Collective social protection: the absurd complexity of a system on its last legs

There are labyrinths that are built stone by stone, not to serve a logic, but to justify the existence of their architects. Collective social protection in the workplace is one of those regulatory edifices whose increasing complexity seems to have become an end in itself. The Social Security Department (DSS), which has been at the helm for decades, has gradually become a formidable machine for producing complexity and URSSAF risk for companies.

A permanent administrative headache

Let's take an emblematic example: group provident and health insurance schemes. Designed to support employees in the event of life's accidents - death, work stoppage, medical expenses - these schemes should be crystal-clear. Yet managing them has become a real administrative headache for companies.

To ensure compliance, these companies must engage in a never-ending race of regulatory updates and verifications.
The notion of "cadre" (executive) has changed from Article 4 to 4 bis, then to Article 2.1 and 2.2. Some categories of supervisory staff even oscillate between managerial and non-managerial staff, depending on developments in case law.

Companies also have to juggle a myriad of rules:

• Distinguish between public and optional exemptions from membership, and ensure rigorous traceability.
• Respect the "tunnel of care" imposed by the "responsible" contract for healthcare costs.
• Verify the collective nature of plans, using formalized criteria with 5 levels of importance: those defined by default as collective, and those requiring justification.
• Compliance with equally complex rules concerning possible contribution structures.
• Communicating and training employees on a benefits system expressed in %BR, %PMSS, and other opaque acronyms derived from an equally hermetic and increasingly complex social security nomenclature of treatments.

This regulatory maze transforms what should be a protection tool into a time-consuming headache, mobilizing precious resources and increasing management costs.

Harmful regulatory inflation

In its great indulgence, the DSS grants transitional periods for each new wave of regulation, allowing companies to adapt slowly to a complexity of its own making. This regulatory inflation entails additional administrative costs for companies and hampers their agility, to the detriment of their performance and the quality of service provided to employees.

The need for a simplification Big Bang

But why persist in this regulatory headlong rush? Why not launch a Big Bang of simplification?

A common-sense reform would simply consist in reverting to a single, simple rule: using the ceiling for deductibility of contributions as the sole criterion, whatever the risk covered - provident, health or retirement. This approach would allow companies to freely organize their schemes according to their employees' needs, with a guaranteed funding floor for each risk. Such a development would offer greater flexibility for employers and greater clarity for employees, who could benefit from cover that is more closely tailored to their personal situation.

Inspiring international examples

Many countries have already begun this transition to simpler, easier-to-understand schemes, encouraging employers and employees to take greater responsibility for managing their social protection. France, a pioneer in the field of social rights, could draw inspiration from these successful experiments to reinvent its collective social protection model. By focusing on intelligent simplification, we could reduce administrative costs, free up time and energy for companies, and thus improve the overall performance of contracts while ensuring greater clarity for beneficiaries.

A modernization opportunity

There is still time to break out of this downward spiral of complexity and rigidity. An open dialogue between social partners, public authorities and companies would enable us to devise a more modern, agile and efficient framework. Because beyond the current constraints, collective social protection remains a formidable lever for employee commitment and well-being. All we need to do is dare to rethink the model to make it a genuine tool for progress and performance, at the service of all.