The Dutch federation of labour unions FNV is an
organization in trouble, on which I already have written a few articles (see
f.i. here and here) in the past. Just like the other large Christian
labour union CNV, the FNV suffers from diminishing numbers of members and an
aging member population.
In spite of their efforts, the FNV and CNV can’t seem
to find the right tone of voice to lure more youngsters into a membership. Many
youngsters have been raised into more individualistic people than their parents
and they feel less need to be unified in a labour union than their parents did.
They think: “I don’t want to be member of a labour union; I’m old and wise
enough to represent myself during salary negotiations”. To be frank, during the
prosperous nineties and early zeroes, these youngsters have probably been
right.
On top of that, the FNV and CNV turned from street-fighters
who represented the ‘underpaid and suppressed workers’ in The Netherlands, into
influential and very political special interest-organizations. These organizations have been closely
attached to large political parties: especially PvdA (labour) and the CDA
(Christian-democrat) party seemed a natural habitat for ex-union
leaders-going-politician. The labour unions FNV and CNV also cooperated closely
with the employer’s organizations VNO/NCW and MKB Nederland.
Negotiating on collective labour agreements (CAO’s) with
the employers and the government was in, while calling out strikes was out of fashion! This phenomenon has
been famous as the so-called ‘Polder-model’: the Dutch society-model of close cooperation
between the government, the employer’s organizations and the labour unions, aimed
at bringing stability and prosperity to the Dutch labour market.
You could legitimately state that this highly
praised Polder-model has been good for the Dutch prosperity over the last
twenty years. However, it has definitely been killing for the labour unions, as
these seemed to have lost their visibility among the youngsters, who in return refused
to become a member. Consequentely, the initially balanced member-base of the unions grew
older and older, virtually without the entrance of fresh blood that the unions needed so
much.
During the last two years, the final nail in the
coffin of the FNV has been the big leadership crisis within this union. The
decision of former FNV-leader Astrid Jongerius to develop and endorse the new pension plan on behalf of the union federation, massively backfired
at her and outraged some of the individual labour unions within the federation.
What followed was a humiliating battle for the leadership within the FNV.
Soon after this battle started, Jongerius was
sacrificed by the leaders of individual unions within the FNV, like FNV Bondgenoten (broad
union for personnel working in manufacturing and distribution jobs) and
ABVA-KABO (civil servants). The leaders of these unions considered that the
flag above their own doors was more important than the unity within the
federation.
This development turned the FNV into a doomed federation:
in spite of the new overall leader Ton Heerts, who had been hired to glue the splinters
of the federation together again, there is still little unity within the FNV.
In the high-profile CAO-negotiations (i.e. collective labour agreement) with the government
and the large employer’s organizations, Heerts mandate is therefore virtually
non-existent, which turns him into a lame duck.
Nevertheless, there has also been a good side to the
problems within the FNV. Since the abdication of Astrid Jongerius, the labour
unions under the FNV flag – and especially FNV Bondgenoten – desperately try to turn into `Rebels with a
cause` again: labour unions that don’t gain respect and influence by ‘hugging
the powers that be’, but by doing real union work. Their style became more
aggressive and their union work more distinct again.
Lately, especially FNV Bondgenoten has been very
active. The following news messages are witnesses of this refound
self-confidence, which is desperately needed in a labour market where high unemployment,
mass lay-offs and virtually almighty employers are the ‘flavours of the week’.
Albert Heijn
On January 28, almost two months ago, I wrote upon the
labour circumstances of fixed and temporary workers in the distribution centers
of the Albert
Heijn supermarket chain. At the
time, FNV Bondgenoten threatened to organize strikes in these distribution
centers, in order to improve the labour circumstances of the fixed and flexible
workers there. I wrote the following lines in comment:
- Just as in other kinds of labour that demand no special education, a race to the bottom started in the distribution centers a few years ago:
- Workers with fixed contracts have been replaced with temp workers;
- Dutch workers with their ‘sturdy’ salary demands have been slowly replaced with Polish, Rumanian and Bulgarian workers, who were willing to do the same job for much less money;
- This development forced Dutch workers also to settle for less money, as they could only receive a temporary contract at a much lower hourly rate;
The
current working environment in The Netherlands is not per sé a good one for
healthy and fair job circumstances. This is the reason that I would not be
surprised when the complaints, collected by the FNV, are largely valid after
all. The difficult economic situation can force employers to state against
their workers: “You have a job, so be happy about that. If you don’t like it,
ten others will!”.
Since last week, the threats for organized strikes
became reality. While the other labour union CNV entered into a collective
labour agreement with Albert Heijn (AH), the FNV Bondgenoten union chose for
the attack. According to the AH organization itself, the union did this on
purpose. Het Financieele Dagblad (www.fd.nl) wrote
about this last Friday:
The supermarket chain Albert Heijn is
strongly under the impression that it has been used as a ‘target for action’ by
FNV Bondgenoten. By doing so, the union seemingly hopes to influence the
political discussion concerning the easing of the labour market and laws for
dismissal, according to AH.
Yesterday (i.e. Thursday, 14 March
2013 - EL), AH entered into a collective labour agreement with the CNV
Dienstenbond (i.e. ‘services union’) for its 5300 distribution workers. FNV Bondgenoten
refuses to sign the contract and expands its actions in the distribution
centers, which started earlier this week.
The CAO-conflict started right at the
moment that employers, labour unions and the cabinet try to make agreements on reforms
for the labour market. To the discomfort of the labour unions, the cabinet is
aiming at easing of dismissal laws and a reduction of the duration and payments of Dutch unemployment
benefit (i.e. ‘WW’).
‘Our goal is to agree upon a good CAO
for our distribution workers’, according to an AH spokesman, ‘but this has been
made much harder now, due to FNV Bondgenoten’. We already thought that other
goals were in play. We think that national political themes, like flexibilization of the labour market and easing of dismissal laws should be discussed in the heart of Dutch politics, namely The Hague.
AH is convinced that it offers a good
CAO to its distribution workers. Next to 3.5% wage increase in two years, the
company offers certainty of work for its fixed employees. In order to take away
worries about the coming dismissal laws, the company wrote down in the CAO that
employees can’t be fired without an independent check.
Of
course, Albert Heijn is right that FNV Bondgenoten has been using the super market chain
as a high-profile target to gain attention in The Hague. However, the super
market chain should not play the role of injured innocence. The organization wants
to save every possible cent on their distribution centers and probably played
hard-ball with the labour unions.
A
wage increase of 3.5% in two years, means in practice that the people receive a
lesser wage increase percentage than the official Dutch inflation rate. Instead
of receiving more money, they receive (a little) less over two years. It is also true that employees with fixed contracts are a dying race within such distribution centers: almost all
new employees will be people with flex-contracts and without any form of job-certainty whatsoever. This is something that the new AH CAO definitely won’t change.
To
be frank, for me it is not so bad that FNV Bondgenoten plays hardball too, with their
actions at the Albert Heijn distribution centers. For a too long time period,
the unions have been invisible negotiators with (sometimes) a hidden agenda. The
members of the unions have not always been sure, whether the union leaders were
negotiating with the cabinet and the employer’s organizations on their behalf,
or that they were working on their political careers. A more visible labour
union might change this for the better.
Companies abusing illnesses
The
following news message from Het Algemeen Dagblad (www.ad.nl)
might be in the same category of ‘creating a higher profile’ for FNV
Bondgenoten.
Employers are trying on a large scale to ditch ‘sick’
personnel at a bargain price. Somebody who returns to work
after a short sick-leave, remains sometimes ‘ill’ on paper, without knowing
this. After two years, the employer can ask for a dismissal in such a situation,
without having the need to pay a high compensaton to its former worker. This is
stated by FNV Bondgenoten after an investigation.
The labour union investigated 3300
reports, which came in at the Meldpunt Verzuimbegeleiding (i.e. briefing point for
absence guidance). Employees that returned to work after having a flu, had been
kept ill for 1% by their employer, without knowing this. After a year, they received 10% to 30% less salary, due to being a ‘sick’ person. ‘After such an event, the road
leads mostly to the courthouse, were the topic of choice is often resolution of
the labour contract’, according to FNV-executive Geo Lotterman.
FNV Bondgenoten is shocked by the
thousands of stories. The unions thinks that the ‘free market’ has been
overdone in the professional absence guidance. The union requires that medical
officers in companies can work independently and that the government maintains sturdy
checks among companies, whether this policy is upheld.
When
these stories are true, it would be a pedestrian way of working by the companies
that act in this way. This makes this story very hard to believe from one side.
On
the other hand, the AD featured one ‘victim’ of this modus operandi, while the FNV claims
to have 3300 more at hand. These circumstances make that this phenomenon deserves an investigation by the
government.
These
are very desperate times for companies and in desperate times people do
desperate things. Therefore, I hope that this FNV report leads to a thorough
investigation by the labour inspection.
Summarized,
FNV Bondgenoten seems well on its way to reclaim the high profile that the
labour union had in the past. I am happy about that: the labour unions have
been too invisible during the last 20 years and these desperate times require
strong unions.
However,
I hope that the union does not want to get this high profile by spreading ghost-stories
and by deploying unjustified actions against companies. This would backfire at
them like a boomerang.
No comments:
Post a Comment