I’m not sure if this is a hijack, but my campus has been blocked for the second time in the last two weeks (which is far less than many other “facs” here in Paris, so I’m kind of lucky). Blocking school seems to me to be the most ridiculous and undemocratic method of protest. Though I am cognizant that certain schools have had a vote whether or not to close, it seems that a walk-out or a protest should be a choice, and those who want an education should be able to get it. Especially foreign students. It will be a horrible thing for France if more and more students decide to go elsewhere, rather than risk losing an entire semester to French social conflict.
What I want to know is if it happens often that facs are blocked en masse as they are right now.
I’ve actually become much more sympathetic to the anti-CPE cause, but I just can’t understand why certain methods of protest have been chosen. Blocking a school seems like shooting yourself in the foot.
Can anyone tell me how normal it is to for these “blocages” to take place?
I guess what I don’t understand is…well, WHY the protests? It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that the protesters are protesting to keep the status quo. But…the status quo seems (again to me) to be economic suicide. For one thing, the age group in question has over a 20% unemployment. 20%!!! My god. For another, the status quo doesn’t seem to be able to allow France to continue to compete with the up and coming Asian economic powers who are much more lean and mean. What will France do if they DON’T get some reforms? Do any of the people there care? Or am I missing something here (undoubtedly since I have only been following this latest French adventure perhiperally).
France is one of the most class divided countries of Europe. Those who protest the reforms most ardently (like the university students) are not those that are worst hit by the unemployment. They’ve got their future mapped out quite well and can in any case afford a bit of ideological grand standing. They’re just out there protecting their privileges. That they come at the expense of the poor and unemployed and down throdden masses don’t seem to bother them much.
Anyway they can always go merrily into the globalised economy humming Apres moi le deluge
The 1995 protests and strikes were much more larger. Paris was essentially paralyzed for a long time.
However, IMO, Villepin has lost any chance to be elected next year. Which doesn’t mean that it will benefit the opposition. His rival within his own party, Sarkozy, is trying hard to rip off the benefits of the crisis.
xtisme, from all that I see here, I believe that something has to be done. Something *like *the CPE, but the problem with the CPE (it seems to me) is that it makes certain changes to the work system without taking into account their affect on the whole system. For instance, to get a bank account, an apartment, etc. one has to show that he has a stable job (please correct me if I’m wrong). A CPE does not constitute a stable job. Therefore, many kids are worried about less about being fired than about being able to get an apartment.
Otherwise, there was a good article today or yesterday in the NY TIMEs about the French view of globalization (which is summed up in a word: “Fear”). That, I think, is another aspect of this CPE issue.
I’d like to reiterate that a lot of French people, including youngsters like myself, seem to think that all this fuss is a bit ridiculous (or very ridiculous). Though most French people do, for some reason or another, support the repeal of the CPE.
Ok, I can sort of see that…they don’t want to lose their job which could lose them their apartment. (that seems easily fixed but…) However, what about the 20 odd percent (22%? 23%) who are currently unemployed then? They won’t EVER get an apartment (seemingly) in any case.
Or is it like Rune is saying…essentially a class issue. The folks from the have’s class (I’d say ‘upper class’ but gods know what that means in France) already have jobs, so are more worried (and therefore out protesting) about losing their privilages…i.e., in your case, their apartments. While 20+% of their peers don’t have that problem…being unemployed.
No. It’s not that losing their job would lose them an apartment, it’s that a CPE wouldn’t qualify them for an apartment in the first place.
Well, again, it’s not losing their apartment so much as not being able to get a job that would qualify you for an apartment until you’re 26. And yes, class does play into it. The unemployment rate for the students is much lower than the unemployment rate among the uneducated - particularly immigrants. So basically, the university students have not much to gain and a whole lot to lose from the proposed reforms. They won’t gain much in terms of job opening and employment, but they will lose job security and may not be able to get a job that would allow them to get a bank account or an apartment.
xtisme, to be clear, I’m just as lost as you are. I’m just an exchange student here, so I’m not at risk of losing anything (except a semester of study).
I just wanted to make it clear that there have been many people, young people, writing into the newspapers and such that I can get my hands on saying that they are for the CPE. Some are not so much for it as they are for having even a transient job. There have been a lot of young people saying that they are for the CPE, even though they don’t think it’s the best answer to the problem.
I doubt that’s something they show on the international news…I could be wrong…
During the riots in the fall, I heard a French politician say on the news that the employment in the suburbs (“banlieues”) of France – about 40% – is the highest in the West. The problem is that I don’t know who the politician was or what show he was on, so I can’t back that up.
Ah, ok. Yes, that is confusing. I guess the disconnect is the formalization of who can/can’t get an apartment based on not only if they have a job in the first place…but that its (I assume) paying enough to qualify you as well. Certainly here in the States its much more informal…you can get an apartment if you can afford one. If you have to work two jobs to do it then you do (I did). All my landlord cared about was getting the rent though.
No, definitely not…at least not where I am. Its a pretty confused muddle to be honest (though again to be honest I haven’t really dug into this one…coming so close on the last riots by the immigrants in France this one has sort of flown by). On the surface of it at least its pretty hard for most American’s to understand…it seems like a no brainer really. There seem to be some deeper issues at work here than merely French stuborness though.
Not only that, but it generally has to be a stable job as well. People with only a temporary contract have a hard time finding a place to rent, generally speaking.
I don’t believe so. I don’t have the feeling that there’s any more support for the reform amongst lower class or unemployed people. I would even hazard the guess : at the contrary. These people are affraid for their future. Affraid of globalization. Affraid of not being able to find a job, and affraid if they ever get one, they could become “kleenex workers”.
I believe that it’s at the contrary people with a stable situation who can afford the luxury of rationalizing the situation.
I don’t know if the concept that more flexibility = eventually more jobs is widespread amongst the US general population (as opposed to people posting here, for instance). It is certainly not the case in France. generally speaking, few people would think “If they can fire employees easily, business will be less reluctant to hire them at the first place”, but rather “there’s already a lot of unemployment, and they’re taking advantage of this situation to force people to accept insecure, precarious jobs”. I strongly doubt that many people actually believe that such a reform is going to create jobs. I would also bet (pure guess on my part) that amongst the youth, you’ll find more supporters of the law amongst educated students with good perspectives than amongst disfranchised young second-generation immigrants.
Also, I already mentionned that “firing at will” is an unexistent concept in France. The idea that an employer could fire someone without any reason at all is perceived as deeply unjust and unfair. This reform isn’t a minor one. Except for the fact it’s limited to a sub-category of the population, it’s a frontal attack against traditionnal work relationships in France.
The fact that this reform was to be implemented without consultation (with the unions and empoyer’s representants) also runs against french uses. Though I’m not convinced people are very worried about that generally speaking, it certainly antagonized unionists as well as politically active people.
As a point of curiosity clairobscur, what do you think the average French citizen thinks about the fact that the US HAS such laws on the books (i.e., at least from Frances perspective, US employers can ‘fire at will’)? Do they think things are vastly unjust here? And what do you perceive their thoughts are about the, er, disparity between Frances employment rates and the US…or Frances and just about any other industrialized nation? Like say the UK? I’m really curious how they can look at the status quo and want to just keep things as they are. Or is there a perception that things are getting better in France, so they should ‘stay the course’ so to speak?
I think that the average frenchman doesn’t know the USA has such laws.
I’m not sure the “average frenchman” is very aware of that. If he is, he probably thinks that it’s paid for at a huge social cost : low salaries, job insecurity, etc… and probably doesn’t want the same model to be implemented here. At least, that’s what I hear the most when references are made to the situation in the UK/USA.
No. There definitely isn’t a feeling that things are getting better. Rather the contrary. A feeling that the castle is besieged and that the battlements are falling one by one. Battlements like job stability. Hence that such reforms aren’t part of the solution, but part of the problem.
I get bad vibes, in France. I feel a lot of tensions, disanchantment, lack of confidence, pessimism. Maybe I’m wrong. I think that the social gaps are getting wider and wider. I doubt i’m wrong on this one.
There are also similar laws in Denmark, where it’s very easy to both fire and hire employees. Probably more so than in US and UK. Denmark has also practically zero unemployment and has now for years being struggling to find enough workers in certain areas, like construction and IT, and now also starting to need workers in unskilled segments, with the government actively trying to lure Poles and Germans to come here and work. Denmark also has generous unemployment support. The Danish PM has been trying to sell the system as FlexSecurity. Apparently the French public didn’t buy it.
Irrelevant. They attack the protestors to rob them, and possibly just to have some fun beating the crap out of them. Similar things happened during last year’s high schools strikes, when the issue was merely changes in the high school’s programms.
The situation in the UK is slightly different. There is no “at will” employment, but there is a qualifying period (typcially a year of continuous employment) where an employer can dismiss you without reason. After that an employer would need a reason for dismissal.
An employee is allowed to quit the job after giving notice, usually defined in the contract of employment (a rough guide would be how often you get paid, a month if you get paid monthly, a week if you get paid weekly). Depending on circumstances an employer may waive the notice period.
