The law on sharing business value, which contains the so-called “Macron” bonus, is currently being examined by Parliament. Louis Margueritte, Renaissance deputy for Saône-et-Loire and rapporteur of the law, summarizes its ins and outs at franceinfo.
The bill on sharing value in business wants to encourage companies to share their profits with employees through profit-sharing, participation, employee shareholding and the so-called “Macron” bonus. This text is the transposition of an agreement between social partners.
The majority disagrees with the Senate on the start of the profit-sharing experiment for companies with 11 to 49 employees. The government would like this system to begin in 2024, but the Senate postponed it to 2025.
franceinfo: Why do the majority want it to start immediately?
Louis Margueritte: First, it must be remembered that this is one of the most important measures of this agreement. Concretely, this means that in companies with 11 to 49 employees, when there are three successive profits of more than 1% of turnover, then they will have the obligation to put in place one of the three systems they wish. In the current state of the national inter-professional agreement, this experiment must be implemented from 2025. We proposed to the National Assembly to move forward by one year, and the Senate restored the initial writing. So this is a point of discussion that we must have in the joint committee and I hope that we will have a peaceful discussion. The simple argument is to say to ourselves that if it is a system that we want, why wait until 2025 when we could do it next year, in 2024.
What do you say to left-wing parliamentarians, particularly communist senators, who say that this system replaces salary increases?
No, it does not replace them. I think it’s a shortcut even if there is indeed a small substitution effect. This has been proven by various recent studies, notably one from INSEE which showed a substitution effect of 30%. This means that for example, if I pay a bonus of 100, there would be 30 € which would not in fact return to wages. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any salary increases. What we want is for all companies that want it and can to, to see salary increases in addition to these measures. For companies that cannot always increase salaries, there will actually be these complementary effects when the company has generated profit so that there can be a payout. In addition, from now on, from 11 employees, these systems will be automatic.
You would like companies with more than 50 employees to open negotiations to define what an exceptional profit is with a view to paying, if necessary, an additional bonus. What happens if there is no agreement?
For the moment there is nothing but we must still note the progress we are making by transposing this interprofessional agreement. First, it starts from 50 employees and the union representatives told us that we always have systems for large or very large companies. However, here is an example of a measure which will apply to companies with 50 employees which have a union representative, and it concerns around 8,000 companies in France. So it’s really hundreds of thousands, even millions of employees who will sit around the table. And who will effectively define, between management and union delegates, what an exceptional profit is and the conclusion they draw from it, if these criteria are met. What I obviously propose is that we leave the text as it is. This has been translated very concretely in the text and, as soon as we have the first agreements on these exceptional benefits, we will see whether they are indeed well implemented or not.
You are a member of the finance committee. There are three letters that are keeping you very busy at the moment, PLF, the finance bill, therefore, the state budget. The examination of the expenditure section begins tomorrow in the hemicycle. It will most likely end in 49-3. Does it still serve any purpose?
Yes, it helps. First of all, I remind you that there are debates in committee which are very long at the moment and which are not yet finished. The objective of the government and the majority is to still leave enough time to examine some missions. We probably won’t be able to examine them all. I am thinking in particular of the overseas mission, but there will be others. It is also useful because it is an opportunity, both in committee and in the hemicycle, to take stock of the major public policies that concern us. Finally, it also helps to ensure that there are no amendments which sometimes objectively border on the ridiculous, and so that we can have a calm and healthy debate and that we can have arguments which are not just arguments. authority arguments.
Are there any amendments and proposals, oppositions that will be taken up?
In the 49-3, on the revenue portion, which passed last week, there were over 150 amendments adopted and a number came from the opposition. Yes, it is possible, and it was already the case last year in 2022. So, personally, I have no doubts about the fact that we will demonstrate responsibility.