The massive demonstrations, which once drew over a million protesters, largely faded more than two years ago. The black-clad youth, notorious for setting garbage ablaze in “wild protests,” eventually ceased their disruptive acts. While some nationwide union strikes have occurred, they haven’t singularly focused on this particular issue.
Therefore, it might have appeared that the heated debate in France over gradually increasing the retirement age, from 62 to 64, had finally been settled. However, that was far from the truth.
Instead, the conflict continued to simmer, remaining a seemingly idealistic rallying cry for left-wing parties and the country’s powerful labor unions. All the while, they faced the unyielding determination of French President Emmanuel Macron.
That is, until this past week. Following prolonged political turmoil, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu shocked the nation by offering to pause the proposed change until after the next presidential election, scheduled for 2027.
This remarkable retreat represented a significant concession from Mr. Macron, typically known for his authoritative, top-down style of governance. It also threatened to undo what many considered to be the sole major achievement of his second term.
However, this move allowed Mr. Lecornu’s government to secure just enough support to avoid being overthrown by lawmakers, a fate met by two of its predecessors in the past year. For now, at least, they survived.
The fact that the prime minister was forced to unravel the change highlights just how deeply rooted France’s cultural attachment is to early retirement, which many consider a fundamental right. The mere idea of losing this right has become a significant political flashpoint for the nation.
“What will remain of Emmanuel Macron’s legacy?” questioned Chloé Morin, a political analyst in Paris. “It is slowly being undone.”
Ms. Morin and other experts agree that Mr. Macron had very little choice in the matter.
The president was facing escalating pressure to call new legislative elections, hoping to resolve the stalemate in the lower house of Parliament, which is currently divided among three major blocs — left, center, and right.
Even some of Mr. Macron’s usual allies have begun to join the growing chorus of opposition voices demanding that the president himself step down.
“For him, conceding on the retirement reform was a way to buy a little time, to defuse the debate over his resignation,” Ms. Morin explained. “It wasn’t even a choice; it was a foregone conclusion.”
While perhaps a political lifeline, the concession also reflected the deep anger that has continued to fester, not just over the proposed change itself, but also how the government implemented it.
The initial plans for the pension overhaul sparked enormous demonstrations across the country for months. Realizing that the change would likely fail to pass the lower house of Parliament through a normal vote, Mr. Macron’s government resorted to a constitutional maneuver, known as the 49.3 after the relevant article, to force the bill through.
Although legal, the use of the 49.3 — which effectively bypassed a full parliamentary vote on the retirement bill — was widely perceived as profoundly undemocratic.
In his speech, Mr. Lecornu acknowledged that the retirement law has been a lingering point of contention for years, provoking “tensions, anxieties, weariness, sometimes a feeling of injustice or incomprehension — whether legitimate or not — in terms of democracy.”
At the time, Mr. Macron justified the constitutional measure, stating that, like the reform itself, it “was unpopular, but necessary” to ensure the long-term sustainability of the country’s pension system.
The French enjoy one of the longest and most generous pension plans globally. Even after the proposed changes, they would still retire earlier than the European average — where men retire at 65 and women at 64.5, according to the European Commission’s 2024 Aging Report.
However, Mr. Macron argued that the French system, where active workers fund the pensions of retirees, was rapidly becoming unsustainable. Statistics indicate that the number of retirees is growing much faster than the workforce, and these retirees are living significantly longer lives. Not adjusting the retirement age, Mr. Macron repeatedly explained, would be akin to “making our children pay.”
Back then, the only mistake Mr. Macron would acknowledge was “having failed to convince people.”
He attempted to move past the issue, announcing a new agreement with labor unions on working conditions and embarking on visits to villages across the country.
Yet, the wound never truly healed, and the reform was never fully accepted.
A poll conducted in April 2025 — two years after the measure was pushed through — revealed that more than 60 percent of the country favored repealing the law and reinstating the retirement age of 62.
“While the political adage suggests that public opinion tends to forget and forgive, in this instance, the issue became entrenched,” said Vincent Martigny, a professor of political science at Côte d’Azur University in Nice. He explained that it transformed into a symbol of the government’s heavy-handed and “revolting” approach to politics, perceived as acting against the will of the people.
“Once people feel you’re doing politics against them, especially in a country like France, which is very turbulent in terms of voicing its discontent, well, it’s very hard to go back to a peaceful situation,” Mr. Martigny added.
In France, a robust pension is not merely seen as an essential component of the country’s generous social security system, established after World War II to unify the fractured nation and intrinsically linked with its national identity. For many, retirement is considered a just reward for the hardships of both working and paying high taxes.
“It’s a very important element in the French psyche,” commented Bruno Chrétien, president of the Institute for Social Protection.
The Socialist Party, which, like most left-wing parties in France and labor unions, views the welfare state as a proud postwar legacy, continued to oppose Mr. Macron’s changes to the retirement program long after the law had been enacted.
Mr. Lecornu only managed to survive this past week with the Socialists’ backing — and in exchange, they finally succeeded in extracting the promised suspension of the law from the government.
However, Pierre Jouvet, the party’s secretary general, along with many other Socialists who supported the prime minister, made it clear that their continued cooperation should not be taken for granted.
“The president is starting to realize that he will be compelled, in order to complete his mandate, to make concessions to the left and to the Socialists,” he stated, “and that he can no longer govern the country alone without considering what the opposition is telling him.”
It remains uncertain whether a suspension of the pension overhaul will withstand upcoming budget discussions. It is expected to face opposition from conservative lawmakers and many within Mr. Macron’s centrist coalition, who express strong disapproval at the prospect of reversing a hard-won reform.
Even so, many believe that the government’s concession, which effectively pushes the issue to be addressed by the next president, will ultimately lead to the final abandonment of the law raising the retirement age.
“I don’t foresee any candidate campaigning on this issue” before the 2027 presidential election, Mr. Martigny remarked.
It would be challenging for a candidate to declare, “Let me warn you, if I’m elected, the first thing I’m going to do is put the pension reform scheme back on the table,” he said, “because that would jeopardize anyone’s chances of being elected.”