The PSC in the FPT, on the same path as in the FPE?
The second annual meeting of the Club Santé organized by Cercle LAB and moderated by Mariona Vivar (Cercle Lab), with the participation of our experts Marie-Sophie Houis (partner) and Olivier Milcamps (senior manager) at PMP’s Financial Institutions and Health division, on January 27th, was devoted to the Supplementary Social Protection (PSC) project in the Territorial Public Service (FPT).
Under the “sponsorship” of Martine Carlu (General Manager of Intériale) and with the testimonies of Laurent Adouard (General Manager of MNT) and Vincent Lelong (General Manager of Sofaxis), we shared our thoughts, convictions and perspectives on this reform, its impact on the different facets of insurance – distribution, management, technical balances, etc. – and the way in which the different players in the sector can work together. – and how the various players can prepare for it. We also asked ourselves how to take advantage of this evolution to bring more value and accompany the transformation of the insurance business.
The day before, and against all predictions, the 7 representative unions of the State civil service (FPE) signed the interministerial agreement, an agreement that the government believes will become the reference base for the other 2 civil services. But nothing is won for the FPT: in December, the FPT unions refused the project of the Directorate General of Local Authorities (DGCL), and at the beginning of January, the two parties agreed on a cycle of negotiations until March (shortened in the meantime to mid-February by the government), but already at a standstill at the end of the first session…
Behind these two very different situations between the two civil services are major differences in terms of issues and methods.
Of the 3 public services, the FPT is the most experienced in terms of PSC: 66% and 78% of the local authorities participate financially in the PSC in health and provident funds respectively of the territorial agents, with an average financing of 18.90€ and 12.20€ per month per agent. In the FPT, all departments except one have set up a referral system, but with an average financial participation of 12€/year/agent, for health only.
But if there are a dozen ministries in the FPE, there are over 43,000 employers in the FPT.
On the FPE side, the Ministry has done everything possible to reach a successful outcome: negotiations with all the representative unions of the FPE, presentation of a draft agreement bearing the mark of each union (the CGT’s basket of care, a key intergenerational device for FO and Unsa, …), which has made it possible to propose a major difference in the scheme in case of signing or not a compulsory group contract.
On the other hand, for the FPT, the basis for negotiation rejected by the FPT unions had been drawn up by the DGCL with a coordination of FPT employers only. In addition to a proposal that was less expensive than the current situation (a financial participation of employers of 15€ for health and 5€ for provident insurance), the project proposed above all to preserve the individual labelled contracts (optional), even if it meant aligning them with the conditions of compulsory contracts (as proposed for the conditions of solidarity in provident insurance for example).
In such a context, if there is little doubt that the ministries will adopt compulsory group contracts on January 1, 2024, the question remains to this day entirely open for the territorial civil service; but the timetable is less constrained there (implementation of the new system on January 1, 2025 for provident funds and January 1, 2026 for health), still offering many opportunities to reach an agreement.
{loadmoduleid 197}
