Les 35 heures n’ont pas été une erreur... et les erreurs commises sont réparables
Some people, especially rightists, consider working longer is necessary for full employment and conclude that 35 hours regulation was an error. This argument doesn’t resist to analysis. This point of view masks a political disagreement about growth fruits sharing. On the opposite, 35 hours regulatio...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Association Recherche & Régulation
|
| Series: | Revue de la Régulation |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.openedition.org/regulation/1311 |
| Summary: | Some people, especially rightists, consider working longer is necessary for full employment and conclude that 35 hours regulation was an error. This argument doesn’t resist to analysis. This point of view masks a political disagreement about growth fruits sharing. On the opposite, 35 hours regulation implementation included some errors. The two main errors were to intend to set by a law the effective hours of work and not to put an upper limit at wage compensation. These errors can be corrected. Such an assessment can be the only base for a positive opposition to Nicolas Sarkozy project implementation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1957-7796 |