LABOR
WORKING IN THE EC: Labor Responds to 1992 By Keith Harper Keith Harper is the labor correspondent for the (Manchester) Guardian. LONDON--A little late in the day, the European trade union movement has begun to respond to plans to unite the 12 European Community (EC) countries into a single market in 1992. Facing corporations which are poised to manipulate the EC's new economic structures, European trade unions are beginning to cooperate and organize across national borders to confront the realities of 1992. Thus far the main advocates for transnational trade union cooperation are the West German unions, which have the most to lose if the 1992 internal market leads to what they call "social dumping." The German unions are wary of companies' willingness to exploit the single market by switching from countries with relatively high social "costs" to low-wage and less socially protected countries, fearing that it could undermine trade union agreements on hours, wages and working conditions. Pushed by the West Germans, the Brussels-based European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) has begun planning a response. In March 1990, it brought together 1,000 trade union officials in Ostend in Belgium to discuss how employers are preparing for 1992 and how workers' interests can be advanced. The ETUC also held a March rally of more than 10,000 shop stewards near the European Commission's offices in Brussels, demanding that the single market not be constructed at the expense of the unions' hard won rights, freedoms and social standards. The unions' response has been slow in coming, partly due to the erosion of trade union power in many Western European countries, where reduced membership has diminished labor's political clout. There are signs, notably in the successful campaign for a 35- hour working week in the West German engineering industry and ongoing efforts to shorten the work week in Britain, that this is changing. An upturn in some European economies and a spontaneous increase in shop floor militancy have both played a part. It is through the ETUC that the unions are attempting to make their voice heard and put their actions into effect. Two European industry committees, one for chemical and energy workers and one for journalists, have been recognized by the ETUC this year, bringing the number of industry committees to 15. Most union leaders agree, however, that their work is just starting and that their national trade union confederations will be reluctant to allow them to negotiate pay and working conditions across national barriers. Challenges to labor Pay and conditions vary widely among European countries. The top runners are West Germany and Denmark; the UK, France, Italy and Ireland form a second tier; at the bottom of the earnings scale are less developed countries, including Spain and Portugal. Corporations can use these disparities to force workers to compete against one another and thereby push wages downward. However, "Trade unions look at these kind of figures differently," says Norman Willis, general secretary of the 8.3 million-strong British Trades Union Congress. "Particularly in the low wage countries, but also in countries like the UK, unions will tend to see moves toward a single European market as an opportunity to bring up real wages and conditions towards the level of the best." He adds, "Unions in higher wage countries are concerned that their favorable terms and conditions are not undermined in competition with low wage countries. The common objective--and I hope it works-must be a period of adjustment so that pay levels can advance in all parts of the EC, most notably the less prosperous regions." Raising wages throughout the EC will require that unions in branches of European multinationals coordinate their collective bargaining efforts. This has happened in some instances, such as at the computer company, Bull, and the food conglomerate, BSN- Gervaise Danone. On the basis of similar experiences, the European Metalworkers' Federation (EMF) has decided that all of its member unions should strive for European-wide contract negotiations with multinational employers. Progress has been slow and employers have resisted approaches from unions representing their workforces in different countries. As a stopgap, the ETUC is pursuing the possibility of using EC funds to subsidize transnational trade union meetings when management will not agree to European-wide negotiations. These meetings have limited value, however, enabling unions to share information on productivity or the profitability of subsidiaries in other EC countries, but not much else. Restructuring industry, restructuring unions Trade union leaders also fear that 1992 will unleash more impersonal forces. They are concerned that the industrial restructuring which will accompany the unification of the European market will have dire consequences for their members. All parties acknowledge that 1992 will generate economic restructuring. Some companies will shift production sites, some firms are expected to consolidate their operations, some businesses will close. Unification proponents claim the creation of new jobs will outweigh the social cost. An official EC forecast predicts 5 million new jobs (it does not indicate how many existing jobs might be lost), and a 4-7 percent increase in the living standards of the average citizen. This prediction, however, rests on optimistic assumptions about how companies will react and about government policies throughout the world. Trade unions fear the effect of the restructuring on their members. John Edmonds, general secretary of the General Municipal Boilermakers' (GMB) general union, the second largest general union in the UK with 900,000 members, says, "In the short term, 500,000 European jobs might be lost as industries restructure. Firms will merge and production plants close as businesses adjust to more competitive trading conditions. There is no guarantee that they will be replaced by new jobs requiring similar skills or that new jobs will be concentrated in the same regions as jobs that are lost." The European unions know they face tough battles if they are to protect the position of their stronger members, let alone create a framework which will encourage higher standards for workers in less advanced countries. The West German unions, notably the metal workers, have been among the first to see that the internationalization of production, where for instance one car is made by plants in several EC countries, demands a drastic overhaul of trade union organization. They see the internationalization of production as heightening the need for joint trade union action across national borders. Unions operating within the same multinational company will have to synchronize their annual bargaining. The metal workers go one stage further, maintaining that single, transnational unions are a necessity. As yet, no takers have appeared for this proposal, but the metal workers remain excited about the prospects of European-wide, international unions, which they think will be able to exert significant pressure over corporations. Opportunities for labor Nineteen ninety-two does offer some positive openings for labor, though it remains unclear whether workers will be able to capitalize on them. One fruitful area for activity appears to be the shorter work week. Most European countries have 40 or 48 hour work week laws. But in most European countries, collective agreements improve on the legal situation. In recent years, trade unions have notched a number of successes in reducing the work week for manual workers. The 38-hour week is the norm in Belgium and the Netherlands, and in Austria many industries have reduced weekly hours to 38.5. In Denmark, many industries are in the process of implementing a phased cut to 37 hours, and a similar campaign, backed by well-organized strikes in key plants, has been proceeding in the UK for the past year. Significantly, the single market issue has led to demands, primarily from the EMF unions, for harmonization of hours throughout Europe. (balance of this article omitted here; unscannable)