Penalized by inequalities during their careers, women are also penalized in retirement. The Court of Auditors published this Wednesday morning an inventory of the situation, underlining the pension gaps “still significant” between the two sexes. A finding that undermines the wish enshrined in the Social Security Code, according to which “the Nation also assigns to the pay-as-you-go pension system an objective of solidarity between generations and within each generation, in particular through equality between women and men”.
The goal of pension parity “is far from being achieved”, summed up Pierre Moscovici, president of the Court of Auditors. In 2020, women received a pension 40% lower than that of men. A difference of 777 euros – 1931 euros on the one hand, 1154 euros on the other hand, survivor’s pensions excluded -, which has certainly reduced over time, but which remains massive in the private sector, reaching almost 50% . “The dispersion of pension amounts is almost twice as great among former private sector employees as among former civil servants,” note the auditors.
Various mechanisms, such as social minima or survivors’ pensions, however, make it possible to attenuate these gaps: in 2020, the gap fell from 40% to 28%, between women’s pensions before and after taking into account reversions, according to the Court. “Without the solidarity schemes, the average direct right pension for women would be 50% lower than that for men”, noted Pierre Moscovici.
Unsurprisingly, these pension inequalities are explained by divergent career paths between the sexes. Women are more affected by part-time work and career breaks. The gap is particularly visible on part-time work, used by 28% of women, in 2021, compared to only 8.3% for men. Consequently, women generally earn less than men, with the average difference estimated at “22.3% in 2019”. The result of different training and jobs, as well as “discrimination”. So many points weighing on the pensions of new retirees, when they liquidate their rights.
In addition to these aspects, the Court considers that the operating rules of the system penalize “in practice women”. First, the general system is based on the best twenty-five years of the career to calculate the pension, but the workers do not always fulfill this condition. Similarly, women benefit little from the mechanisms of a long career, and tend to work longer to compensate for their choppy career paths.
Over the years, inequalities have seen timid improvements. The gaps have narrowed slightly: survivor pensions taken into account, the difference has fallen from 35% to 28%, between 2004 and 2020. Auditors expect this movement to continue, but slowly: the pension gap total should thus increase to 17% in 2040, but it “should not disappear”. By way of comparison, other countries, such as Denmark, are already doing much better: France is only in an “intermediate” situation, compared to its neighbors.
The Court therefore calls first to carry out “actions on the labor market”, upstream, to fight against discrimination weighing on women’s careers. In addition, the 2023 pension reform has not “brought substantial changes to family pension rights”, note the auditors, who therefore plead for a “overhaul” of the compensation systems, to make them more effective and more readable, “at a lower cost to the community”.
