I’m always interested in cultural differences between English and French and how they might have come about, so I was fascinated recently to have a chat with a young French chap who has just got back from a work secondment in Germany, and was talking about the differences between work experiences in the two countries.
As always, I’m not telling the following story as a criticism of the French (or German or British) way of working, but simply to highlight the significant gulf that can exist between workers in one one country and another…and perhaps to hint at the problems faced by French employers trying to implement changes.
Apart from the (inevitable) comments about differences in eating habits (lunch being a quick sausage taken at the worker’s desk…) it was the working conditions that he found most surprising in Germany.
He was truly astonished that when workers were asked to do something new or different at work – they just got on and did it! To his amazement there was no talk of strikes, no meetings with management or union leaders to discuss the changes, or under what circumstances the new work might be acceptable…
…and he really did genuinely believe that this ‘blind acceptance’ made the German workers ‘a herd of sheep’ (his words). He couldn’t begin to understand their attitude.
This difference was reinforced by an interesting comment someone kindly left on the recent blogpost about the differences between the French and English (Vive la difference) – as it was quite long I thought I’d post it here (slightly abbreviated) so it gets a bit more attention…
“hello everybody,
I am reading your article with a lot of interest and a big smile, because I am French, and it is surprising to see how you, as an expat, you watch France.
Well, on the political topic, here is my point of view. For me, the thing is not in a kind of national spirit, making English and French different, but rather in history.
I think Boris is completely right. There is a history of the protests in France stopping government action. Not going back to the 18th century of course, but I can give you here some examples (always on the topic of student or retirement!) when the French government gave the odd impression to be really weak in front of a national strike, by canceling the laws and even firing the Prime Minister! And several times…
1984: loi Savary sur l’école privée (changement de 1er ministre)
1986: loi Devaquet sur l’Université (démission du ministre)
1994: loi Falloux sur le salaire des étudiants (retrait de la loi)
1995: loi Juppé sur la réforme des retraites (démission du 1er ministre)
2005: émeutes de banlieue (apparition d’un 2nd 1er ministre…)
2006: Contrat 1ere Embauche (CPE) (quasi démission du 1er ministre)
2010: réforme des retraites (le 1er ministre devait changer alors que la reforme était encore en cours de discussion: c’est de la prévention?!)
With such a political balance sheet, a French man would be mad not protesting when his little comfort is in danger. It seems so easy to frighten the government (specially student organization and lorry trade-unions are strong in that game, because each time they enter in the game, the prime minister starts getting his bag ready!)
I don’t really know recent British history about strikes or social conflicts. My “Epinal picture” (stereotype) is the conflict between Ms Thatcher and the miners in the mid-80?s. Once reduced the power of the trade unions, people are less confident starting a trial of strength…”
(end comment)
Are the differences in working attitudes because of the conflicts between Thatcher and the miners in the 1980′s? Almost certainly yes, but also I think because generally in Britain (and presumably Germany) both pay and progress in a company are linked to effort and performance – so employees actually see ‘going the extra mile’ as the path to their personal success, rather than strike action.
If a company is going to lay-off 10% of its staff is it better to all go on strike together to protect the jobs (French style), or to work harder to make sure you aren’t in the 10% (UK style)? There’s no right or wrong answer but I can see how the difference of opinion might come about, and why it can be so difficult for each nation to understand the attitudes of the other!
You can see why D has the most successful economy in Europe and why Britain was so successful under Mrs T. Its down to hard work and getting on with the job. There are enough laws to protect people and all the unions are doing are causing trouble as there is nothing left for them to do.When you look at China and India much needs to change in Europe if we are going to compete. No one owes us a living.
While being driven by an ambulance/taxi driver we chatted and were suprised to be told that Fr drivers drive with one hand on the wheel the other with the mobile to their ear and the elbow on the window ledge because, she said, we like to be rebels.
Johnny, I don’t think everyone (in lots of European countries) has quite grasped the idea that ‘no one owes us a living‘!
Lesley, it sounds quite glamorous to be a rebel, don’t you think – but as you realise there’s a difference between being a rebel and acting dangerously or irresponsibly, or avoiding responsibility for your own actions. We know someone who had their car written off recently in France because the other driver was on the phone and veered across the road. The insurance company said it couldn’t be proved they were on the phone so they were both ‘equally responsible’ – our friends suggested that phone records could be checked, but were told by the police that would only happen for serious crimes, murder etc. not for a trivial car crash, however serious the consequences could have been.
At least in Britain the phone records are checked for every accident where a mobile phone may have been used.
All the rules and regulations comming from the EU are restricting our ability to compete. The EU is the problem not the solution. The Daly Express is the first newspaper today to start a campagne to get us out. Now i know its only the Daily Express but its a start.
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/213573
First, I would like to thank you to put my “French” comment in the middle of a new article!
)
But I am really surprised by what I am reading now… So I will try to start the controversy, playing my fierce role of left-wing frenchy!
What is this story of considering people protection as a swear word!
Saying “No one owes us a living” is a huge mistake for me. It implies a selfish attitude that I reject!
Yes everyone should build his life, not waiting stupidly that others help you.
But our life shouldn’t be led by money and profit. My main concern is not how I will be competitive against China or India!
I just would like to remind that while making huge earnings for their beloved stockholders, patented medicines send lot of people to death, while contaminating shores or rivers, oil companies earns billions, and what about the big shameful business of war (and for example France has been a major supplier of weapons for Irak taking profit of an odd relationship and making handsome profits in the 80′s).
Yes, a lot of people are working hard and doing their best sincerely believing pay and progress presupposes pain and effort. But an individual effort does not make a society project, and does not make a lovely tomorrow for the next generations.
I think we should rather try to be as much as possible useful in the society.
To conclude being provocative, I will say that, in France, it is not that we want to act as rebels or romantic guys, making a strike one after another. No! In France, we dare think differently. We do not have a devotion to Dollar, and we are not on mainstream like a “herd of sheep”!
Hi Dominique, controversy is good, it helps us all understand each other a bit better. I do like to understand how and why we all see things so differently.
You have explained things very clearly and I agree with a lot of what you say, especially about people in some countries being obsessed with money, and how a society should help each other – which is why I gave up a well paid job in a bank to live in France!
The difference is, I think most British would say that the best way to help a whole society to get richer is for everyone to work harder to get rich themselves, which means more taxes get paid and pensions etc can be higher. Similarly, making it expensive and difficult to employ and get rid of employees (as in France) is good if you are the person who is going to lose their job, but not if you are the company that has to close because salaries are too high and China can do the same job cheaper.
It’s all a question of deciding which is the right approach. I guess there is no right answer because England and France are about as rich as each other, despite their different ways of doing things!
In every country there are people who think ‘the world owes them a living’ (people who claim benefits when they could work, bankers who really think they deserve million pound bonuses…), that comment wasn’t referring to French people, it was saying that if we are to compete against China etc we need to either work harder or work smarter than them, wherever we are in Europe.
Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts
ps at the other extreme, I’m not at all a supporter of the USA system, where there are now a very large number of people living in poverty because the state does little to help those that fall on hard times, despite the great wealth of many in the country.
Well I am a simple man and I know you cannot continue to spend more than you earn. the day will come when you run out of wealth and then what do you do. Wealth is created by hard work and making a profit on what you do to feed, house your family and heat your home in winter. If less and less people are working and the benifits paid go up and up it just cannot go on forever no matter how kind you want to be. I feel so many people as in Dominiques case have just lost sight of the basics of how things work.
We have far too many civil servants and politicians for a start who stand in the way of the basics of making a living. thats why its all going wrong it is the people that get things done.
PS 6 inches of snow this morning.
Nice to see J.N. telling us how Global Warming is getting on in Norfolk.
I fear that I don’t have The Answer to our problems, we must just soldier on within the systems that are dictated to us by the Gang that is in power at the time. Defeatest, I know, but we do at least get to vote (well not here in France, of course) and the majority have their sway. I usually vote for the Party that I agree most with, but of course I usally end up with the bits that I vote for being subsumed by the bits that I don’t like!
I was happy to read all your reactions! First of all, you are using quite a challenging wording, so thank you for making me improve my English! But obviously you express very interesting opinions which make me think about. Well, of course, more you write, more I disagree
First point. The best way to help a whole society is first to have a common project, certainly not to gather as much wealth as possible!
I have some simple History examples. European did not hesitate to despoil South American natural resources, slaughtering whole civilizations, to make durable the snazzy comfort of some Kings. A true project for the future! Nantes and Bordeaux are beautiful cities with an outstanding urban and architectural ensemble… paid with the slave trade to West Indies… Nice to know that in those times people (sailors, merchants, naval architects, …) were working hard or smart for that objective, they became rich, and the retirement system was certainly with high net earnings! Well, I am now happy to learn – in the 21st century – that I have to “compete against” China or India!…
Other point. Wealth is created by hard work. I think it is highly wrong (because incomplete). Example. The wealthiest French (a woman) has never worked one minute in her life. She inherited! Wealth is created by capital and work. Allocation: 5% from work, 95% from capital! Sarkozy is still making whole France laughing with his slogan “Travailler plus pour gagner plus…” Shareholders have smiled and voted for him!
PS: I think you can vote in France, and even stand for election! For example Daniel Cohn Bendit is a member of the European parliament representing France, and he is German.
Lesley its -6c a foot of snow but blue sky and sunny. No snow fall overnight so we are going for a winter walk instead of snow clearing. Overall yearly temps have been falling in this part of the world (not rising) for over 10 years now.
Hi Domonique, thought you might like to see the top 10 richest poeple in France:
Forbes French Rich List 2010
# Name Net worth Citizenship Sources of wealth
1 Bernard Arnault US$27.5 billion -LVMH
2 Liliane Bettencourt US$20.0 billion -L’Oréal
3 François Pinault US$8.7 billion -PPR
4 Serge Dassault US$7.6 billion -Dassault
5 Alain and Gérard Wertheimer US$7.5 billion -Chanel
6 Jean-Claude Decaux and family US$4.6 billion -JC Decaux
7 Alain Mérieux US$4.0 billion -BioMerieux
8 Martin Bouygues US$3.4 billion -Bouygues
9 Pierre Bellon US$2.2 billion -Sodexho
10 Philippe Foriel-Destezet US$2.0 -France Adecco
As you can see, everything is related to those horrible capitalist successfull companys, which make money… And incidentally employ an awfully large ammount of people too…
My own opinion of Sarkosy is that he has the agenda France needs to bring it kicking and screaming into the global market of the 21st century…the problem is that he should have been President in the previous 2 terms so that he could have used the boom years to cushion the finacial reforms France badly needs, whereas he is unfortunately presiding over a recession….
Hello Rob,
You are right that successful companies employ a lot of people.
No doubt Sarkozy is doing his best to bring France back in the global competition.
And I do not think that capitalism is a horrible concept.
The opinion I want to express is that capitalism is a mean, not a goal. I want to highlight that precisely the lack in our society is that we have rules – market rules – but no collective, noble, and humanist objectives.
That’s why I gave examples to show that the first need to keep coherent a society is to find a common project, not just the will to gather wealth! That’s why I first wrote a comment on the shocking and aggressive – for me – sentence “No one owes us a living”.
You give me in your comment the ranking of the wealthiest French people published by Forbes, which takes it from the French weekly magazine “Challenges”. The problem is that this magazine – since 1996 – has published each year in fact the ranking of PROFESSIONAL fortunes. And once re-published by the Americans, the word “professional” has been forgotten… which explains partly why all these shareholders appear first in the list.
Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that almost all these people belong to… a dynasty! Just like the ironfounders… time has not changed a lot to that, we still live in a kind of class based society.
Some datas:
Arnault’s father was… an industrial. He started his career in his father’s company.
Liliane Bettencourt is the only child of Eugène Schueller, the founder of L’Oréal.
Dassault is the son of Marcel Dassault, from whom he inherited the Dassault Group.
Alain and Gérard Wertheimer inherited their company from their father Jacques, who had inherited a racing stable from his parents Pierre and Germaine Wertheimer.
…
That’s why I wrote that wealth is mainly created by capital (here inheritance).
So I am just unconvinced by the “meritocracy” concept (and the kind of sentences like No one owes us a living), concept which would make me believe that the main source of wealth is my commitment in work. It is not true today.
Actually, I do not understand why you name these 10 persons. Do they represent any ideal, do they deserve their money, have they any operational function in their company, did they discover any scientific artistic important concepts, …? What is your purpose?