Like it or not, France needs Macron’s pension reform

Give French President Emmanuel Macron credit for determination. His previous effort to reform the country’s public-pensions system was defeated by months of strikes and demonstrations. Now he’s trying again — and, as before, facing furious opposition. Here’s hoping he has better luck this time.

Mr. Macron’s new plan, or something like it, is certainly needed. Despite some earlier modifications, France’s public-pension system is unaffordably generous. It lets most workers retire on a full state pension at 62 so long as they’ve paid contributions for 42 years. On average, people stop working earlier than in most other countries and therefore spend more years in retirement. Payments also replace a bigger share of wages. The cost is enormous: roughly 14% of gross domestic product (compared to 7% in the United States). If you’re wondering why public spending in France is about 60% of GDP, the highest in Europe, here’s one reason.

Mr. Macron’s latest proposal is hardly extreme. It would gradually raise the full-pension age to 64, a year earlier than his previous design, and require 43 years of contributions. He’s softened the proposal in other ways too. The new increase to 64 won’t apply to some people who started work especially young, for instance, or who have health problems; the plan would also establish a new minimum pension. In all, by international standards, the system would be generous even after the changes. But it would still make a big fiscal difference: Despite the concessions, officials say, the package would eliminate the pensions deficit by 2030.

As Mr. Macron doubtless understands, much bolder reform would be better. France doesn’t have one public pension scheme but dozens, each with its own complex rules. Ideally, they should be integrated and simplified, as earlier plans proposed. Pension reforms are difficult at the best of times, because they threaten perceived entitlements and add to workers’ sense of insecurity. The political challenge is vastly greater when workers can’t properly understand how the systems work or how proposed reforms would affect them.

What’s clear is that allowing France’s pension costs to keep piling up would be extremely irresponsible, and the longer the delay, the more drastic the remedies will have to be. Measured against what’s required — or by the generosity of other countries’ systems — what Mr. Macron’s proposing is moderate, even modest.

That hasn’t blunted the reaction. According to a recent poll, roughly half of voters want the statutory age to remain at 62 and another quarter want it cut. Mr. Macron’s popularity has slumped; he no longer commands a majority in parliament; and unions are calling for strikes and demonstrations to start on Jan. 19. Last time around, months of protests effectively shut cities, idled the economy, crippled transportation systems, closed schools, and led to oftenviolent clashes with police.

It’s fair to say that Macron’s chances for success aren’t much better this time. The president is right to press on nonetheless.