, this system allows us to
partially escape salaried employment and all the joys it entails:
exploitation, work rate, hierarchy, work ideology... But on the other
hand, it makes our jobs precarious and therefore exacerbates our
exploitation. There's a tension between our desire not to participate in
the capitalist organization of work and the isolation it places us in.
Moreover, if the 15-hour week is done in a company, some people are
delighted because it will force the lazy to work, but it will put
pressure on other employees because unpaid workers will do the job. Just
like the unemployed, RSA members therefore serve to put pressure on
other employees.
More generally, RSA recipients are quite isolated. They are
beneficiaries of aid who depend on the state and local governments and
must meet certain conditions to do so. So you're in contact with the
administration without any safeguards, you don't have much leverage if
you don't submit. On the RSA, everything is thought out and designed so
that you're alone facing an administration. Conversely, the organization
of work means that we're sometimes in a more collective relationship and
less alone facing the boss. Similarly, when you work you also have more
room to maneuver just through money... In short, if you escape salaried
employment through the RSA, it can make collective struggle difficult...
Finally, resorting to the RSA to escape salaried employment as a
political statement is marginal; most recipients are in precarious
situations and can no longer work. They are forced to submit to the
pressure of the administration. It's difficult to appropriate one's
power to act because one quickly finds oneself in a situation of
dependency. Once again, because they are producers, workers can have
more leverage than RSists, particularly through strikes, to fight
against their exploitation, or even more. But they still need to have
the capacity and the will to organize collectively in this direction...
The history and failures of the labor movement are there to remind us
that it's far from being that simple. All of this is still in the early
stages of our thinking.
RV
https://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4436
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten