In other words the legal security has its own limits

It is not disputed, examples of legal uncertainty are legion and represent a real handicap for the economy: between 3 and 4 points of the national GDP, according to the OECD. For at the outset, a paradox must be underlined: the will of simplifying the legal environment is inevitably opposed the need to adapt to a society increasingly more complex technologically and economically. In other words, the legal security has its own limits. It is not a goal to pursue, essential for the life of the business and competitiveness - international - our companies.

The question is not new in relations with public authorities. Allow companies to engage in a transaction with the certainty of the interpretation that will make the tax or social administration, it is the purpose of the proceedings of Rescript. And yet, despite the progress made, remains fear of companies receive a negative response to their consultation with administration and, finally, the feeling of taking a risk by drawing his attention. This diagnosis of insecurity takes an acuity special in the period of crisis, in which we expect an increase in controls and investigations of tax, of the MFA of the Labour Inspectorate, with always the same faults: a right of access to the premises of undertakings inadequately supervised, a secrets sometimes looted, seized documents not returned, tax checks which should be as well to charge and discharge.

In its relations with other actors that are workers and consumers, lurks a premise, that a business considered holding too much power. So Parliament has inevitably tend to distort the gives disproportionate, more stringent rules for businesses and the opportunity may be questionable. For illustration, what about the precipitation in the implementation of the portability of social rights, entered into force on July 1, 2009 and already extent by order of the October 7 This, with areas of shade in the implementation of the device, not to mention the heavy administrative burden in particular on SMEs - TPE.

The law, privilege of insiders

More fundamentally, it comes back to the issue of normative production. So even the intention of the legislature may be laudable (modernizing the economy, reduce the unemployment rate, increase purchasing power), proliferation of the sources of the law and legislative inflation lead to a tracery of standards which may be contradictory or difficult to reconcile and that it is then impossible to control. These paradoxes and questions, certainly not of fixes, but the use of methods based on consultation with civil society, in a way for companies to anticipate the major developments and integrate them into their strategic choices.

In any case, the period of crisis tests the ability of our right to respond with fitness for an economic need and societal. It is now essential to lead a discussion of methodological on art to legislate in such circumstances. In other words, reconciling reactivity and respect for our democratic values

In short, the major challenge is that of a right which a union perfect, model married the economic and social realities faced by businesses. Quid, inter alia, the now - and unfortunately - classic example of this procedure of economic dismissal whose duration can exceed 400 days due to the combined influence of a series of deadlines and obligations for the companies of 1,000 employees through the dismissal of at least 250 of them Aberrant situation in the case of a company in great difficulty for the survival of which the speed of action is decisive.

Not to mention the difficulties of access to the standard: approach of Eve, now essential, especially in certain sectors where technical regulations are particularly numerous, significantly increases the cost of the activity, with a real "legal divide" at the expense of SMEs which may not have the human resources or financial to deal with.

Or regression of freedom is deep when the law ceasing to be the good of all, becomes the privilege of insiders.