Home iconBACK TO HOME PAGE

EUROPEAN REVIEW

ISSUE 41 - Page 3




Unions welcome Commission ‘yes’ to Works Council reform
CONTRARY TO ITS POSITION ON A SERVICES DIRECTIVE, the European Commission has indicated that it will make proposals to reform legislation on European Works Councils (EWCs). Originally passed in 1994, the initial directive has been strengthened by the European Company Statute (2001) and the Framework on Information and Consultation (2002). By 2006 more than 60% of workers in eligible firms (they must have more than 1,000 employees with over 150 in each of at least two member states) were covered by EWCs. However they were far more common among the larger companies (61% with over 10,000 workers) than smaller ones (23% in the 1,000-5,000 bracket). The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) believes that this is due to management hostility in smaller enterprises and recommends an active trade union organisation as a guarantee of a good EWC.
Some idea of what can be achieved by negotiation with co-operative employers comes with the agreement at BASF, a German-based company with 60,000 employees across 22 EU Member States. There will be three Europe-wide EWC consultations annually as well as national meetings. Members of the industry union federation EMCEF will have the right to be present at board meetings and any decision that affects employment will not be implemented until ‘in-depth and conclusive discussions with the workers’ side’.
Holes in the law that the ETUC would like to eliminate include the lack of sanctions against companies that ignore it, for example when Renault closed their Vilvoorde plant in Belgium in defiance of the directive (see issue 14). They would like to see decisions that impact on workers be declared legally invalid if there is no consultation and no information supplied to the EWC; or special compensation could be paid. The confederation also want to see better training for works council members, better access to expert advice, a shortening of the time taken to conclude agreements with employers and clearer definitions of information and consultation. Now they want the Commission to get on with revising the law so that it can be passed by the end of 2008: ‘the fierce resistance from European employers to improving the European Works Council (EWC) Directive looks more and more incomprehensible’ added Reiner Hoffmann, Deputy General Secretary.



Romanian/Bulgarian wages up due to migration
Ireland-based multi-nationals avoid unions
AS POORER EASTERN EUROPEAN states have joined the EU various economic effects have been experienced in both east and west. Starting the century with high unemployment and low wages, the former Communist countries have begun to lose large numbers of workers as migrants and the tightening of the labour market is reversing this situation. With as many as 2 million Romanians now working abroad it is becoming hard for employers to find recruits in sectors such as construction. Unemployment has fallen from 7% in 2003 to about 4% and there is a similar story in neighbouring Bulgaria with the figure reduced to 8.9% from 19.5% in 2001. As a result wages are rising and trade unions believe that this means that the minimum wage should also be increased. Romanian unions are asking for a rate of €206 a month, the cost of a basket of subsistence goods. The current government rate is €97, the second lowest in the EU. Analysts now expect salaries in other countries, such as Poland, to go up by about 12% a year.
A RECENT SURVEY BY RESEARCHERS at the University of Limerick has highlighted the differing records on union recognition of home and UK-owned companies as compared with the newly arrived foreign-owned multi-nationals. While 80% of the former said that they engaged with trade unions, only 61% of the latter had such relations but this overall figure masks important further differences: only 41% of US companies accept unions. Furthermore only 50% of these recognise unions at their new Irish sites. From these results the researchers conclude that there is growing trend to avoid unions even among already unionised firms.  More evidence for this supposition came from Coca-Cola in August when they announced the closure of their Drogheda facility. With three plants in Ireland, could it be coincidence that the largest unionised one was to be closed while a non-union factory was to become the main production centre, asked Irish unions.


Back to
Front page icon
Forward to
Next page icon
Up to Top of page icon
FRONT PAGE NEXT PAGE TOP OF THIS PAGE