Focus originally published on the website of the Autonomy Health Ideas Laboratory (LISA), of which we are partners.
Reforms sometimes have their destiny linked.
Older employees are thus very often caregivers: the pension reform is therefore not indifferent with regard to the potential help that sixty-year-olds, particularly women, represent for their ascendants. The reform further increases the pressure for the management of old age.
Above all, this reform reinforces a little more, if necessary, the need to be concerned regarding the working conditions of caregivers. We mentioned it recently for professionals who work with the elderly, both at home and in institutions.[1]. The loss ratio for work accident and professional diseases is particularly high there. However, in many cases today, thebusiness wear does not allow caregivers to consider working until the legal age at which to exercise their right to full pension.
Whatever else we think of the relevance of the pension reform, it is urgent to provide healthcare professionals with prospects for the rest of their careers. Another way of putting it: this is not the time to further aggravate the flight of caregivers.
It is therefore necessary to consolidate the workforce to relieve the working conditions professionals in post and strengthen the systems likely to limit or mitigate professional wear and tear. Beyond the professionals in post, we really do not have the means to further degrade theattractiveness of the sector care vis-à-vis putative entrants, to whom it is necessary to be able to offer something other than a static career up to the age of 64.
In order not to scare away existing staff and attract new ones, it is therefore crucial to design professional trajectories and to propose alternatives or developments during the career.
It is urgent :
– to consolidate our statistical knowledge on the careers of healthcare professionals, as has been recommended the Court of Auditors (which pointed to the dispersion of ATMP risk data)[2]to develop the most relevant public action possible;
– strengthen the prevention of occupational risks. No fatality in the matter. A better nursing supervision rate for patients is a sine qua non. It allows for teamwork. The mobilization of adequate equipment is another condition for limiting occupational risks. From this point of view, the creation of funds for the prevention of occupational wear and tearprovided for by the pension reform, is an important system in the health and medico-social field: it is intended to co-finance with employers preventive actions for the benefit of particularly exposed employees (awareness, adaptation of workstations, training and retraining) .
As we have said, the issue is significant in the health field. The system allowing early departures at the full rate for permanent incapacity will also be crucial in this field… and will no doubt be in high demand, insofar as the means exist;
– to globally resume the care professions site[3] to give prospects for the development of the activity during their career: finally, we will have to admit that we only keep our staff on the condition of offering them prospects for mobility. This is undoubtedly paradoxical and even counter-intuitive for some, who reasoned regarding “captive” personnel, but the professionals who can vote today with their feet. Albert Hirschman had described it in 1970 regarding consumers, who had at their disposal exit (change supplier), questioning (complaining) or loyalty (being faithful to a product or a brand).[4]. This is the case with professionals today, who legitimately put in competition the work organizations depending on their conditions.
Stephane Le BoulerPresident of Lisa
[1] https://www.lisa-lab.org/focus3-conditionsdetravail
[2] Court of Auditors, Social Security 2022, October 2022. “Chapter VI – The challenges of controlling occupational risks in establishments and services for the elderly and people with disabilities”
[3] https://www.lisa-lab.org/focus-8-profession-sante-etatdurgence
[4] Exit, Voice and Loyalty, Responses to decline in firms, organizations and states, Harvard University Press, 1970.
