In this column, the sociologist Dominique Méda demonstrates how it is imperative to continue to put a maximum of “cash” for the unemployed and recipients of the RSA, always in the viewfinder of the government.
Companies. “We have to make sure that at all times the work pays and that we always make the choice of work,” the Premier said on August 26. Who is this “on” who does not seem to prefer the work systematically? Senior executives, who should resume work as soon as possible, suggested LRM MP Aurelien Tache.
But it is above all the unemployed and recipients of the RSA who are in the sights of a government that continues to firmly believe that our fellow citizens should be “encouraged” to find a job, as if unemployment was voluntary and was mainly due to lack of appetite vis-a-vis the work or a learned calculation leading to the rational decision not to work.
It was believed (we, that is, we, the researchers) that we had finished with this kind of reasoning, especially since the failure of the RSA. Let’s remember: this one was supposed to break radically with his predecessor, the RMI – criticized (for a long time) for his supposed capacity to “disincentive” the recipients to take again a job. Experiments were launched at great expense in 2007 to assess the incentive of the new system, which was fully (already!) Part of the paradigm of the revaluation of work and “work more to earn more”.
Even though the evaluation was seriously flawed and all the validity conditions were not met, the main result had been the almost non-existent impact of “treatment” (ie the application of the experienced scheme) on the rate of entry into employment.
in 2016, the RSA-activity, “strong” a non-recourse rate of 70%, was removed and replaced by the activity premium
During parliamentary debates, this result was largely embellished to win the support of parliamentarians. But in 2016.