France · Question · Question écrite
15792
Question 15792 — civil servants and public agents
Introduced
9 June 2026
Last action
9 June 2026 · Question
Status
posée
Sponsors
—
Subjects
Discovery layer
Source updated
9 June 2026
Summary
Ms. Marianne Maximi alerts the Minister of National Education to the exclusion of staff from public interest groups for continuing training and professional integration, in particular agents of GIP FCIP, from the effective benefit of employer participation in complementary social protection. However, these personnel carry out essential missions in the public service of national education. They are involved in training continued, professional integration, career support and the implementation of essential public policies, particularly for those furthest from employment or qualifications. They thus fully participate in a mission of general interest and contribute, on a daily basis, to equal access to training and emancipation through education. However, while they come under public law and work in connection directly with the rectorates, these agents do not benefit from the same social rights as other public agents carrying out comparable missions within national education, in particular in academic services or GRETA. Following an analysis by the General Directorate of Public Finances, several GIPs were led to suspend the payment of the fixed contribution of 15 euros monthly for social protection. complementary. In some cases, agents are even asked to reimburse amounts previously paid. This situation is socially unjust and incomprehensible from a Republican point of view. It amounts to creating, within the same public service, categories of public agents with unequal social rights. With comparable missions, comparable commitment, comparable contribution to the service of the State, the personnel concerned see themselves deprived of a right recognized to others. Such a breakdown in equality weakens agents, fuels a legitimate feeling of abandonment and contradicts the stated objective of strengthening the attractiveness of the public service. It is all the more shocking given that the reform of complementary social protection in the public service was precisely aimed at better protecting public employees and reducing inequalities in coverage. social. However, in reality, its application results here in excluding personnel who carry out essential missions for national education. This situation is all the less acceptable in a context where many public officials are already experiencing statutory insecurity, the erosion of purchasing power and the deterioration of their working conditions. This difficulty is not an isolated case. Each academy has a GIP FCIP or an equivalent structure, this exclusion is likely to concern thousands of agents throughout the national territory. It therefore poses a national question of republican equality: can the State accept that public agents carrying out similar missions on its behalf be treated differently in terms of fundamental social rights? Furthermore, the Government has already recognized that this situation raised practical difficulties and questions of fairness between agents. In a response to the Senate, it was indicated that the Government was considering how to cover GIP agents under fairer conditions. This recognition cannot remain without concrete follow-up. Also, she asks him, firstly, to specify the progress of this government reflection and the timetable envisaged for putting an end to this unequal treatment. She asks him, secondly, if he intends to modify Decree No. 2022-633 of April 22, 2022 or Decree No. 2013-292 of April 5, 2013 in order to explicitly integrate GIP personnel into the field of complementary social protection of the State civil service. She asks him, thirdly, if a national instruction will be given to suspend requests for reimbursement of participations already paid to agents, pending regulatory clarification guaranteeing their rights and putting an end to this breakdown in equality between public agents.
Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.
Timeline
9 June 2026
Question
Source: DateQuestion
Votes
No vote records are attached yet.
Versions
No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.
Documents
No documents linked.
Sponsors
- Marianne Maximi · auteur
Related records
No cross-record relationships stored yet.
Sources
PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.
- Official source: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/questions/QANR5L17QE15792
- Open data entity: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/opendata/QANR5L17QE15792
- france · QANR5L17QE15792 · source updated 9 June 2026