IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Les négociations salariales en France : une analyse à partir de données d’entreprises (1994 ‑ 2005)

Listed author(s):
  • Sanvi Avouyi-Dovi
  • Denis Fougère
  • Erwan Gautier

[eng] Wage agreements covered an average of nearly 75% of paid employees in France in the period 1994-2005. Industry agreements covered nearly two-thirds of workers, while enterprise (i. e., single-company) agreements covered less than one-quarter. The percentage of employees paid at near-minimum-wage level (Salaire Minimum Interprofessionnel de Croissance: SMIC) makes an enterprise agreement less likely but industry agreements more likely. There is no systematic connection between the signing of an industry agreement and of an enterprise agreement. The intervals between two agreements— very often one year— reflect the obligation for firms and industries to bargain annually. Very few agreements have effects lasting several years. Some agreements are phased in gradually during the signature year. In the period 1994-2005, 53% of agreements in industries other than metalworking and construction were signed between October and January, 40% of agreements in metalworking were signed in December, and 50% of agreements in construction were signed between March and May. At enterprise level, nearly 60% of agreements were signed between January and April. The timing of the minimum-wage adjustment— July in each year of the period studied— has an impact on the agreement calendar. In sectors with a high proportion of workers paid at near-minimum-wage level, agreements tend to be signed between June and September. The distribution of negotiated wage changes across industries and enterprises depends on inflation conditions, the sales/ workforce ratio at firm level, and the proportion of employees earning the minimum wage. The prior signing of an industry agreement has a mildly positive effect on the pay raise negotiated in the firm. [fre] En France, les accords de salaire ont couvert en moyenne près de 75 % des salariés chaque année au cours de la période allant de 1994 à 2005. Les accords de branche concernent environ les deux tiers des salariés alors que les accords d’entreprise n’en couvrent que moins du quart. Le pourcentage de salariés employés au voisinage du salaire minimum interprofessionnel de croissance (Smic) réduit la probabilité que soit signé un accord de salaire dans l’entreprise, mais l’accroît au sein des branches. Le lien entre la signature d’un accord de branche et celle d’un accord d’entreprise n’est pas systématique. Les durées entre deux accords de salaire, très souvent d’une année, reflètent l’obligation pour les entreprises et les branches de négocier chaque année. Il est rare d’observer des accords dont les effets perdurent durant plusieurs années. Certains accords prennent leur effet de manière progressive au cours de l’année de signature. Sur la période 1994-2005, les accords de branche (hors métallurgie et BTP) sont majoritairement signés entre octobre et janvier (53 %), 40 % des accords dans la métallurgie sont signés en décembre, alors que plus 50 % des accords dans le BTP sont signés entre mars et mai. Au niveau des entreprises, près de 60 % des accords sont signés entre janvier et avril. La date à laquelle le Smic est réévalué, le mois de juillet de chaque année au cours de la période étudiée, a un effet sur le calendrier des accords. Dans les secteurs où le nombre de salariés rémunérés au voisinage du Smic est important, la signature des accords intervient plus souvent entre juin et septembre. La distribution des changements de salaire négociés au niveau des branches et des entreprises dépend du régime d’inflation, du ratio ventes sur effectif au niveau des entreprises et de la proportion de salariés rémunérés au niveau du Smic. La signature préalable d’un accord de branche a un effet légèrement positif sur la hausse de salaire négociée dans l’entreprise.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Programme National Persée in its journal Economie et statistique.

Volume (Year): 426 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 29-65

in new window

Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2009_num_426_1_8041
Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.2009.8041
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2009_num_426_1_8041. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Equipe PERSEE)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.