Development of the French Social Security System (FSSS) was influenced by several political and economic occurrences during the past century within the neighboring countries of France, such as in Germany (Chapter 2.10.6) and the United Kingdom (Chapter 2.10.7). Currently, FSSS can be seen as a complex network that includes a variety of benefits for the entire population of France. The Industrial Revolution during the 19th century had a profound impact on FSSS, as it did in other European countries. During the past few decades, the growing
population of working class have commenced to regulate their livelihoods on remuneration based regular income. The passion for having a remuneration related income related to modern industries has increased the social risks of the responsibilities depending on the type of the occupation.
After the Wald War 2, the traditional mechanisms of communities that have supported social risk management mechanisms (Guilds, religious centers, family relatives and neighbours associations) gradually decreased mainly for the reason of the unavailability of having time for social events that is influenced by occupational pressure. Because of disconnection from social networks, people were at a greater risk of becoming vulnerable when they faced situations such as unemployment, occupational injury, sickness and old age. The applicability of the traditional law of tort was ill adapted to help during such situations that commonly occurred. Even for applicable occasions (Keeton, 1962), implementations were poor and rare since, the distribution of power had an imbalanced situation between the employers and employees.
During the first stage of the French Revolution in 1791, mutual aid societies were developed, diluting the old Guilds. In the era between the late 19th century and the early years of 20th century, a structure to support social development was commenced. During those days, a social supportive structure appeared as useful but supportiveness was limited only to a segment of society. The system was managed purely on the voluntary contributions received from the working people. There would always have been differences in the contributions since attitudes towards the contributed amount varied depending on the individual’s mentality. These kinds of contributions were considered as the final option available for the underprivileged citizens. Such supportiveness was insufficient for protecting a population at large. Since then, the evolvement of new institutions capable of providing protection that was more adequate could be seen to slowly develop in society. In 1898, a law was passed by French Government relating to occupational injuries and this established the principle of absolute liability with the employer. In 1910, the first law was passed in France for a mandatory old age pension scheme benefiting the entire population of the country. The framework, which was a combination of a variety of schemes suitable for different occupational categories
(such as railway men, mineworkers, seaman and civil servants etc.) had only a small impact at its beginning.
The current French social security system is structured on a number of statutory schemes such as:
a. A compulsory general scheme which covers most employees and certain other categories (students and beneficiaries of certain benefits that have progressively come under the general scheme),
b. Various "special" schemes covering specific categories of nonagricultural workers against all or some risks (usually old age, with other risks being covered by the general scheme),
c. Compulsory basic and supplementary pension schemes, such as the health insurance scheme for nonagricultural, self employed workers,
d. An agricultural scheme which covers agricultural sector employees and non salaried workers against all risks. The agricultural scheme’s provisions are similar to those applicable under the compulsory general scheme,
e. An unemployment insurance scheme covering all wage earners and managed by representatives of employers and employees.
f. The supplementary pension schemes (ARRCO or L’Arrco - Association pour le régime de retraite complémentaire des salariés) and (AGIRC or L'Agirc -
Association générale des institutions de retraite des cadres), which are compulsory for all employees affiliated to the general and agricultural schemes (Cleiss, 2014).
The initial intention of the FSSS scheme was to provide benefits for all the residents of France. At the time of commencement of the universal social security coverage for all the residents of France, considerable opposition was developed from the self employed residents. A similar opposing situation was reported in Sri Lanka when GOSL began to convert the prevailing EPF system to a lifelong PR/SS tfor the textile industry employees in the Katunayake Free Trade Zone (FTZ) in Sri Lanka causing the death of one life in May 2011 (The Island, 2011).
In the recent past, the FSSS commenced has hit difficulties due to the self complexity of the system. Fiscal unsustainability for the medium term was a major
concern due to regional recession. It appears that these constraints have now been resolved in the FSSS when evaluating the last few years against the current situation. A higher level of fiscal fragmentations and dissimilarities in patronage treatment have been identified as the areas that require constant concern by the policymakers. Despite the described constraints, the FSSS can be considered as another substantial mechanism that covers the periods beyond employment responsibilities (Guardiancich, 2010). The FSSS may change their mode of operandi in the future as replacement rates are in a decreasing trend because social appropriateness usually cannot be considered as a perceived or significant political constraint.
Since the commencement of 1980s, the FSSS has been considering a restructuring based on workforce movement and the complexities relating to systemic disintegration. From that point onwards, elderly people commenced enjoying comparatively high social security advantages. It appears that social competences were considered only on an occasional level during the reform discussions because policymakers were more focused on the calculations relating to retirement benefits in basic returns, the duration of the contributions and the setting up of an individual plan for capital savings. When comparing looking at the reformed structure, it can be noticed that a substantial portion of the old system remains unchanged and constructions relating to inherent fiscal mechanisms are left unresolved. Any pension, retirement benefits or social security system that is not capable of being synchronised with a variety of other prevailing schemes of a similar nature means the persistence of an inequality among the categories of benefiters (DICOM, 2012). Employees of statutory organisations and civil servants in France required participating in ‘régimes spéciaux’, which provide better and generous conditions during retirement age; also regarding the period of qualifying and formulae advantages.
In 1959, the FSSS identified the requirement of having corresponding organisational setups in overseas countries in order to liaise with the main body and other inland institutions within France known as (Le’ Cleiss - Centre des Liaisons Européennes et Internationales de Sécurité Sociale) well before the European
Union was formed (Cleiss, 2014) and the FSS implemented the constitutional requirement for an establishment of such a nature.