Trade Union Development In Central And Eastern Europe - The "the Velvet Revolution" European Union Accession And Beyond : "The Velvet Revolution" European Union Accession and Beyond 9781845448325, 9781845448318

Citation preview

er cover (i).qxd

13/10/2005

10:13

Page 1

ISBN 1-84544-831-6

ISSN 0142-5455

Volume 27 Number 6 2005

Employee Relations The International Journal

Trade union development in central and eastern Europe – “The Velvet Revolution”, European Union accession and beyond Guest Editor: Geoff Hayward

www.emeraldinsight.com

Employee Relations

ISSN 0142-5455 Volume 27 Number 6 2005

Trade union development in central and eastern Europe – "The Velvet Revolution", European Union accession and beyond Guest Editor Geoff Hayward

Access this journal online __________________________ 551 Editorial advisory board____________________________ 552 Guest editorial ____________________________________ 553 The GPMU and graphical and paper trade unions in central and eastern Europe Geoff Hayward _________________________________________________

555

Changes in the role of the trade union in the Hungarian printing industry: a transition from socialism to market economy Janos Aczel ____________________________________________________

566

Employee relations in the Czech Republic – past, present and future Frantisek Stasek ________________________________________________

Access this journal electronically The current and past volumes of this journal are available at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm You can also search more than 100 additional Emerald journals in Emerald Fulltext (www.emeraldinsight.com/ft) and Emerald Management Xtra (www.emeraldinsight.com/emx) See page following contents for full details of what your access includes.

581

CONTENTS

CONTENTS continued

Norwegian and Nordic trade union support and solidarity for trade unions in eastern and central Europe Finn Erik Thoresen _____________________________________________

592

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia Borislav Majtan ________________________________________________

603

‘‘Change and continuity’’ – the experience of trade unions in the cultural sector of the former Soviet Union Vladimir Kamen ________________________________________________

613

The Dutch trade unions – and their support activities in central and eastern Europe Rene van Tilborg _______________________________________________

624

Note from the publisher ____________________________ 635

www.emeraldinsight.com/er.htm As a subscriber to this journal, you can benefit from instant, electronic access to this title via Emerald Fulltext and Emerald Management Xtra. Your access includes a variety of features that increase the value of your journal subscription.

How to access this journal electronically To benefit from electronic access to this journal you first need to register via the internet. Registration is simple and full instructions are available online at www.emeraldinsight.com/admin Once registration is completed, your institution will have instant access to all articles through the journal’s Table of Contents page at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm More information about the journal is also available at www.emeraldinsight.com/er.htm Our liberal institution-wide licence allows everyone within your institution to access your journal electronically, making your subscription more cost-effective. Our web site has been designed to provide you with a comprehensive, simple system that needs only minimum administration. Access is available via IP authentication or username and password.

Key features of Emerald electronic journals Automatic permission to make up to 25 copies of individual articles This facility can be used for training purposes, course notes, seminars etc. This only applies to articles of which Emerald owns copyright. For further details visit www.emeraldinsight.com/ copyright Online publishing and archiving As well as current volumes of the journal, you can also gain access to past volumes on the internet via Emerald Fulltext and Emerald Management Xtra. You can browse or search these databases for relevant articles. Key readings This feature provides abstracts of related articles chosen by the journal editor, selected to provide readers with current awareness of interesting articles from other publications in the field. Reference linking Direct links from the journal article references to abstracts of the most influential articles cited. Where possible, this link is to the full text of the article. E-mail an article Allows users to e-mail links to relevant and interesting articles to another computer for later use, reference or printing purposes. Emerald structured abstracts New for 2005, Emerald structured abstracts provide consistent, clear and informative summaries of the content of the articles, allowing faster evaluation of papers.

Additional complimentary services available Your access includes a variety of features that add to the functionality and value of your journal subscription: E-mail alert services These services allow you to be kept up to date with the latest additions to the journal via e-mail, as soon as new material enters the database. Further information about the services available can be found at www.emeraldinsight.com/alerts Research register A web-based research forum that provides insider information on research activity world-wide located at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister You can also register your research activity here. User services Comprehensive librarian and user toolkits have been created to help you get the most from your journal subscription. For further information about what is available visit www.emeraldinsight.com/usagetoolkit

Choice of access Electronic access to this journal is available via a number of channels. Our web site www.emeraldinsight.com is the recommended means of electronic access, as it provides fully searchable and value added access to the complete content of the journal. However, you can also access and search the article content of this journal through the following journal delivery services: EBSCOHost Electronic Journals Service ejournals.ebsco.com Informatics J-Gate www.j-gate.informindia.co.in Ingenta www.ingenta.com Minerva Electronic Online Services www.minerva.at OCLC FirstSearch www.oclc.org/firstsearch SilverLinker www.ovid.com SwetsWise www.swetswise.com

Emerald Customer Support For customer support and technical help contact: E-mail [email protected] Web www.emeraldinsight.com/customercharter Tel +44 (0) 1274 785278 Fax +44 (0) 1274 785204

ER 27,6

552

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 p. 552 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Professor Greg J. Bamber Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia Dr Boyd Black Queen’s University, Belfast, Northern Ireland Professor William N. Cooke Douglas A. Fraser Center for Workplace Issues, Detroit, USA Professor Linda Dickens University of Warwick, Coventry, UK Professor Hans-Jurgen Drumm University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany Professor Patricia Fosh University of Wales College of Cardiff, Cardiff, UK Professor Patrick Gunnigle University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland Richard Holden British Energy Generation UK Ltd, East Kilbride, UK Professor Jan Kees Looise University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands Professor Csara Mako St Stephen University, Budapest, Hungary

Professor Mick Marchington Manchester School of Management, UMIST, Manchester, UK John Monks General Secretary, European Trade Union Confederation, Brussels, Belgium Professor Richard Painter Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK Professor Nancy Papalexandris Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens, Greece Professor Edward Snape Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong Professor Tan Chwee Huat National University of Singapore, Singapore Professor Brian Towers Nottingham University Business School, Nottingham University, Nottingham, UK Professor Adrian Wilkinson Professor of HRM, Loughborough University Business School, Loughborough, UK

Guest editorial About the Guest Editor Professor Geoff Hayward is currently a Visiting Professor in the Department of Human Resource Management at the University of Strathclyde. He read History at Corpus Christi, Oxford following which he was employed as Research Officer, Education Officer and latterly Head of International and Political Affairs with the graphical, paper and media union (GPMU). During the last twenty years he has developed strong links with senior officials in the European Parliament, European Commission, European Foundation for Human Rights, and was part of the UK delegation to the international labour organisation (ILO) in 1999. He has also had practical experience of the European ‘‘Social Dialogue’’ process. He was a Governor of Ruskin College, Oxford for many years in addition to lecturing at establishments of Higher Education in the UK. Professor Hayward was a long serving member of the Board of EGIN – a European wide professional educational and research body. He has also been an international guest lecturer in Germany, Finland, Norway, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Mozambique, South Africa and North America. For many years now, he has been an associate examiner with the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development and since the end of 2000 CIPD National Assignments Moderator (Employee Relations). He also runs his own consultancy business specialising in designing and delivering HRM seminars in Eastern and Central Europe.

Trade Union Development in Central and Eastern Europe – the ‘‘The Velvet Revolution’’ European Union Accession and Beyond This special issue of the Journal, which focuses on the development of ‘‘free trade unions’’ in the former Soviet block countries, is probably unique. It does not for the most part rely on academics for the contributions contained with in it. Quite the reverse, the editorial board decided to invite selected ‘‘players’’ who took part in the changes of the late 1980s which ended the ‘‘socialist experiment’’ and opened the way for those countries to travel the highway from command to market economies. With few exceptions, the articles are short on ‘‘notes’’ and ‘‘references’’. This ought not to be surprising. The contributors are writing from their own experiences. They lived in the ‘‘old regime’’ and were involved in the various activities that brought about the changes. They also served in senior positions in the trade union movement in the ‘‘postcommunist’’ period. In some cases they were involved in the trade unions of the ‘‘old regime’’. So far, no academics have had access to them – probably because of their seniority, the calls on their time and to some extent, their experience and consequent distrust of academics who are inclined to hold pre-conceived ideas and manipulate information given in good faith to conform to some theoretical model. Perhaps it is a good thing. It will certainly be refreshing to read accounts of what actually happened by people who lived through the great changes of 1989 in their own words. People who were on the streets, who attended meetings and demonstrations, who were frightened at times, who were never sure that the authorities would give up power and who knew only to well the price that would have to be paid if the ‘‘reform movement’’ failed. So many times in their lives, campaigns to merely temper the harshness and rigidities of the regime, had lead to tanks, prison, and exile and in many cases torture and death. It must be remembered that in many cases these activists were never looking for an end to ‘‘socialism’’. They were just asking for a more tolerant and less rigid regime which made allowances for personal freedoms and which allowed citizens to fulfil their full potential. Some of these activists are horrified at what capitalism has done to the

Guest editorial

553

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 553-554 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455

ER 27,6

554

lives of the ordinary men and women in the former ‘‘socialist countries’’. Gone is the state paternalism, which provided full employment, free health care, nurseries, free or cheap transport, cheap holidays, and security in old age. The rigors of the ‘‘market’’ they have found are incapable of compassion or altruism and are deaf to the cries of the young, the infirm and the vulnerable in society, although it provides great opportunities for the strong, young and – it has to be said – the ruthless and hard hearted within society. The extent of the ‘‘changes’’ was as much a shock to them, as it was to observers in the West. The contributors are all connected to the graphical and media industries in Europe. Hence there in a coherence – a pattern and consistency in the various accounts that assess the ‘‘transition’’ from communism to capitalism in terms of what it has meant for employee relations and workers organisations in Central and Eastern Europe. It is hoped that colleagues with an interest in other sectors might carry out similar studies and thus allow us to make comparisons as to the extent that the experiences in the graphical sector is typical of what was happening elsewhere. The editor would very much wish to place on record his gratitude to the contributors who are either still in senior trade union posts in their respective countries, or who have only recently retired. Through them we are able to share first hand the aspirations and hopes of working people in the early days of the ‘‘velvet revolution’’ – how those dreams faded in disillusionment and finally how they acquiesced to the norms of the West European Model which is more or a less a modern ‘‘mixed economy’’ characterised by a not always easy symbiosis between the propensity to intervene by the ‘‘state’’ and the anarchy and heartlessness of ‘‘the free market’’. Let the articles and the voices of these people who where there at the time speak for themselves. Geoff Hayward Guest Editor

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

The GPMU and graphical and paper trade unions in central and eastern Europe Geoff Hayward

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 555

Visiting Professor, Department of HRM, Strathclyde University, United Kingdom Abstract Purpose – The paper aims to provide an insight into the psychic of working people in the immediate aftermath of the 1989 changes, especially with regards to their perception of the new free trade unions, how this perception changed and the role that education and training has played in helping them develop free and effective trade unions capable of operating in Market Societies. Design/methodology/approach – The paper has used extensively the archives of the GPMU and UEG to piece together 15 years experience of a international trade union federation’s efforts to assist its new affiliates in Central and Eastern Europe adapt to operating in a market economy. Findings – The paper suggests that attitudes, perceptions and aspirations have changed, both amongst the newly democratised trade unions of the CEEC countries, and the trade unions in the West. Trade union education and training over the past 15 years has created confident and capable trade union organisations who now stand on equal terms with their Western European counterparts. Originality/value – The authors access to the primary materials in the archives of the British Print Union and the European Federation for graphical workers provides a unique insight which demonstrates that the help and assistance given after 1989 was systematic, well planned, adequately funded and has provided tangible outcomes. Keywords Trade unions, Eastern Europe, Education, Training, European Union, Europe Paper type Case study

Introduction With the fall of Communism in Eastern and Central Europe the trade union movement in the region found itself disengaged from the former state apparatus. It was on its own – and the early euphoric mood of the early 1990 soon became tempered by the harsh realities of surviving and operating in a free market environment. The newly freed trade unions in the central and eastern european countries (CEEC) were obliged to look to their comrades in the West for some guidance as to how to operate in a market economy. This paper attempts to set the scene by describing the mood, aspirations and of course the awesome challenges that faced the CEEC trade unions in their early years of freedom. It also explains the type of help and assistance provided by the graphical, media, paper union (GPMU) of the UK[1] and others initially and how that aid, in light of experience, became far more ambitious and cost effective. The paper briefly outlines the four year rolling program of aid which took the form of seminars involving some 20 instructors from the West European Trade Union movement who organised seminars in 18 CEEC countries which provided an opportunity for over 1,600 CEEC trade union activists to acquire and develop knowledge and skills aimed at equipping them to effectively represent their members in market economies. Paradox – mergers and amalgamations in west – fragmentation in CEEC From a trade union point of view, the events in Central and Eastern Europe were a massive contradiction and at complete odds with what were happening in the rest of the industrialised Western world. The growth of Multi-nationals, the merging of

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 555-565 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626090

ER 27,6

556

technologies and the hegemony of Right Wing politics steeped in radical economic liberalism with a blind evangelical faith in the market had had a profound impact on Trade Union organisation in the West. Nowhere was this truer than in the Graphical and Paper Industries. From a trade union movement characterised by hundreds of small to medium sized unions operating within national boarders, the early 90s saw a flurry of mergers which created larger and more inclusive unions. Not only did the economies of scale make this good financial sense, but also these new and larger unions more accurately reflected the way in which the industries in which they operated were organised. National Trade Union Centres throughout Western Europe had become more important and cross-border trade union solidarity had been given a boost as a result of the Single European Act [2]. This move towards an integrated European market gave the European trade union confederation (ETUC) and its Industry Committees a whole new role – and importance. So – at a time when the rest of the industrialised world’s trade unions were getting their act together, their comrades in the fledgling democracies of Central and Eastern Europe were going in exactly the opposite direction. The big ‘‘mega unions’’ of the Communist era were being fragmented with the components parts proclaiming independence and setting up shop on their own. In the early 90s, therefore, the new trade union movement in the Region was made up of a multitude of small and medium sized unions many of which were under funded and experiencing a haemorrhage in membership. Many of them were doomed to perish within a few years – but that was something they had to find out themselves the hard way. It was against this backcloth of bomb-happy, post-revolutionary anarchism – when no self-respecting trade union activist would hear the slightest criticism of Capitalism or the free-market that the Western European Trade Unions were invited by their new colleagues to help them adapt to the quite strange and unfamiliar world where all economic activity seems dominated by the Market. Out with the old – in with the new The uncritical perception of the market in those early years is illustrated by the experiences of many Western Trade Unions who visited their CEEC counterparts in the early 90s of which the following is a good example. The Head of Research and Education of a major British Trade Union had been invited to speak to a conference of Hungarian trade unions about how trade unions in the West operated in a free market environment. He explained that the market had ‘‘no heart, no social conscience, no notion of fairness – but was driven solely by profit and the accumulation of capital’’. Hence, the ‘‘trade union movement in the UK had developed a close relationship with the Labour Party and apart from being the party’s main financial backer, the trade unions sat on the executive of the party and provided massive man power support during general elections in order to bring about a Labour Government committed to improving social and welfare rights and providing a level playing field and a more equitable balance of bargaining power between labour and capital’’. A number of the CEEC delegates thought this was outrageous and accused him of being a communist for expressing such thoughts. The British Trade Unionist in question was quite flattered – and with an ironic smile mused on what his colleagues back home would think – as they always referred to him as ‘‘an old right-wing trade union baron’’. Although, their was a diversity of experiences and the pace at which CEE countries adapted to market forces, their was a number of factors that were common throughout

the region. Immediately after The Changes a great wave of optimism existed which extinguished any reservations that former comrades might have had about the Market. The great benefits that would come clouded their thinking. This was understandable given the cynical and dishonest promises that were made by some of their political leaders – aided and abetted by Western propaganda. Workers left their trade unions in droves. Trade unions were associated with the old regime and therefore anathema to the newly liberated converts to the Market. Moreover, the benefits that trade unions had been able to offer before the Changes were no more. The convalescent homes were a thing of the past, holiday homes were gone, Christmas parties and other social gatherings provided by the unions stopped as did guaranteed employment, pensions, health-care, kindergarten facilities and subsidised housing. The economic benefits of trade union membership were gone. This feeling of antagonism towards the trade unions was further compounded by the integrated role within the State and the Party machine that trade unions had enjoyed under the old regime. In short – it was no longer fashionable to be a trade union member. Within a very short period of time, the euphoric bubble burst and ordinary working people and their families started to wake up to what the realties of life was like in a market economy. The problem was their lack of experience of the way in which the game was played. The great benefits depicted by the Satchi and Satchies of the western world had not – for the vast majority – become a reality. It had all proved to be fools gold! All the social provisions of the old Socialist System had gone. Full employment, cheap housing, subsidised food, free healthcare, and security for old people, mothers and children were a thing of the past. Privatisation Privatisation had been – from a people’s perspective – inefficiently and in many cases – corruptly introduced. The natural wealth of many CEE countries was sold off at ludicrously low prices to gangsters and cronies of the new political masters. Communities became rundown, derelict, and depressing. Unemployment became endemic and market forces had made housing, travel, health care, to name but a few of life’s necessities beyond what the average worker could afford. The corruption of politicians and the new bureaucracy was rife and even some of the trade union leaders of the newly reformed trade unions became part-time entrepreneurs as a means of subsidising their incomes. One of the consequences of the changes of the late 1980s early 1990s had been the return of trade unions’’ assets (mainly trade union properties) which had been appropriated by the former regime. This provided the trade unions with valuable collateral to underpin their newly gained expectations and confidence as they made their first tentative steps towards doing business in the newly freed labour markets. In one of the new democracies, at least 10 unions sold off their assets, which included hotels, union headquarters, training schools etc at questionable rates in order to guarantee the integrity and operational activities of the national union’s head quarters. There is no doubt that the newly formed trade unions were starved of cash at the center – this was primarily as a result of local branches being unwilling to release money to the national union – all of which added to the financial problems One senior union official even acted as middle man in facilitating the sale of union properties and assets and for his services received a percentage of the total package of the sales. All in all, there is good reason to believe that – although the unions were

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 557

ER 27,6

558

hard-pressed and desperate for cash – the sale of their assets was done hastily and at prices well below their true worth. There are good reasons to believe that this type of corruption in Eastern and Central Europe which typified the privatization program saw many valuable state owned Central and Eastern European companies sold off to private owners at ridiculously low prices – and, it has to be said that the trade unions were by no means immune from these activities. For the most part, these actions were not in anyway illegal and did not transgress the country’s privatization laws. The baby thrown out with the bathwater In a nutshell, by the mid 90’s most working people and their families shared the view that they ‘‘had thrown the baby out with the bath water’’! Whilst they had overthrown the greyness of life under communism, freed them from the stifling state machine and the lack of individual freedom, they had thrown away all the social security benefits, guarantees and protections that they had taken for granted. Benefits that had greatly outweighed anything that their Western European counterparts enjoyed. But – workers in the region knew that there was no going back! They resigned themselves to the fact that ‘‘what’s done is done, and what’s gone is gone and what’s lost is lost and gone for ever’’. But – whilst clearly disappointed with many aspects of the new path they had chosen to follow, the new unions and their leaders along with the rump of their former membership started to consolidate and build organisations capable of dealing with the owners of the newly privatised industries. This they did with great enthusiasm and courage. The role of the EGF and the western European graphical trade unions in assisting their CEEC counter parts (Phase 1) It was clear that the CEEC trade unions desperately needed help they looked for it to the recently enlarged and reorganised european grafical federation (EGF)[3] which had recently been transformed from the one man and a dog outfit, which is had been since its inception into an effective European secretariat. One which was capable of co-ordinating the energies and actions of Graphical and Paper unions throughout Western Europe, building a European wide data base and developing links with the European Parliament, Commission, ETUC and other institutions involved in the new law-making procedures introduced by the Single European Act (1987). Hence, when newly reformed CEEC trade unions – most of whom where EGF affiliates asked for help, there was an organisation that was ready to oblige. The EGF and its Western affiliates adopted a dual approach to providing the assistance requested. First, it lobbied the European Commission for funds to carry out educational and exchange of information visits, and Secondly, it encouraged its affiliates in the West to adopt one or more CEE countries for targeted help and assistance. It was by these means that the UK Graphical and Paper Union – GPMU – developed close links initially with the Hungarian graphical union, the Czech graphical union, and the Czech paper making union, the Slovak graphical union and the Slovak paper making union. The experience of the GPMU Funding was obtained from the European Commission and from the GPMU’s own general funds. The help and assistance took a number of forms. First, exchange visits took place between the senior officials of each of the adopted unions and GPMU’s senior officials. It was vital that the GPMU understood how their organisations

operated, how the industries in which they operated were structured, what the prevailing legal and economic situation was, and what were the major problems facing their respective unions. Many of the problems were common to all of these unions. First, they had no experience of operating in a market environment. Collective Bargaining over wages and conditions were something they had never done. Indeed, for the most part – in the immediate aftermath of the changes – there were no employers to bargain with. The state had not yet sold off the family silver – and the industries were still state owned with wages and conditions being set quite arbitrarily. Even after privatisation, the new employers had no experience of dealing with free trade unions and certainly were not organised into employers associations. So collective bargaining skills and procedures were high on their list of priorities. Other areas they required help with included how market economies worked, how trade unions in the West financed their operations and serviced their members and the pros and cons of supporting moves to become members of the European Union. Once the exploration phase was completed, meetings took pace with each of the GPMU’s adopted CEE unions to arrange individual seminars especially tailored to meet their specific needs. The early seminars were held in the GPMU’s Convalescent and Educational Centre at Rottingdean near Brighton and latterly at Quorn Grange. These seminars were a huge success. The learning methodology was geared to adults and relied heavily on role play, small groups working on specific tasks and plenary session discussions. The timetable was also balanced to accommodate theory and practice. This involved specialist tutors such as Professor John Gennard of Strathclyde[4], Specialists from the TUC, ETUC, the employers federation (BPIF) giving short lectures – followed by practical tasks which allowed the participants to apply the theory and practice the techniques in assimilated practical situations. Of all these techniques, role play which dealt with negotiating skills and preparing for collective bargaining was the most popular amongst our CEE comrades. As trust and confidence and a greater appreciations of the quite different political and economic environments in which the GPMU and its sister unions in CEE countries operated grew – so did the exchanges between us become more ambitious. A whole series of visits were arranged whereby, a group of leading officials and activists visited the UK for an intensive programme of familiarising themselves with how unions such as the GPMU operated within a mature market economy. These activities included in-depth discussions with GPMU officials at National, Branch and Chapel level. Formal Meetings were arranged with external organisations such as the TUC’s International Department, the GPMU’s Parliamentary Group of MP’s, the GPMU’s Group of MEP’s n the European Parliament and Representatives of the Employers Federation (BPIF). Wherever practicable, these meeting were held at the respective premises of each of these organisations. Questions and discussion were essential learning mechanisms and both side acquired and developed a sound understanding of how each other worked. Particularly the GPMU and its CEE counterparts were able to compare the similarities and differences in our respective situations. It soon became clear that the similarities were far more numerous than the differences. The role of the EGF and the western European graphical trade unions in assisting their CEEC counter parts (Phase 2) By the late 1990s and after nearly a decade of strengthening the links between the Western unions and their sister organisations in the CEE countries – the trade union situation in the new democracies had settled down markedly. Although loss of

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 559

ER 27,6

560

membership continued, as it also did in the West – it was at a much slower pace. Organisation and recruitment exercises were being experimented with and collective bargaining had become the norm in most of the CEEC countries. The EGF had become Uni Europa Grafical (UEG) as a result of the International Grafical Federation (IGF) merging to create the largest international trade union federation in the world – UNI. The GPMU’s General Secretary had become the president of UEG and initiated the establishment of a CEEC Regional Committee, chaired by the Croatian president. The Committee met at least once a year, usually at the Annual General Meeting of UEG. Information was exchanged, policies relevant to CEEC evolved, and a coordinated approach to receiving help and assistance from Western affiliates agreed. This overcame some of the problems that had arisen over the years such as duplication and un-even distribution of assistance throughout the region. The new approach – a coordinated four year rolling programme In 1999, Tony Dubbins – The EGF President initiated the most ambitious programme of education and training for CEE affiliates to date. It involved forming a Group of UEG affiliates who would each be prepared to make a considerable contribution towards funding as well a providing experts who would be responsible for organising and teaching on seminars designed to meet the training needs specified by the CEEC trade unions – over a four year period. Given the financial support that was pledged by the Western European Affiliates, the European Commission agreed to commit substantial funding towards the project. In the first year, over 400 CEE union officials and activists attended at least one seminar in one of the following countries: Romania, Croatia, Ukraine, Byelorussia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Albania, Poland, Bulgaria, Russia, Hungary, Latvia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Macedonia, Moldavia and the Czech Republic. These seminars dealt with a wide range of subjects selected by the CEE affiliates and included such topics as Collective Bargaining, Recruitment of new members, Privatisation, New Technologies and the European Union and Social Dialogue. By the end of the four-year program some 1,600 CEEC union officials and activists had attended one of nearly 50 seminars. The CEEC Countries in which they were held comprised Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldavia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and the Ukraine. The seminars were all designed to deal with subjects specifically nominated by the CEEC affiliates. Content of seminar’s programme and subjects covered Whilst a whole range of topics were dealt with, the following are examples of the more popular subjects that the CEEC Trade unions requested: (1) Understanding the process of change and transition from a command to a market economy. This was particularly important in the earlier days of the training program – especially when the trade unions were having to adapt to rapid change from state owner ship of the enterprises to private and foreign ownership. Along with these changes came dramatically alien innovations in employee relations practices. In addition, the trade unions and their members had to deal with the hardships that resulted from the process of privatisation and the liberalisation of the economy, which was speeded up by the entrance requirements for EU membership. These reforms were much harsher and crudely introduced with a minimum of industrial unrest because they were

presented as a pre-requisite to membership of the EU, which the governments of the applicant’s states could do nothing about if they were to become integrated fully into the European Union. (2) The European Union and enlargement. This increasingly became a priority topic for CEEC Trade Unionists. The reasons for this related to the liberalisation and privatisation policies of their governments, which excluded any role for the trade unions. In fact, successive government in the new democracies sought to isolate and marginalise the new or reformed trade unions by dismantling legislation which gave workers rights and protections, liberalising the labour markets, encouraging flexibility and promoting alternative forms of employee representational systems. The CEEC Trade Unions quickly came to the same conclusion that their UK equivalents did in the years of Conservative government – i.e. The EU with its Social Dialogue, Parliamentary pro-social Europe majority, and comprehensive social acquis communautaire which was enforceable by the Commission and European Court of Justice – was in fact, a good bet and the only game in town. Hence, Seminars were requested that explained the origins of the EU, the development of the social dimension, the decision-making procedure, the social dialogue process and the enforcement mechanisms. They also want to have the opportunity to gain an understanding of the tensions between those who supported and Anglo/American Social Model and those who were committed to retaining the European Social Model. (3) The establishment of a stable and sustainable industrial relations system. This included gaining an understanding of the nature of collective bargaining and the four pre-conditions that are required for bargaining to take place i.e. two sides (trade union organisations and employers organisations), procedural agreements (lay down the rules by which bargaining takes place and by which disputes and differences are reconciled), substantive agreements (the provision for reaching agreement on the price in terms of wages and conditions by which the employer will purchase the skills, and services of the workforce, and finally, sections (the ability of both sides to apply sections which are capable of hurting the other side – and as a consequence oblige both parties to take bargaining seriously. Examples of sections being strikes by the workforce and lock-outs by the employers). One of the early problems for the CEEC Trade Unions was the absence of any employers organisations to negotiate with and in a number of CEEC countries, it was the trade unions that took the initiative and assisted the employers in establishing their own Employers Federations. In all the CEEC countries, those pre-conditions for collective bargaining now exist – although they are far more sophisticated in some countries than in others, and bargaining takes place on a wide variety of issues of which the most important are wages, holidays and working conditions. (4) Recruitment, retention and organisation of workers and the establishment of strong and effective trade unions. Recruitment and organisation of new members and the retention of existing members were seen as being central to establishing strong and effective trade unions. Participants in the seminars wanted information with regards to the democratic organisational and financial structures of trade unions in the West operated – and in particular, how they remained independent from government interference whilst involving

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 561

ER 27,6

themselves in the political process. Sessions dealing with this topic examined the various strategies and tactics that could be used to stimulate recruitment and organisation – and most important how trade unions could organise their financial structures effectively and persuade members and local union organisations to increase their subscriptions and in particular increase the proportion that is received by trade union headquarters.

562

(5) European works councils and national information and consultation provisions. Given the growth in Multinational Companies, and privatised national enterprises CEEC trade unions were eager to acquire and develop an understanding of the provisions contained in the EU Directives which related to European Works Councils and the more recent Information and Consultation Rights of Employees in National enterprises. Specific areas of discussion include; – the difference between information and consultation – and bargaining; the separation of powers between trade unions and employee representatives on works councils and information and consultation forums. The relationship between the two forms of employee representation etc. At the end of the four-year rolling programme a number of conclusions we arrived at: (1) The importance of sharing information and knowledge. The officials and activists who had participated in the programme had acquired an appreciation of the importance of information and knowledge. They recognised that information and knowledge was power. That it could be used to persuade employers to make concessions, to persuade fellow workers to act in solidarity, to strengthen the bargaining Position of the workforce in their negotiations with employers, to plan strategy and tactics, to organize and recruit, to help build morale, to enthuse fellow workers etc. The sessions of the Europeans Social Acquis Communautaire and Social Dialogue had added to this understanding and – most important – how EU membership would bring with in, not only statutory rights to information and consultation, but also enforcement mechanisms which had real teeth. (2) The importance to acquire and develop practical skills. Having gained information and knowledge, the CEEC Seminar participants recognised that trade union activists and officials needed a whole range of practical skills by which they could make full use of the information and knowledge gained. They needed to develop analytical skills (e.g. SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) and techniques to assist in prioritising demands and aspirations. They also needed negotiating and collective bargaining skills, communication skills etc. Further essential skills needed were with regards to organising and recruitment and developing practical, efficient, cost effective yet democratic internal trade union structures. (3) The importance of continuous education, training and development. The participants also recognised that training was an ongoing requirement – and than new and regular opportunities to further develop knowledge, skills and understanding were essential, especially in light of new developments and new challenges which might arise in the future. (4) The importance of establishing and developing trade union networks. The participants all agreed on the importance of establishing and strengthening links and developing networks. The seminars along with the bitter experience

of dealing with global and trans-European enterprises had demonstrated the need to be able to counter the activities of such organisations quickly and professionally. Central to this, they concluded, was an effective mechanism for exchanging information, raising question and sharing experiences – and of course, seeking solidarity action. With the completion of the Four Year Rolling Programme an important stage in the development of effective trade unions in the former communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe came to an end. However, encouraged by the success and added value which resulted from the programme, the European Commission has agreed to join with EUG and a number of its largest affiliates in financing a one-year advanced programme of seminars which will focus on the rights of employee to be informed and consulted in the workplace. These seminars will be held on a sub-regional basis throughout the CEEC sector and a common set of materials has been designed in the form of a UniEuropa Graphical Trainers Manual for Seminars on Information and consultation. These seminars are scheduled to be completed by 2005. 16 years on In the 16 years since the Changes, the people of Central and Eastern Europe have gained a much more balanced view of life in a market economy. Some aspects are welcomed, others not so. The social protection, full employment, care for the young, old and vulnerable, cheap housing, free childcare are features of the old regime, which are sadly missed. Unemployment is currently running at between 18 per cent and 22 per cent across the region. They also recognise that they have a long way to go before wages, working conditions, and standard of living is on a par with their Western colleagues. Nevertheless, they recognise that they are where they are and there is no going back. They have adapted to liberal democracy and pluralism in their political institutions and in their trade unions. They fix wages and conditions by collective bargaining through the process of negotiating between Employers and Trade Unions, and they recognise the benefits of cross-boarder trade union cooperation and solidarity. As a result of the Seminar Program, most of the activists and officials who had attended seminars understood the arguments for and against membership of the EU. Most of the CEE affiliates supported membership and looked forward to participating the EU’s social dimension and in the role that the Social Partners play in formulating European Social Legislation. Even, now as a result of the links that have been forged between CEEC affiliates and their Western sister unions – many CEEC union representatives are already sitting on European Works Councils. There is no doubt that in just over a decade and a half – the integration of CEEC and Western European trade unions is almost complete. They now work side by side as equal partners within Uni-Grafical and Uni-Europa Grafical. With full membership of the EU being achieved in March 2004, the mechanisms for developing further a system of European Wide Collective Bargaining and Industrial Relations is now well in place. Notes 1. Graphical Paper and Media Union (GPMU). During 2004, GPMU members voted to merge with Amicus becoming the Amicus GPM Sector. Amicus is the largest manufacturing union in the United Kingdom, with over one million members in the public and private sectors.

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 563

ER 27,6

564

2. The Single European Act of 1987 dramatically changed the way in which decisions were made in what was then the European Community. Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) became the way in which the Council of Ministers adopted legislation aimed at making an integrated European Economic Community a reality by 1992. It also applied to Health and Safety measures. 3. European Graphical Federation (EGF) was the European Regional Organisation of the International Graphical Federation. In 2000, it merged with a number of other International Trade Union Federations to Created Union Network International (UNI). UNI is the largest international grouping of individual trade unions in the world. It brings together over 900 unions representing over 15 million members. The EGF became UNIEUROPA GRAPHICA (EUG) in the new organisation. 4. Professor John Gennard is Head of the HRM Department at the University of Strathclyde and has been closely associated with the aid programme to trade Unions in the CEEC Countries since the early 1990s. Further reading Aslund, A. (2002), Building Capitalism: The Transformation of the Soviet Bloc, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Auer, A. and Butzer, M. (2001), Direct Democracy: The Eastern and Central Europe Experience Ashgate, Aldershot. Bugajski, J. (2002), Political Parties of Eastern Europe: A Guide to Politics in the Post-Communist Era. Armonk M.E. Sharp, New York, NY. Central and South-Eastern Europe (2004), Regional Surveys of the World, 4th ed., Europa Publications, London. European Bank Reconstruction and Development (RBRD) (2001), Transition Report. European Bank Reconstruction and Development (RBRD) (2002), Transition Report. European Bank Reconstruction and Development (RBRD) (2003), Transition Report. European Bank Reconstruction and Development (RBRD) (2004), Transition Report. European Bank Reconstruction and Development (RBRD) (2005), Transition Report. Gennard, J. (1990), A History of the National Graphical Association (NGA), Unwin Hyman, London. Gennard, J. and Bain, P. (1995), A History of the Society of Graphical and Allied Trades (SOGAT), Routledge, London. Hayward, G. (2002), Report on the CEEC Budapest Conference to the GPMU President, Bedford, April. Grzymala-Busse, A.M. (2002), ‘‘Cambridge studies in comparative politics’’, Redeeming the Communist Past: The Regeneration of Communist Parties in East Central Europe’’, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. King, L.P. (2001), ‘‘Theory and society’’, Making Markets: A Comparative Study of Postcommunist Managerial Strategies in Central Europe. Kosteleck, T. (2002), Political Parties after Communism: Developments in East Central Europe, Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington, DC. Lavigne, M. (2000), ‘‘Problems of post-communism’’, The Economics of the Transition Process: What Have We Learned? Vol. 47, pp. 16-23. Remington, R.A. (1991), ‘‘Eastern Europe after the revolutions’’, Current History, Vol. 90, pp. 379-483. Shepherd, R.H.E. (2000), Czechoslovakia: ‘‘The Velvet Revolution and Beyond’’, Macmillan, Houndsmills, p. 204.

Special Issue on the Enlarged European Union: Diversity and Adaptation (2002), West European Politics, Vol. 25, pp. 1-204. Kolaric, S. (2001), ‘‘Analysis of the trade union work in CEEC countries: conditions, characteristics, similarities and differences’’, UNI-Europa Graphical, Training Seminars for Graphical Unions in Central and Eastern Europe in 2001, Brussels. UNI-Europa Graphical (2001), ‘‘Circular from Secretariat informing affiliates of the conclusions reached at the Conference for CEEC affiliates on the EU Enlargement Process’’ held in Sofia, 25-26 June, Circular No. 85/RS, Brussels. UNI-Europa Graphical Secretariat (2001), Circular detailing contributions of selected affiliates to financing the CEEC programme of seminars, Brussels, 22 February. UNI-Europa Graphical (2001), Selected conference documents (including agenda, participants list, resolutions committing EUG to action), Central and eastern Europe conference, Sofia, Brussels, 10-12 February. UNI-Europa Graphical (2002), Selected conference documents (including agenda, participants list, country reports) Central and eastern Europe conference, Budapest, Brussels, 7-9 April. UNI-Europa Graphical (2003), Selected conference documents (including agenda, participants list, country reports), Central and eastern Europe conference, Ljubljana, Brussels, 1-2 March. UNI-Europa Graphical (2004), Selected conference documents (including agenda, participants list, ‘‘Activities in CEEC 2004 Interim Report 21 Sept. 2004’’, Acton plan), Central and eastern Europe countries meeting, Berlin, 4 November. UNI-Europa Graphical (2005), Selected conference documents (including agenda, participants list), Report on Trade union training (2001-2004) Central and eastern Europe conference, Warsaw, Brussels, 6-8 March. UNI-Europa Graphical (2003), Selected documents (including agenda, participants list, ‘‘Acton Programme 2003 – State of Play’’ – UEG Presidents private notes), Central and eastern Europe countries meeting, Madrid, Brussels, Belgium, 29 October. UNI-Europa Graphical (2002), Stronger Unions–Stronger EUROPE (a compilation of conference documents), The Hague, Brussels, 11-12 October. Valenta, J. (1991), Soviet Intervention in Czechoslovakia, 1968: Anatomy of a Decision, revised edition. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. Wejnert, B. (Ed.) (2002), Transition to Democracy in Eastern Europe and Russia: Impact on Politics, Economy and Culture, Praeger, Westport, CT, p. 369.

Trade unions in central and eastern Europe 565

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

ER 27,6

Changes in the role of the trade union in the Hungarian printing industry

566

A transition from socialism to market economy Janos Aczel President, Hungarian Graphical Workers’ Union, Budapest, Hungary Abstract Purpose – This paper sets out to describe the experiences of the Hungarian Trade Unions as they adapted to the political and economic changes of the post-communist period. The paper lucidly explains how and why the trade union movement in Hungary made the transition from being a major player in every aspect of political, economic and social life in the old regime, to being a mere shadow of its former self in the early. Design/methodology/approach – The author paints a vivid picture of ‘‘how’’ and ‘‘why’’ the trade unions were perceived in the ‘‘golden age of Socialism’’. He then explains why dissatisfaction and disillusionment of the workers grew as living standards and real income declined and Western Capitalism became more attractive. After the initial aphorism following the overthrow of communism, the Author analyses why many Hungarian workers by the late 90s yearned for a return to the securities and paternalism of the Ka´da´r era. Findings – This Paper systematically traces the steps from Socialism to Capitalism in Hungary and the impact this had on organized labour. The author notes the paradox that at exactly the time that trade unions were rationalizing and merging into mega trade unions in the West, the newly freed trade union movement in Hungary and elsewhere in the CEE countries fragmentized and formed a multitude of small unions many of which would fold in months rather than years. The point is made that the transition to a neo-liberal economic and political system led almost immediately in Hungary to falling standard of living and rising job insecurity. Research limitations/implications – The account given in this paper of the changing nature of employee relations in Hungary spanning the communist and post-communist periods provides researchers with a sound base to explore further the paradoxes to which the author has referred. Originality/value – This paper provides a welcome, human account of what the changes and their consequences were for ordinary working people and their families and – most important – what they meant for organized labour in terms of its ability to enhance working peoples quality of life in Hungary. Keywords Hungary, Trade unions, Employee relations, Works councils, Europe Paper type Case study

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 566-580 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626108

In the 1970s and 1980s, during the so-called ‘‘Ka´da´r-regime’’ unions were an integral part of political power in Hungary. The communist regime guaranteed that unions had the right to represent the interests of industrial and agricultural workers, as well as of the intelligentsia. As long as unions were willing to work according to the rules and regulations set up by the communist party, the political power guaranteed their rights. No one could question the sanctity of state property, the wages and salaries were controlled by the state, companies had to follow centralized working time regulations, but no decision related to labour issues was taken without prior consultation with the industrial unions

and the national trade union confederation (SZOT). The workers joined company unions and rate of unionization was virtually hundred per cent. The living and working standards of the workers of a company depended to a large extent on the work and skills of the company union organisation. Industrial unions controlled and supported the work of unions located at the different companies and leaders of industrial unions maintained close and friendly contacts to the management of the individual companies. On the other hand, industrial unions maintained close relations to ministries and state authorities, also. SZOT, as the sole national trade union confederation, represented the highest level of the Hungarian labour movement. It was involved in the political decision-making and it made sure that decisions of the communist party were met by the industrial and company unions. SZOT faithfully followed the party line of the Hungarian Socialist Workers Party (MSZMP). SZOT was one of the most important political allies of the communist regime. I. The position and role of unions within socialist ownership structures during the communist regime 1970-1989 Company unions were in the front line of politics. As you may know, the Hungarian Socialist Workers Party – as Hungary was a one-party system at that time – established a network of party units at the different companies. These party units managed local political activities and recruited party members. They controlled the management of the companies and were responsible for the protection of state property. The communist party was omnipresent and dominated all domains of public life, that means unions worked under the watchful eyes of the party. Party members controlled the activities of company unions and the communist party did not tolerate any independent unions. Aside from few isolated cases of abuse of power, the communist regime did not try to limit the independence of company unions. If a company employed more than 300 workers the head of the company union worked full time for his union. Elected shop stewards and chief shop stewards supported the activities and campaigns of the company union. The employees of the company elected shop stewards by ballot for a period of five years. The communist party had to be consulted but it rarely refused to accept the results of the elections. Union leaders were not under the obligation to join the communist party. The political power set up centralized mechanisms to control production activities and the so-called ‘‘company quadrangle’’ coordinated political and trade union activities on company level. Members of this body were the general manager of the company, the party secretary, the union secretary and the secretary of the party youth movement. The secretary of the communist party youth movement (KISZ) was responsible for recruiting junior party members within the company. The main responsibility of the company quadrangle was to adapt production activities to national targets of the centralized planning system. The different bodies of the company unions worked according to their formal statute adopted by their members. They maintained close cooperation with the general manager or director of the company who took full responsibility for all production activities. The company union and its leaders were responsible for: .

concluding a company collective agreement and for its annual amendment;

.

concluding an annual company wage agreement;

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 567

ER 27,6

568

.

deciding the wages and salaries of the individual workers together with the shop stewards;

.

managing holiday resorts owned by the trade unions and setting up an annual vacation plans for the workers;

.

managing social and welfare funds of the company;

.

organising the ‘‘socialist workers’ brigade movement’’ to achieve superproductivity;

.

organising cultural events, dancing-parties, excursions, hiking tours and different leasure time activities for company employees.

The political power controlled institutions of industrial democracy at company level and the rights of unions were guaranteed by law. The ‘‘company quadrangle’’, the company union and the shop stewards played an important role in maintaining democracy on company level. Shop stewards and the chief steward attended these meetings, but in most cases the local union secretary and the general manager of the company were invited, also. The management of the company informed the union about its future plans and the union signed agreements with the management. The shop steward bodies acted as a forum for democracy on company level. In spite of the fact that these institutions were influenced by the ideology of the political system, their existence was a clear sign that labour relations would change in a future market economy. Shop stewards were invited to participate in the discussions about the main contents of a collective agreement, they took part in decisions about the utilization of company welfare funds and internal affairs of the trade union. Their consent was needed to adopt the company wage policy. They were entitled to express their opinion about the production plans of the company, the allocation of profits and the balance sheet report. They made sure that the management followed the legislation governing workplace standards and decisions taken by the trade union. The shop stewards managed the union groups that were established in the different units of the companies. Shop steward had a double responsibility. On one hand they managed the different union affairs, on the other they had to be consulted in issues related to wages and salaries. They could express their opinion or submit proposals about the working and living conditions of the workers and they had to right to make sure that the management complied with prevailing legislation. The stop steward represented a group of fellow workers. He could impose a veto in certain issues but the final decision lay in the hands of the company union. Several rounds of negotiations preceded all agreements. The management had no choice but to follow the contents of the agreements and adherence was strictly controlled by the authorities. Unions had a positive reputation because they managed effectively a well-functioning welfare network and provided welfare benefits to the workers. Workers and their families could spend their holidays in holiday resorts owned by the unions or by individual companies for a nominal fee. As a matter of fact, wages and salaries did not cover holiday expenses, so workers considered cheap holidays at such resorts as a great benefit. Unions understood the importance of solidarity and offered different forms of financial support to needy workers. They sponsored company and public sport events and individual sportsmen. They organised cultural and educational events, hiking tours, bicycle tours, etc. Union members could participate free of charge at these events or they paid a just a nominal fee.

Negotiating with the company management and concluding collective agreements were important parts of company trade union activities. There were no sectoral collective agreements, so the rights and obligations of workers were regulated in the Labour Code and the company collective agreements. Lengthy negotiations preceded the signing of collective agreements. All trade union members could tell their opinion and these views were integrated into the official proposals presented by the company trade union leaders to their bargaining partners. The union discussed these demands with the company management but the final decisions were taken by the company shop steward body. The valid collective agreement was considered binding law on company level and any infringement was strictly sanctioned. The most important part of the collective agreement dealt with the wages and salaries paid to company employees. In most cases the bargaining partners could agree upon a basic wage increase according to the official inflation rate but any changes in the variable part of the wages needed the consent of the company union organisation. The communist regime followed an ‘‘egalitarian’’ wage policy that means equal wages were paid to all employees of a company irrespective of their performance. This idea proved to be later one of the main obstacles of the economic reforms. The living standards of the working masses improved and this decade was the ‘‘golden age’’ of socialism in Hungary. The role of the labour movement underwent major changes. Besides representing workers’ interests unions promoted the political and professional education of workers. On the surface democratic institutions in the companies were respected by the communist party but, in reality, their role was formal and limited. Employers used these democratic forums to force their economic interests upon the workers. As negotiations between the unions and the employers were more of a formal character and criticism from workers did not receive any attention, people got tired of participating in pointless phony negotiations. As time went by, workers grew increasingly disillusioned with the system. They withdrew from active participation and became indifferent to the demands of unions. In spite of these negative trends, there was no drop in the number of union members. Workers benefited from union membership because company trade unions were still able to enforce labour protection standards, they managed welfare benefits and offered cheap vacations to the workers. As wages and salaries were relatively low in those years, the different welfare benefits were very popular among the workers. By mid-1980s the workers lost all their illusions about the true nature of the communist regime. People abandoned unions and the Hungarian labour movement started to lose power. People thought that trade unions were not really concerned about the difficulties of daily life: goods in short supply, general shortages, traveling abroad was a privilege of few high-ranking party members, centralized wage policy, increasing inflation rate, growing bureaucracy and favouratism, increasing disillusionment with so-called democratic structures on company level. People blamed partly the trade unions for these problems. However, the Hungarian labour movement could not be made responsible for all these negative developments because these serious problems were inextricably linked to the controversial nature of global communism. Ordinary workers started looking for ways getting away from this difficult situation and turned with increasing interest towards the different forms of an emerging market economy, for example small family companies. The workers demanded that trade unions should adapt to a changing economic environment. These changes laid down the fundaments for the economic and political changes that took place during the nineteen-nineties in Hungary.

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 569

ER 27,6

570

II. The impact of the political changes on the trade unions 1989-1995 By the end of the nineteen-eighties, the ideology of communist dictatorships became increasingly obsolete and the labour movement in the so-called socialist countries had to come forward with a renewed progressive ideology if they wanted to survive the political changes. The political changes that took place in Central- and Eastern Europe and in the former USSR brought independence and democracy to the nations and led to the dismantling of the communist regimes. Another important development that took place during this decade was the renewal of the leftist ideology. In the UK, the United States, in Germany, Italy and in Russia leftist parties gained political power but their development was influenced by the political environment of the different countries. That means every country and party had to find its own way. The basic values of a progressive ideology remained unchanged but every party had to find its own way of development. This revolutionary period of European history was the prelude for a united Europe and the re-unification of Germany. Hungary was in the forefront of the democratic reform of the social, political and economic system. In 1989-1990 peaceful changes took place in Hungary followed by the ideological and institutional breakup of the previous communist regime and by the emerging of market economy of Western European type. Ownership structures underwent revolutionary changes, as state-property was privatized. The emerging of a multi-party system caused important changes in other spheres of public life, also. The Hungarian labour movement became polarized and, on the other hand, civil liberties and rights started to emerge. The next major step in a changing economic environment was the introduction of new tax schemes. Along with the new capitalist system, the personal income tax, the value-added tax and several other new taxes were introduced in Hungary. The main interest of political parties was gaining political power. At the first democratic parliamentary elections more than hundred political parties courted the favors of the voters. Ultimately six parties got into parliament and a new conservative coalition government was formed. Hungary started moving in the direction of a Western type democracy and market economy. The political and economic changes and reforms motivated the polarization of the Hungarian labour movement. The first steps included establishing a new relationship to the new political parties. The hegemony of the single national trade union confederation (SZOT) was replaced by a variety of new national confederations that maintained close links to different political parties. For example, the ‘‘MSZOSZ’’ confederation, which is currently the most important trade union confederation with the highest number of members, maintains close ties to the Hungarian Socialist Party. The ‘‘LIGA’’ confederation is linked to liberal political groups and the conservative ´ STANA ´ CSOK’’ (Labour Councils) was founded by conservative confederation ‘‘MUNKA groups within the labour movement. The ‘‘Autonom SZ.SZ.’’ represents intellectual workers from different industries. A similar polarization took place among the company trade unions and unions of the different industrial sectors. During these years the historic Hungarian Printing, Paper, Press and Publishing Trade Union broke up into four independent unions and lost most of its 50,000 members. Our trade union was not the only organization within the Hungarian labour movement that had to face the negative consequences of the political and economic changes. The political changes started as a success story but led to a deep and ongoing crisis within the union movement! The unions tried to position themselves in the new political and economic environment by establishing contacts to the new political power and dividing up the

wealth of the old MSZOT among themselves. However, all these problems shrink into insignificance compared to difficulties ordinary Hungarian workers and employees had to face in their daily lives. Serious problems, like unemployment, rapidly raising inflation rates, the introduction of incentive pay systems, increasing tariffs for public services, privatization, poverty, homelessness and a drastic cut in welfare benefits came as a total surprise for most Hungarian families. Unions were forced to sell off their holiday resorts because they lacked the funds to maintain them. For the first time since many decades parents had to pay a tuition fee if their children wanted to study at a university. As an alternative to unions so-called works councils were established in many companies. The leasing of manpower became commonplace and – in many cases – the only alternative to unemployment was the establishing of small family companies, even if these companies were to small and inexperienced to survive the economic changes. The changes and their aftermath shocked large parts of the Hungarian public. The young Hungarian democracy was en route to a deep and treacherous crisis. Taxidrivers decided to launch a nationwide strike to express their dissatisfaction! The actual reason of the strike was a drastic increase in petrol prices, but spontaneous actions of radical groups played an equally important role in the background. The strikers blocked major roads in the capital and in bigger provincial cities which nearly paralysed the traffic all over the country. The country stood on the verge of chaos and the country’s peaceful transition from socialism to market economy faced the danger of falling apart. Angry and disillusioned masses went on the streets and put an increasing pressure on the Hungarian government and unions. Trade union leaders played an active role in dissolving the crisis but the labour movement itself was unable to profit from the political consolidation. Finally, the taxidrivers removed the roadblocks but this incident had a noticeable effect on the Hungarian population and weakened the political positions of the unions. The trade unions faced serious difficulties because they lost their previous rights and priviliges and were unable to explain the new situation to their members. Hungarian workers blamed the unions for all their problems and started abandoning the unions in great numbers. This was the first phase of a deep and lasting crisis within the Hungarian labour movement. The situation became even more difficult for the unions when for the first time in the history of Hungarian labour movement works councils were elected. The conservative government made the works councils potential rivals of the trade unions by giving them traditional trade union rights and responsibilities; for example the right to conclude collective agreements, to manage welfare funds and to act as main bargaining partners of the employers. Fortunately, the trade unions reacted to this new situation without delay and were able to mobilise their members, so they could prevent losing ground totally. But the end of the crisis was nowhere in sight. Hungarian trade unions were still facing serious difficulties and a positive outcome was far away. We may believe that these events and difficulties already belong to our past, but the young generations that grew up in the past fifteen years have heard about socialism only at school, and the nowadays popular ideology of ‘‘self-fulfilment’’ has little in common with traditonal values like solidarity. A new labour movement that supports collectiveness and solidarity with the weak and poor has to react to the challenges of our modern age. The prosperity and success of the Hungarian workers and their unions depends upon solidarity and willingness to work for each other.

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 571

ER 27,6

572

III. The loss of power after the political changes. The breakup of the Hungarian Printing Workers Union 1995-2002 For many decades the Hungarian Printing Workers Trade Union was the only organisation representing and protecting the rights of the workers in the printing industry. However, the Hungarian printing industry was not exempt from the decentralisation and privatisation of the economy, and had to endure all consequences of the economic and political changes. Major companies in the printing industry – approximately 60-70 companies – were privatised in the initial phase of privatisation. At the same time, foreign and Hungarian investors set up numerous new printing companies. Major multinational companies like Bertelsmann, Axel-Springer, WAZ and Polestar Mondadori appeared on the Hungarian market. Currently some 4000 companies are engaged in printing activities in Hungary. 10 per cent of the companies are major corporations with 2000-4000 employees, 15-20 per cent of the companies employ 50-100 workers and the rest have 3-20 employees. The breakup of big socialist printing companies that employed 700-1200 printing workers made the position of our union extremely difficult. Within short time the union lost the majority of its members and was unable to establish good relations to the employers, because managers working in a capitalist environment are more interested in achieving their profit targets than offering higher wages and additional bonuses to workers. Low wages, unfair and arbitrary working time regulations and the lack of binding legal provisions led to an increasing exploitation of the workers. Our union lost its cadre on company level, there are no fulltime union secretaries and we do not have shopstewards or the shopstewards anymore. We are not able to pay for the services of experts, either. Employers terminated collective agreements, many printing houses stopped production and employees became redundant. Most companies are struggling for survival and workers are preoccupied with their own problems. Many families of the working class suffer from unemployment and uncertainty of their own existence. The rapidly increasing inflation rate and the nearly non-existent welfare benefits made it difficult for all generations to cope with the new situation. The government established minimum wages but it is not enough to sustain a decent standard of living. The amended Hungarian Labour Code limits the scope of union actions. Unions still do not know how to stop losing members. What can the leadership of the Hungarian Printing Workers Trade Union do to survive such difficult times? We act like someone trying to rescue his remaining possessions from a burning building. We cannot demonstrate power and are unable to mobilise our members. Our trade union set up a special fund to support unemployed printing workers (Foundation for the support of printing workers). We started collective bargaining with the employers to conclude a Sectoral Collective Agreement. We launched an extensive information campaign to recruit new members. Hereby we would to thank for the valuable help we received from the Uni-Europa Graphical, the British GPMU and from the Austrian and German sister organisations. We started a campaign to reorganise company-level union groups. The Hungarian Printing Workers Trade Union lost 60-70 per cent of its members. It had no choice but to use up all its assets to survive. It lost all its experts and the network of its activists do not exist anymore. But we managed to survive! The various Hungarian governments of the past fifteen years did not make the life easy for the labour movement. During the election campaign all political parties seem to be sympathetic to the cause of the trade unions, but none of the elected governments were really interested in providing a positive working environment for the trade

unions, or – at least – not putting more obstancles in the way of their work. This is the reason why Hungarian unions are still not able to function properly. In the European Union solidarity between nations and cultures belongs to the fundamental values. We hope that Hungary’s membership in the European Union will help us and Hungarian unions to regain our well-deserved position. We believe that the Printing Workers Union should not give up the historic legacy of the Hungarian printing industry. The Hungarian labour movement faced the most serious difficulties under the conservation coalition government of Viktor Orba´n. The conservative government never sympathised with the trade unions and paralysed the work of all forms of social dialogue. It abolished the Self-Governments of the Social Insurance, it made the work of the Council for Interest Reconciliation impossible, it amended the Labour Code without prior consultations with the trade unions and made it clear that it wanted to force the trade unions into a defensive position. As a matter of fact, the Hungarian labour movement – including the printing workers trade union – behaved like a intimated victim. It took many years until the opposing trade union confederations finally realized that only solidarity and collaboration can lead to success. However, there are still some unions in Hungary that refuse to admit the need for solidarity. We have to be aware of the fact that unless we demonstate the power of solidarity we won’t be able to achieve our common goals in protecting the interests of our members. The Hungarian labour movement lacks unity and the individual trade unions are too weak to stand up against the government. The turning point came with the parliamentary elections in 2002. Based on the majority of the Hungarian Socialist Party a new socialist-liberal coalition government was formed. Hungarian unions supported the new government from the very beginning. The government programme for the first hundred days brought new hope for the Hungarian workers, trade unions and their members. This government demonstated more sensitiveness to welfare issues, however, it will surely have to make some controversial decisions, also. Unions would be extremely disappointed if this government would refuse to participate a substantial social dialogue with the labour movement. IV. Works councils as new forms of interest representation Works councils did not belong to the traditions of Hungarian labour movement and stirred heavy protests among the traditional unions. The Hungarian Labour Code guaranties the election of works councils but many workers and employers refused to comply. Every Hungarian company with employees is obliged to establish a works council or to elect a workers’ representative. However, if anyone would ask Hungarian workers about the responsibilities of a works council or a workers’ representative, four workers out of five would say that works councils date back to the times of the communist regime. Or they would say that they never heard about it. In spite of the fact that the Hungarian Labour Code from July 1, 1992 contains precise provisions about works councils, only few companies were ready to organise the ballot. The problem is that the majority of Hungarian workers are completely unaware of their rights. They do not know that they are entitled to initiate the establishment of works councils. In some cases this is even a quite good idea because works councils represents the interests of the employees of a specific company. The reason why employees rarely elect a works council is that the ballot is rather complicated. The Labour Code prescribes that a works council must elected if a company has more than fifty employees. Companies with less employees (15-51 employees) must elect a workers’ representative. Newly established companies must meet this requirement within

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 573

ER 27,6

574

three months. Works councils are elected for three years. All employees of the specific company have the right to vote. The Labour Code contains precise provisions on the number works council members which depends upon the size of the company. If a member of the works council is disabled for any reason he is replaced by a substitute member. The works council convenes its first meeting within 15 days after election and the members elect a president among themselves. Works council comvene according to the needs. Decisions are delivered with the majority of votes; in case of a tied vote, the president has the casting vote. Works councils do their business according to their own statutes. What benefits are due to the members of works councils? To take time off during working hours: members and the president of the works council are entitled to a 10 per cent, respectively to a 15 per cent time off during working hours to perform their duties. Fees: law prescribes that companies with more than one thousand employees are obliged to pay a renumeration to the president. Works council members receive legal protection according to the labour law in the following cases: .

the employer must ask for the consent of the works council if he wants to assign a member of the works council to a different job;

.

the employer may terminate the employment of a works council member only with the prior consent of the works;

.

in case of the termination of the employment with immediate effect the employer must consult the works council;

.

the employer must inform the works council if he plans to take disciplinary actions against a works council member.

What are the responsibilities of a works council? The works council must be consulted in the following cases: .

if the planned measures of the employer effects a large group of employees (restructuring, selling off parts of the company or introduction of new production methods);

.

the registering of personal data of employees;

.

the setting up of annual vacation plans;

.

introduction of new internal regulations.

The works council has the right to participate in taking of any decisions related to the utilisation of welfare funds or real estate property of the company. The works council must present its official opinion within 15 days to the employer. After the expiry of this deadline, the employer may consider as if he had received the consent of the works council. If the employer fails to ask for the official opinion of the factory council, his planned actions are illegitimate and the works council has the right to take the complaints to tribunals. The employer must inform the works council twice a year on the economic and financial situation of the company, on the wage policy and working time policy, on any major investment projects or major changes in the production profile of the company. In spite of the fact that the Labour Code guarantees the rights of the works council and all the preconditions for an effective functioning, works councils are still disliked by the Hungarian unions.

Works councils are a thorn in the side of Hungarian unions, however, their success depends upon the consolidation of the Hungarian labour movement. Let me prove the validness of this statement by bringing two examples from daily life. A young employee of a Hungarian a printing house owned by foreign investor browsed in the Labour Code and came to the conclusion that his company should have established a works council. He liked the idea and informed the general manager of the company about his plans. The general manager was far less enthusiastic about the idea and decided to prevent the ballot. Informally he let the employee know that he had better give up his idea, or he will lose his job. As a consequence, the young employee stopped organising the ballot and today this printing house has no works council. The other case occurred at another printing company. The employer wanted to transfer one of the employees, who was a member of the local works council, to a new workplace within the company. The employee protested and wanted to discuss the issue with his boss. The boss agreed to talk to him during the following week. The unpleasant surprise came next day when the employee was told that he is dismissed with immediate effect because he did not appear at his new workplace and did not give any valid reason for his absence. The employee did not want to put up with the situation and took his complaint to a labour tribunal. He knew that the employer is obliged to get the approval of the works council before transferring a member to a new workplace within the company. Most of the people would have given up the fight and blamed themselves for being quarrelsome. But this employee knew that he was right. He could not appear at his new workplace because the employer forgot to inform him officially about his new boss. The employer stated in court that the employee’s sphere of activity was cancelled at an earlier date and the employee should have known to whom he must report at his new workplace. The labour tribunal did not accept these arguments and ruled that the dismissal with immediate effect was unfair and illicit. V. The revival of unions Unions must concentrate on recruiting new members! Joining a union should be considered a positive and responsible decision. If an employee decides to join the union and pays his membership fee regularly, then he may well expect to benefit from membership. If you join a club and pay membership fee then you expect to profit from your decision. If it makes no difference whether you are a member or not, so-called free riders will demand the same rights and treatment as paying members, and they will protest if the trade union is unable to protect their interests. We all know that it is easy to stay on the sidelines and shout instructions from there. What can the trade unions do in such a situation? What are the most effective means of improving their situation? The most frequently recommended way is promoting solidarity. Solidarity became a forgotten value, ever since union membership has stopped being obligatory. I do not doubt the correctness of this decision but it led to a drastic drop in the number of union members. That means, a trade union movement with a low number of paying members is trying to maintain social peace. Nobody ever questioned the importance and essentiality of peaceful and functioning relations between employees and employers. The state, the government, employers’ and employees’ organisations declared that they were interested in maintaining peaceful labour relationship. What was the reason? Workers fear that they would lose their workplace, as their only source of income. Hungarian workers had to work hard to regain the 1990 level of purchasing power of their wages by 2004.

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 575

ER 27,6

576

The other option for the unions – at least according to the provisions of the Labour Code – is organising strike actions. Striking could be suicidal because the costs of such actions are paid by the taxpayers – that means ordinary workers. Therefore Hungarian trade unions have to take an active role in balancing the opposing interests of policy makers, the employers and the employees. Currently the Hungarian Printing Workers Trade Union has less than 3000 members, that means 25-30 per cent of the total number of employees of the printing industry are organised, only. Fortunately there are still some companies where the rate of organisation is nearly 100 per cent, but at the overwhelming majority of companies this rate is between 0-10 per cent. When asking for the reasons, employees and employers arguments are quite similar. Why should they join a union or any other organisation if they don’t get anything for their money. Members’ rights and interests are not protected effectively, nor can unions offer additional benefits to their members. Now, let’s be frank, their criticism ist well-funded. During the past 15 years, unions became small and insignificant factors within the economy and in the eyes of the general public. Their calls for a strike remained generally unsuccessful. Strike actions do not have traditions in Hungary and the weak labour movement was unable to demonstrate power. Hungarian workers forgot the meaning of solidarity. Only strong unions with a sound financial background can: .

Conclude binding collective agreements. They can protect the interests all workers. They can make the employers provide the same level of welfare benefits to all workers of an industrial sector. They can make employers provide luncheon vouchers to employees if there is no cantine at the company, and a clothing allowance if the employer does not provide work-cloths.

.

Strong unions can reach an agreement with the employers that they provide vacation cheques to the workers.

.

Unions can make sure that employees can express their opinion about issues related to the company, and if they notice unlawful actions of the employer they should be able to take their complaints to an ombudsman or to tribunals.

.

Strong unions can reach an agreement with the employers that wages and salaries are increased at least according to the level of the offical inflation rate, that an additional monthly salary is paid to the employees in order to close the income gap between Hungary and in the EU.

.

Strong unions can make sure that workers (irrespective of their age and gender) get the necessary support if they are dismissed or their company is closed (for example severance payment).

I am fully aware that Hungarian unions have not yet reached these standards, but these requirements do not contradict the set of rules laid down in the Labour Code and in other legal norms. Unions can work effectively only if they can call the attention of the Hungarian government and company managements to the social needs of the workers and make them respect prevailing law. Strong unions need many members. VI. Accession to the European Union Hungary’s accession to the European Union was not only a historic event but it had a major influence on social, political, economic and cultural life of the country, also. Hopefully, the changes will promote new values and the unions can profit from these developments. The future will show whether we can meet these challenges

successfully. However, I think that the Hungarian labour movement will have to make every effort to overcome the current crisis of confidence and regain its previous social and economic position. Unions have to adapt to the requirements of our modern age and members because hiding in the shadow of political parties is a waste of time and involves lots of risks. We have to admit that the ‘‘welfare state’’ has become a mere illusion and political parties are no longer interested in cooperating with unions or other civil organisations. Workers must realise that – in a capitalist environment – solidarity and strong unions are essential for a successful interest representation. Unions should not avoid conflicts intentionally but with the help of their special expertise they should forecast future problems and work out effective solutions. Such problems include the maintaining of an appropriate level of employment in Hungary, the reform of the tax system, the elimination of factors that cause additional production costs, the critical situation in the Hungarian agriculture, the reform of the health and welfare system. These are some of the challenges no Hungarian government was not able to meet in the past fifteen years. It seems unavoidable that a buffer organisation should be established in the different industrial sectors with the task to resolve conflicts and maintain peaceful labour relationship between the social partners. Experience shows that with the help of so-called industrial dialogue committees and sectoral collective agreements such problems can be resolved successfully. In the labour movement we need more radically minded leaders who are willing to support thorough reforms. We need strong-minded leaders because the nature of capital won’t change in the foreseeable future. Capitalist entrepreneurs don’t intend to pay a high price for labour and they do their utmost to keep labour and production costs low. They do not shrink from making unpleasant decisions like transfering production facilities to countries with lower labour costs. It would be very sad if Hungarian workers would be driven out of the domestic labour market because of the careless actions of Hungarian governments. The governments must make every effort to keep labour and production costs at a reasonable level, to introduce reforms in the tax system and to ease the tensions on the labour market by adequate legislation. The only effective method to meet the challenge of increasing concentration of international capital is coordinating the activities of the international labour movement. The European Union itself will not be able to resolve all tensions between the social partners. Workers living in the European Union need strong and successful unions so that their interests are protected in a more effective manner. Workers will pay a high price for their indifference and intolerance towards the unions sooner or later, however, I sincerely hope that we won’t have to experience the bitter consequences of a weak labour movement in the near future. Union should improve their work in the different industrial sectors and Industrial Dialogue Committees should be set up. The interests of trade unions and their members must receive more attention in the legislative work of the parliaments. The reform of the Hungarian Labour Code should be based on public consensus. Company collective agreements should express the mutual interests of the social partners. Collective bargaining should be made more simple and understandable. There is a need to sanction those employers who refuse to participate in collective bargaining. Unions should motivate employers to maintain systematic and coordinated labour relations. Experience shows that in the Hungarian and international printing industry employers regularly and intentionally bypass labour legislation to undermine the authority of collective agreements. Whose task and responsibility is to change this situation? It is not easy to answer such questions because sometimes unions have same interests as employers and therefore turn a blind

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 577

ER 27,6

578

eye to certain shortcomings. The Hungarian Printing Workers Trade Union and its partner, the Professional Association of the Hungarian Printing Industry demand that a binding wage policy should be introduced in our industry, appropriate professional training and re-training programmes should be offered to workers and working conditions of unions should be improved but these proposals were always rejected by the Hungarian and multinational corporations. Heavy sanctions should be imposed on companies who intentionally breach labour legislation. Labour inspectorates should receive wider scope of rights and should cooperate with social partners. New and effective forms of training that focus on trade union relevant subjects should be offered to interested workers and union activists. We must find ways to motivate workers to join the union movement and to persuade them that membership is important for their own future. We have to make our partners understand that we have common interests. Our goals include the sustainable and balanced development of the Hungarian economy, providing adequate carreer opportunities for every Hungarian worker and improving the quality of life and work for all Hungarian workers. Every union and union leader should make every effort to achieve these goals. In the 21 century unions must be able to provide answers to questions that influence the living standards of workers and pensioners as well as the position and role of unions in our society. However, the relationship between politics and unions still do not meet all requirements. Unions should express their opinion about decisions made by the European Commission because these decisions can force unions into a defensive position and prevent them from working effectively. In Hungary, political parties and politicians preferred to keep their distance from unions even when there was a chance for compromise. In case of radical social conflicts the governments nervously searches for potential allies within the Hungarian society. At the beginning of its term in office, the Medgyessy-government was very committed towards reforms but it soon lost its stamina and determination, and certain government decisions were strongly criticised by the unions. The majority of Hungarian voters and union members who sympathised with the progressive ideas of the socialist government became increasing disillusioned and turned away from the Hungarian Socialist Party. The new prime minister, Mr. Ferenc Gyurcsa´ny came forward with a government programm that tries to answer the needs of an emerging economy and is more open towards unions. The Hungarian government seems to have recognised that even in a capitalist economic environment certain limitations should be introduced in order to protect the labour movement. The big differences in income and the lack of equal opportunities caused strong feelings of disappointment among the Hungarian people and the public opinion is deeply shocked about the injustice and discrimination millions of workers are exposed to. Therefore we may well interpret it as a positive message that the prime minister visited union leaders and indicated that the unions must increase their prestige in the Hungarian society. The prime minister confirmed in a public statement that the government pays attention to the problems of the working masses and wants to have a better understanding for the goals of union work. He underlined in his statement that the existence of unions is inevitable and there is a necessity for maintaining regular contacts between the government and the labour movement. There is a need for the development for a substantial economic policy on the level of the different industrial sectors, and the wage policy should be managed as part of the national development programme. He stressed that unions should participate in the work of labour inspectorates and in the development of the Hungarian vocational training system as well as in controlling the social security funds. Strong and

successful unions are in the position to stop the exploitation of workers and to regain the dignity of work. VII. Unions in the twenty first century Many Hungarians think with nostalgia of the good old days during the socialist regime. The political changes brought democratic liberties and new opportunities for many Hungarian people. However many people think that the dictatorial regime of the Hungarian Socialist Workers Party has been replaced by the dictatorship of capital. The labour relations are chaotic and unions are not able to enforce their rights guaranteed by law. Unions are in deep moral and financial crisis and employers can do whatever they think fit. The national trade union confederations are consumed by internal struggles and are unable to demonstrate power or mobilize their members. Nowadays Hungarian workers have three main interests, namely maintaining their workplace, earning an income that allows decent living standards and maintaining human dignity at workplace. Many Hungarian printers work a lot more for far less money than their colleagues in other EU member-states and have nearly no chance to protest against unfair practices of their employers. In Hungary, union activists do not have to fear for their lives, like in Columbia, Burma, in Belarus or in the Ukraine, and they do not face problems like the persecution or banning of unions. Our experience shows that employers use more refined methods to hinder the work of unions, to bypass the law and to intimate workers. Our sister unions working in Western European countries are not exempt from such problems. They know how difficult it is to recruit union members among employees of small and medium sized companies and to protecting their interests in a satisfactory manner. It is even more difficult to make sure that employers follow the legal provisions. Globalization is another major challenge unions have to face. The international labour movement has to react to negative consequences of globalization. How can Hungarian unions make Hungarian and multinational entrepreneurs respect international labour standards set by the ILO or the UN? There are different ways of solving such problems but the core remains unchanged: we must increase the power of the labour movement. Unions must increase their strength so that they can protect the rights of the workers more effectively and recruit new members. We need to demonstrate the power of solidarity at the workplaces, in our local communities and on the national level and to improve social coherence: these are the main responsibilities of modern unions. Obviously, Hungarian unions cannot prevent multinational companies from employing Hungarian workers for low wages. Multinational companies and international investors work on a global market place, therefore the international labour movement must start networking, or they will become the victim of the ‘‘divide and rule’’ policy. It is easy to understand the goals of international capital: investors invest their money in countries where the tax system is favorable and the labour costs are low. Aside from these factors, investors attach a great importance to political stability, balanced and reliable economic environment, highly developed infrastructure and well-trained workers. Dealing with these problems requires solidarity and coordinated actions within the international labour movement. International capital dominates the global economic environment because international investors are far more successful in organizing and coordinating their activities than the international labour movement. Unions face a major challenge of promoting solidarity within the EU and building an effective network of cooperation to

Changes in the Hungarian printing industry 579

ER 27,6

580

protect the interests of workers. These are the priorities of union work at the beginning of the twenty first century. I sincerely hope that printing workers, who have not yet realized the importance of unions, will soon understand that becoming a member serves their own interests, also. This thesis has already proven its validity in the European Union. Joint efforts, solidarity, willingness to help each other have brought prosperity to the workers and their unions. In the 21. century, unions representing true social democratic values should use their power to balance the disparities between labour and capital. History has already proven that democratic unions, that are trusted and supported by their members, are able to manage the redistribution of wealth generated by the economy. The most important feat of the communist regime was maintaining full employment, but we learned to appreciate this extraordinary achievement only after the political changes. Today, a secure existence remains a dream for many workers and the majority of Hungarian families have to face the growing threat of unemployment. Illegal employment and the shadow economy is gaining ground, and the number of workers employed for minimum wage is increasing day by day. Before the political changes an average Hungarian citizen has better off than today. The country had an economic system in which the government controlled and regulated production, distribution and prices, but all citizens had equal access to basic goods and services. This is the reason why many Hungarian look back nostalgically at the golden era during the Ka´da´r-regime. However, most Hungarians are more realistic about the future of their country. Hungarians do not want to turn back the clock but they want to reform the economic and political environment to ensure a peaceful transition from dictatorial regime to democracy. Fifteen years after the political changes ‘‘Hungary has become a free but unjust country’’ (quotation from Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsa´ny). This is true! There is an urgent need for changes before it gets too late. The core values in a modern European democracy are equal opportunities and solidarity. We, Hungarian printing workers are ready to offer our support if it is needed.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

Employee relations in the Czech Republic – past, present and future Frantisek Stasek

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 581

President, Typograficka Beseda, Czech Republic Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to provide an insight into how trade union activities in the Czech Republic have developed in the 15 years since the ‘‘Velvet Revolution’’ of 1989 and discusses some of the important political, economic and cultural factors which have influenced that development. Design/methodology/approach – The author shares with us his fascinating experiences as an activist in Czechoslovak and latterly Czech politics over a period, which spans some of the great events in the History of the Czech Lands. As an activist in the trade unions he was at the center of the events known as the Velvet Revolution of 1989 and for the 15 years that followed he has been President of Typograficka Beseda (the Print Trade Union) – and has lead the union through the troubled waters of reconstruction, transition to a market economy, democracy, privatisation and EU membership. This first hand account provides a welcome insight from an important ‘‘player’’ in the events that re-shaped the system of employee relations in that region. Findings – The paper compares the myth of democratic trade union institutions and workers rights under Communism with the reality of the Czechoslovak industrial relations system under the old regime where the trade unions were restricted to dispersing welfare and holiday club benefits. The author explains the major problems which faced the new democratic trade unions which were set-up in the aftermath of the 1989 Revolutions – in particular the haemorrhage of members, the loss of experienced leaders to politics and business, privatisation and the general distrust of the trade unions which were still perceived by many as still being run by and in the interests of the Communist Party. Research limitations/implications – One of the main strengths of this paper is that being a player rather than a mere observer its author provides a study which is based on being at the center of the events that moulded the new democratic trade unions that emerged after Communism collapsed in the former Czechoslovakia. The frame work within the article provides a challenge and points the way to further research into the internal and external environmental factors which the author argues are the key to understanding the changes and which determined the political, economic and social structures that the Czech trade unions adopted. Originality/value – The paper’s main value is that it provides primary material – a first hand account of the events that are normally written by people who were not even born when they took place. These are the reflections based on actually being in the place at the time seeing hearing smelling and sharing the feelings of those who were there. Keywords Czech Republic, Employee relations, Eastern Europe, Trade unions Paper type Case study

Introduction The events of 1989 which took place 15 years ago in the in the former Czechoslovakia are now referred to as the Velvet Revolution. That historic departure was made possible by a small number of politicians who now run the country – or so those rather immodest present day protagonists of neo-liberal economics would have us believe! The truth of the matter is something quite different. The brave people who actually carried out the revolution do not deserve to be forgotten. Central to the success of the revolution were the people in the factories, the leaders of the dissatisfied in the enterprises. Without such people, the central places targeted for

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 581-591 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626117

ER 27,6

582

annexation by the vanguard of the revolution such as the Civic Forum headquarters could never have been taken. This paper recognises the courage of those people who at that critical time in our history took such dangerous risks to win freedom for all of us. Many in the vanguard came from the representatives of the Strike Committees which were created to ensure that the general strike was successful and worked tirelessly to persuade the general public to fill the streets of Prague, Bratislava, Brno, Ostrava and all the other main centres of the former Czechoslovakia. And, most important, from the point of view of this article, the very same people who made up that revolutionary vanguard later laid the foundations on which the present trade unions in the Czech and Slovak Republics were built. In the immediate aftermath of the 1989 Changes, there was a euphoric atmosphere – a popular enthusiasm amongst the population who welcomed unconditionally the changes that they believed would at last come. In hindsight, it would be reasonable to say that whilst the bulk of the people knew exactly what ‘‘they did not want’’, very few actually knew ‘‘what it was that they wanted’’, or what they might reasonably expect or the future. Looking back from the vantage point of the present, it is easy to see that many of the expectations of the ordinary men and women who celebrated for weeks after revolution were naive in the extreme. The consequence of the unfulfilled expectations was disappointment and disillusionment. For better understanding of the psyche of the Czechoslovak people we need to travel back the period prior to November 1989 and take a look at life in what was then the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. Constitution rights under the old regime The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic was perceived by many observers as having a democratic system of government, which rested on the principles of a wide National Front dominated by the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. This leading role of the Czechoslovak Communist Party was approved regularly by the citizens expressing their approval at free elections. However, a closer look at the elections themselves would show that they had not a great deal of common ground with democracy. First, there was the obligation to vote, which meant that all Czechoslovak citizens over the age of 18 years had to take part in the elections under the threat of sanction. Of course, there was only ever one candidate, selected in advance and approved by the Communist Party. Common practise was for the result of the acclamation of the elections to be pre-arranged. To actually be in the booth during the elections when the ‘‘count’’ was being conducted would need certain courage and result in an entry being made in the personnel cards. Every Czechoslovak citizen had his or her own file of personnel cards. Such files of personnel cards had to be established at birth for every member of the Republic and were filled in assiduously with a mass of minute detail of either a positive or negative nature on every aspect of a person’’s life. For example, negative points would be recorded if someone was born to who were considered to be undesirable parents. This file of personnel cards accompanied each citizen from birth to the grave and even after death, file archiving took place. These files includes information not only about the person him self, but also about the members of his family. Any kind of

application to the authorities requested by a citizen – even if it was an insignificant matter, the reply would be written and issued on the basis of the information contained in a citizens file. It is quite true that the Constitution of the State stipulated some other significant democratic rights such as the right to work, right to education and health care. Each of these are worthy of a little more scrutiny, for example consider the ‘‘right to work’’ and the proclaimed slogan ‘‘who does not work will not dine’’. The ‘‘right to work’’ meant that all citizens at an employable age would have to be given work, the others were undesirable parasites and a punishment waited for them. The Labour Code stipulated the industrial relations system in the former Czechoslovakia (e.g. rights and obligations of the employer and employee, notice period, working hours, holidays, etc.). The Labour Code also included some extremely restrictive provisions that invaded the freedoms and rights of people in the workplace, for example, if an employee wanted to terminate the employment contract, the employer was able, at any time, to prolong his legal notice period by 6 months, thereby preventing the employee from exercising his right to terminate the employment contract. Other so-called ‘‘democratic’’ measures include the practise of reserving the most desirable jobs and appointments for the ‘‘Party faithful’’. In short – only the members of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia could occupy such leading and managerial posts. In that respect, appointments to senior positions were not dependent upon the education, competence, or the qualifications of an individual, but solely on membership of the Communist Party and thereby subordination to the party and party discipline. A Further boast of the former regime was the right to education. The truth was that this was only the case in respect of primary education. All applications to secondary schools (grammar schools) and universities were subject to the approval of the acceptance committee who would automatically make their decision on the basis of the information contained in the individual’’s personal file. Trade unions before the 1989 changes It would be appropriate at this stage to focus on the Trade Unions in former Czechoslovakia. All working people including the leading and managerial employees were obliged to be organized in the Trade Unions. The basic trade union organizations in the workplace comprised of two elements, the first being the local representatives of the National TU Federation and the second, representing the professional TU of the respective profession and sector in which the enterprise or workplace operated. At all levels there was the ubiquitous and constant presence of ‘‘the Party’’ and ‘‘Party Discipline’’. The instructions and decisions came down from the National TU Headquarters through the regional councils, provincial councils, municipal councils, enterprise councils and finally to the factories. A reversed flow of information and intelligence was in turn passed from the factory floor through the various strata up to the National Head Quarters. Everyone at each level had to be accountable for his or her activities. In every workplace in the factory the Shop Steward was the leader of the trade union organization. The Shop Steward was elected by the basic trade union organization in the factory. The structure of the basic trade union organization in the factory was determined by the next level in the chain or command. Although the

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 583

ER 27,6

584

number of members in the factory trade union organization would vary depending on the size of the enterprise, the absolute majority of the members would have to be members in the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. The Chairman of the factory organization, did not necessarily have to be a member of the party, however, if he was not, the vice-chairman had to be a party member and would usually be the leader of the Communists group inside the basic trade union organization in the factory. It can therefore be seen, that ‘‘democratic voting’’ in the trade union at the workplace always conformed with the party line as party discipline required all members of the Communist Party in the in the workplace to vote jointly and uniformly. That is why the revolutionary labour movement (ROH) – as the former Federation of Trade Unions in Czechoslovakia – was often described as the ‘‘extended hands’’ of the party. The representatives of the Unions were co-opted to the various committees of the enterprises such as health and safety, wages etc always as observers. Their expression and attitude was never at variance with the management’’s position and never ever in conflict with the management. Although they enjoyed rights under the Labour Code to participate in mutual decision making with the management and had the right of veto over certain management actions such as instant dismissal – such rights were only exercised after seeking guidance and ensuring that they did not cut across the wishes and policies of the party. Fund of cultural and social need Of course, the former powerful masters in the old regime were not stupid and they were very familiar with the game of ‘‘tit for tat’’ and that their ‘‘power to control’’ was strengthened by allowing the ordinary citizens to feel that they were ‘‘stake holders’’ in the political system – and in particular the democratic decision making procedure. In the old regime this took the form of an ‘‘Employment Fund’’ (Fund of cultural and social needs) in all enterprises and institutions. This Fund was financed by hypothecating 2 per cent of the total wage bill. The utilization of this Fund was decided upon by the mutual agreement of Management and the Union Organization. Once agreement was reached, the specific terms were incorporated into the Enterprise’’s Collective Bargaining Agreements. Collective bargaining With regards to the Collective Bargaining Agreements, the trade union organisation would enter into discussions with management with a view to reaching agreement on what working conditions would be and how much was to be paid in wages. However, the most interesting part of the collective bargaining procedure for the majority of the employees was the social programme. This included the provision of cheap recreation, summer camps for the children, Christmas presents, gifts on the occasion of the International Day of Women, granting loans, disbursement of jubilee rewards and gifts on various occasions which included life’s jubilee, employment duration, birth of a child, death of a family dependent, accession of the child to the school. etc. As a means of emphasising the role of the Trade Unions and their independence, about 25 per cent of the Fund of Cultural and Social Needs, was handed over to the trade unions for their individual social program activities. The decisions relating to the disbursement of this money, together with the expenditure of the income from membership fees, was the sole responsibility of the Trade Unions. The membership fees were directly deducted at source from the wages

by the employer and handed over to the trade unions. In most cases income from membership fees was also used for financing the recreation, summer camps for children, sports and cultural activities, and for granting various rewards. It is worthy of note that many former trade union members and activists today look back nostalgically to the days of the old regime and lament the passing of the old order when for every Czechoslovak crown they paid in membership fees they received the value many time over back in benefits, Moreover, the union asked little or nothing from them in return, either in time or effort – everything was done for them.The ‘‘Velvet Revolution’’. So this was the situation that existed prior to the events of November 1989. Very few people recognised what great changes were about to take place when the students’’ protests broke out in the late autumn of that year. In the space of just a few the Communist system in Czechoslovakia was brought to its knees. Massive protests on the streets of Prague – often several hundred thousand strong – forced the resignation of the hard-line Communist Party leadership in what became known as ‘‘the velvet revolution.’’ The Universities students ignited the spark, and at once the apathy and stupor of the people seemed to vanish. There was an unmistakable strong desire for change. As mentioned earlier, they did not know exactly what kind of changes they wanted, but they were well aware of what they wanted to terminate. Many of those who were senior echelons, directors and leaders at the centre of the old regime did not hesitate, they quickly changed their ‘‘political coats’’ or withdrew into the background silently only to emerge some time later, in the new commercial companies or in the newly privatised State properties. Here, in this regard, it may well be the case that ‘‘our revolution was more velvet than velvet’’, because, nobody from the former governmental notables or apparatchiks in the party, have ever been punished or made to pay for their acts and conduct. In the case of the Czech Republic, there is therefore good reason to tentatively note that whilst we may talk about the collapse of the Communist regime, we many certainly not assume that the ‘‘velvet revolution’’ marked the end of Communism. Naturally, after November 1989, radical political changes took place and most of those changes took place on the economic front. The restoration of the private sector and transition to a market economy commenced. Free trade unions restored It was at this point that the entire break up of the former trade unions structures occurred. The members of the strike committee and civic forum started to rebuild a free and democratic trade union movement, however, this only occurred in respect of the professional and craft trade unions. Beside the non-party character of these new or reconstituted trade unions, they established two main aims. First, the primary aim was to secure the best working and living conditions for the employees, legal aid were needed, cultivation of self-confidence and dignity which is pertinent to trade union strength and effectiveness. The second aim, which was less understandable to the ordinary members, was to secure the sustainability of the Unions, which would enable the short-term and longterm fulfilment of the first aim. With this, it was necessary to systematize the internal organization of the union, the mutual cohesion of the local and national bodies and to achieve material and financial

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 585

ER 27,6

586

independence. At the same time it was considered essential that the unions gained influence in the wider structured civic society and to establish foothold vis-a`-vis the other social partners. The strategy adopted by the newly reconstructed trade unions was to adopt a reformist approach constructed on the basis of social dialogue and arguments. The new political and economic situation necessitated the new Unions functioning in a quite different manner. Many Unions members who were trade unionists for their own expediency could not deal with the new functioning of the Unions and allowed their membership to laps and as a consequence become part of the large non-union workforce. Political stabilisation The political scene has gradually stabilized and a number of political parties have been created which span the whole political spectrum and range from the ultra right-wing Republican Party to the ultra left-wing anarchist party. Generally speaking there has not been a great deal of interest amongst ordinary people with regards to taking up membership of any particular political party – with the exception of the Communists who have retained a hard core of supporters. Indeed, the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM) has survived basically in an unreconstructed form and was the third largest party in elections for the Chamber of Representatives in the elections held on 14 and 15 June 2002, gaining 41 seats with 18.5 per cent of the total vote. Privatisation The economic dimension of the ‘‘velvet revolution’’ took the form of a voucher privatisation scheme. Many ordinary citizens became engaged in the voucher privatisation process, which included an initial ‘‘small privatisation’’ of the small business sector, which was quickly followed, by a much larger privatisation, which included the massive program of selling off the State enterprises. Everything moved at an incredible pace in the privatisation of the economy, and it was hardly surprising that many problems and unfavourable negative consequences began to appear. A lack of relevant legislation and an inability to introduce legislation to accommodate the demands of a market economy and the privatisation process emphasised just how long the 40-year period under the Communists actually was. The problem was that in the former Czechoslovakia, there was no ‘‘moth balled’’ set of legislation, rules and regulations, which could be dusted off and resuscitated. In a nutshell, the problem was that none of us had any experience other than operating in a closed, command economy where the rules and regulations were the exclusive business of ‘‘the Party Machine’’ and the Central Committee and Politburo. Hence – no one should be surprised that on so many occasions in the early years of new Czech Republic well intentioned measures aimed at dealing with the new situation turned out to be unrealistic. 1 January 1993 – separation of Czechoslovakia into two separate republics In addition to these problems and challengess, there was the separation of Czechoslovakia in to an independent Czech Republic and an independent Slovak Republic. This act of separation was essentially a political decision that was taken in the belief that separation would be suitable for both the Czechs and the Slovaks.

The Czechs were convinced that during the Czechoslovak period, they had carried the burden of supporting the Slovaks financially and believed that without the Slovaks they would have done better and moved faster towards achieving a prosperous economy. The Slovaks, on the other hand, held the belief that at last they had been offered the opportunity of having their own independent and autonomous State. The whole separation procedure moved on placidly, calmly, peacefully and frequently with nostalgia and sadness – not least of all, because on both sides mixed Czech/Slovak marriages and families meant that families would be separated and treated as foreigners. At the time of the separation, many Czechs and Slovaks thought it would just be a matter of time before the two peoples would be reconciled into a a single united state once again. Such an idea would be deemed ridiculous today and politically naive. Both States are going their own way separately and – as good friends, steadily growing apart. Challenges for the new trade unions The separation of the former Czechoslovakia had no significant impact upon the Trade union movement. However, the period of ‘‘separation’’, which followed so quickly the start of the transition towards adopting democracy, pluralism and a market economy placed massive pressures on the trade union movement in both of the new Republics. The proficient and competent people who had been in the vanguard of the revolution and had played such an important part in the ‘‘re-birth’’ of free, independent and democratic trade unions – regrettably, began gradually to move a way from the trade unions into either politics or business. However, as damaging as that was – even more serious problems were becoming apparent and had to be dealt with. The greatest problem of that early post-communist period was that the trade unions had no social partner with whom they could negotiate a collective agreement. There was a lack of the necessary laws, which were required to regulate the relationship between the ‘‘buyers’’ and ‘‘sellers’’ of labour power’’ in the new Czech labour market. This realisation that there was no real industrial relations infrastructure was a harsh ‘‘learning experience’’ that was unavoidable. But it was only one of many other harsh realities that the Infant Czech Republic and the trade unions had to deal with. A major shock that had not been sufficiently considered was the collapse of the East European Markets, upon which the Czech economy depended and in which it had been a central player. Next came the invasion of tough competition in our own home market followed by the arrival of foreign capital and multinational companies and – most important, the collapse of the State system of economic management. In comparison with most of the other emerging and transforming economies which gained independence with the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Czech economy has shown resilience, energetic adaptability, a willingness to face up to the fundamental changes which have taken place without the serious social and welfare consequences which have devastated the populations in some of the other immerging democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. The Czech trade unions and their officials – many of whom were new to operating at such senior levels had to grow up very quickly – and learn equally quickly! They pragmatically decided that the way forward was to become active partners in a ‘‘tripartite’’ relationship with the government and the employers, Given that there were no employers organisations, the unions themselves actually helped and assisted in

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 587

ER 27,6

588

bringing employers together to form Federations with whom they could negotiate national collective agreements and enterprise Agreements. The collective bargaining process, on the whole, was successful and worked well and nearly always led to the conclusion of collective agreements, which were acceptable to both parties. The collective agreements, till now, generally respected the principle of maintaining the real wages and resulted in increases, which at least matched the prevailing inflation rate. In the period following 1 May 2004, a new factor had to be taken into consideration – membership of the European Union (EU). The people were afraid of a rapid increase in prices after the Czech accession to the EU, which combined with a freeze on wages during the transitional period would leaden to a sharp decrease in living standards. Thankfully, such fears turned out to be without any foundation and living standards were more or less maintained. Czech accession to the European Union (EU) 2004 The consensus view of the majority of the Czech people regarding EU membership – at the time of writing – is probably that being part of the largest integrated economic block in the World will give the Czech Republic a wide advantage in developing its Political, Economic and Social structures, bringing not only new opportunities to the enterprises and their employees, but which will also give the trade unions and their members rights which would be enforceable under the EU treaties to which the Czech Republic are signatories. The impact of all these changes and challenges since 1989 have understandably had a profound effect on employee relations and the trade unions – especially the old craft/ professional unions which have histories which span well over two centuries. Once such Trade Union is Typograficka Beseda the Print Union and an examination of the way in which in was resuscitated after the 1989 Revolution may help to give a clearer focus to how employee relations has developed in the Czech Republic over the last fifteen years. Typograficka Beseda Typograficka Beseda was the first trade union to be formed in the Czech Lands and was the product of two craft guilds merging in 1862. Sadly, it can no longer claim to have the influence or significance that once was the case. The older of the two guilds was Typograficka whose purpose had been the mutual support of its Prague members. The youngest one Typograficka´ Beseda’s had more of self-help and self-improvement tradition aimed at encouraging a sense of community and strongly favouring the benefits of acquiring a good and all-round education. Until the year 1939, Typograficka Beseda was one of the most significant, influential and the richest trade unions in the old Czechoslovakia. This was the year of the Nazi occupation of Czechoslovakia and the declaration of the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. The occupation led to the division of the membership in to nationals of the protectorate and citizens of the imperial Germany, and consequently resulted in a loss of most of our property. In the year 1945, after the liberation, a short period of resurrection and rebirth of the union began – one that was to be short lived. The end of the union’s democratic development occurred in 1948 when Typograficka´ Beseda was forcably swallowed by the ROH (revolutionary labour movement) and incorporate into the massive industry wide trade union for the chemical industry based on the Soviet trade union model.

With the great changes of November 1989, a breakthrough and fundamental turn of events took place. In the basic trade union organisations of the enterprises throughout the printing and paper industry, dramatic changes occurred. Unprincipled, inept and unqualified officials left and new officials were elected who at an extraordinary conference in March 1990 took the decision to renew the activities of Typograficka Beseda. In the years since the rebirth of Typograficka Beseda, the Czech printing industry and the union have had to travel a long and complicated road experiencing many difficulties and facing many challenges. Primarily they have been: (1) Privatisation. With the exception of the State currency and security-printing house, other enterprises – printing houses have been privatised. (2) The technical and technological revolution. Till the year 1990, the technology, which predominated, was the hot-metal composition process. (3) Relocating the enterprises. Printing houses from the centre of the large Cities were relocated. Technologically outdated printing houses were closed. These three factors all had a massively negative impact on employment in the industry. In the printing industry alone, the size of the workforce fell in the immediate aftermath of the revolution 17 November 1989 by roughly 30 per cent. Czech and Moravian Confederation of Trades Unions (CMKOS) To complete this brief picture of the developments which have taken place in the Czech Republic over the last fifteen years, it might be interesting to say something about the relationship that Typograficka Beseda has had with the CMKOS (Czech and Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions) especially as the print union was one of the Confederation’’s founding members. From the point of view of Typograficka Beseda, CMKOS retreated from the principals of the confederation and started to act like the former ROH, expanding the apparatus, which markedly increased the financial burdens of the affiliates. The largest four trade unions monopolised power over the decision making process in the leading assembly and assumed a dominant position. The needs and rights of the small trade unions were ignored. It was these developments, which led to the print trade union to reach the uneasy decision in 1996 to disaffiliate from the Confederation. Contrary to the alarm bells which were sounded at that time, Typograficka Beseda has not been isolated and neither has it lost the prestige and respect of its sister trade unions in other sectors. Indeed the print union has continued to cooperate with all Trade Unions interested in cooperating with them and even maintains a good working relationship with the Confederation by utilizing some of their paid services as and when it seems appropriate and to the advantage of both parties. International affiliations Typograficka Beseda was affiliated to the international graphical federation (IGF) and the European Graphical Federation (EGF) in the past and has continued its commitment to international solidarity and cooperation by affiliating to the EGF’s successor Uni Europa Graphical (UEG). In addition to its commitment to play its part in the relevant international bodies, it has also declared a willingness to establish friendly bilateral relationship with all interested parties.

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 589

ER 27,6

590

Although the print union is a relatively small trade union, it has developed over the post-1989 period a stable working relationship with its ‘‘Social Partners’’ the ‘‘Union of Graphical Entrepreneurs’’, with whom they conduct collective bargaining and negotiate national collective agreements – something they have done every year with the exception of 2003 and which covers roughly 2/3 of the employees in the printing industry. So far, Typograficka Beseda has managed to negotiate on each occasion a little more and never a little less than was achieved in the previous year. Multinational companies Regarding the multinational companies in the Czech Republic, the union has also developed relations with them, although their representatives are not members of the employers’ federation, the Union of Graphical Entrepreneurs and Typograficka Beseda has been able to establish functioning basic TU organizations in most of these multinational companies and in negotiating enterprise collective agreements. Whilst it is a pity that these multinational companies in the Czech Republic are not affiliated to the Union of Graphical Entrepreneurs paradoxically, it has been the union’’s experience that in most cases the attitude of the multinational companies towards the social dialog process have been more accommodating than in some of the Czech national enterprises. A good example of where Typograficka Beseda has developed a good working relationship with a multinational is Ringier Company. Of course it has to be said that the experience of the graphical industries with multinational companies must not be seen as a benchmark from which to assess employee relations with multinationals throughout the Czech Republic as in many other sectors the experience has been somewhat different. For example, in the foodstuffs commercial industries (Carrefour, Tesco, Liedl, etc.), have behaved in a very hard-nosed and ruthless way crushing whatever resistance stood in their way. Conclusion To summarise the recent events in the Czech Republic and our expectation for the future this paper offers the following tentative conclusions. The social differences among Czech are increasing and the gap between the ‘‘winners’’ and ‘‘losers’’ in the new Czech Republic is widening. Unemployment is also on the increase. As a consequence, the growth in popularity for the Communist Party amongst Czechs is hardly surprising. The euphoric period immediately after the ‘‘velvet revolution’’, which radiated such high hopes based on a belief in human decency, freedom, love and compassion has – in the eyes of many Czechs – gradually been drowned in corruption, lies and money. The people are dissatisfied with the policy of the CSSD (Czech Social Democratic Party) which to many citizens seems to have lost its way – engrossed in the internal conflicts within the party – it would seem to be losing the support of its traditional voters and sympathisers. At the time of writing, all the signs point to a victory in the 2006 general elections by the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) and its ‘‘Blue Opportunity Program’’ which currently sends a shiver down the backs of all trade union activists. The ‘‘Blue Opportunity Programe’’ includes the following proposed changes: .

Disengagement from the Labour Law

.

Abolishment of the ban on the Schwarz System (so called after a Czech businessman named Schwarz who required his staff to sign recurrent contracts

. . . .

for limited periods of time as self-employed individuals so as to eschew the legal duty to pay insurance on behalf of the staff and observe the legal notice period in the case of layoffs) Cancellation of mandatory health insurance Cancellation of unemployment relief Abolishment of allowance for children and the ending of other social benefits Privatisation of the State sector (hospitals, schools), etc.

It would be difficult to examine the ‘‘Blue Opportunity Program,’’ objectively and not conclude that there will be clear ‘‘winners’’ and clear ‘‘losers’’ and given the ODS’s clear statement of intent, the ‘‘winners’’ will not be ordinary working people and their trade unions. It is worrying for the trade unions that people in general are disillusioned with politics and the current round of polls indicate that should the general election be held today, less that 30 per cent of those entitled to vote would go to the polling booths. This does not auger will for democracy and the future. Perhaps it is only by recognising this unpalatable reality that the trade unions might be prepared to change yet again – especially with regards to their tendency to distance themselves from party politics. Perhaps the time is now opportune for the trade unions to mobilise the potentially powerful collective vote of their members and their families to protect their rights and protections and proclaim that whilst they want a prosperous, competitive and productive Czech Republic – the price to be paid must not be unemployment, low wages, unsafe working conditions, poor health services, inferior education opportunities, poor pensions and inadequate welfare benefits. In short, lets have ‘‘flexibility’’ by all means, but let the trade unions make it clear, that such ‘‘flexibility’’ must be tempered by ‘‘Fairness’’.

Employee relations in the Czech Republic 591

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

ER 27,6

592

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

Norwegian and Nordic trade union support and solidarity for trade unions in eastern and central Europe Finn Erik Thoresen 2nd Vice-President, The Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (‘‘LO-Norway’’), Oslo, Norway Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to provide a Norwegian perspective of how trade unions in the former Soviet block countries have dealt with the challenges of the post-communist period and how the European trade union movement has attempted to assist them as they have adjusted to representing and protecting the interests of workers in a market economy. Design/methodology/approach – This paper considers the point that the experiences of trade union development in the former communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe should not be assumed to have followed some monolithic pattern. Findings – Each of the individual states experienced challenges that were unique to them and which reflected the economic, geographical and social situation they found themselves in when they took the ‘‘leap in the dark’’ at the end of the 1990s. The speed at which they made the transition to a market economy was also quite diverse with some countries such a Czech Republic and Hungary making progress quickly whilst others, for understandable reasons, were much slower off the mark. Research limitations/implications – One of the main thrusts of this paper is the diversity of experience amongst the former Soviet block countries both prior to and after the 1989 changes. The paper invites researchers to explore this diversity further in terms of causality and the impact of this diversity on the democratisation process of Central and Eastern European Countries. Originality/value – Provides a timely reminder of the dangers of perceiving trade unions in the former communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe as replicas of their counterparts in the West. The picture he paints of the diversity of the region, the weakness of national trade union headquarters starved of funds to pursue industrial objectives by local trade union organisations who have a ‘‘holiday club’’ mentality and retain the bulk of the income for social and welfare benefits reminds us of the extreme difficulties that face trade unions in CEE countries as the strive to build strong and effective organisations capable of challenging multinational conglomerates. Keywords Trade unions, Norway, Industrial relations, Employee relations, International cooperation Paper type Case study

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 592-602 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626126

1. Introduction After the comprehensive political upheavals around 1990, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO-Norway) initiated varied project cooperation with trade union organisations in Central and Eastern Europe in 1992. The political change made the cooperation possible, and the Norwegian Parliament allocated funds to this cooperation through the Programme of Action for Eastern Europe. This was the Norwegian authorities’ chief instrument to stimulate a long-term cooperation with North-western Russia, the Baltic and Central Europe. The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs were to follow up the allocations, and asked LO to coordinate the resources from the programme earmarked trade union activities. The Ministry needed assistance from the Norwegian and the international trade union movement, since it

did not have the necessary knowledge about the trade union structures in the former one-party states. There is a long tradition of cooperation between the authorities and organisations in the civil society in Norway, irrespective of the political colour of the governments. Many non-governmental organisations (NGO) in Norway receive considerable financial support from the authorities for their work – also for national and international solidarity work and humanitarian efforts. The trade union movement has therefore also benefited from the policy of the Norwegian authorities to promote Norwegian interests or to influence developments in Central and Eastern Europe. LO-Norway is a financially totally independent organisation, but has nevertheless applied for financial support from various governments for its international involvement. LO-Norway has since 1992 received funds from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for its solidarity work in Russia and countries in Central and Eastern Europe. The priorities of LO were Northwestern Russia, Slovakia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, and this was confirmed in a strategy document for the cooperation in Central and Eastern Europe (2001-2004). However, at its adoption autumn 2000, the public assistance to the work started to fall. The Parliament’s allocations have varied strongly from one year to another, and this has made it difficult to develop long-term and comprehensive plans for the cooperation. The assistance has been of decisive importance for the solidarity cooperation, in which the Norwegian trade union movement has been, and is, involved. In addition to the funds from the authorities, several of LO’s national unions have contributed with considerable funds to the cooperation. The Norwegian and the Nordic trade union movements have coordinated parts of the work regionally through the council of nordic trade unions (NFS), or through international organisations such as the international confederation of free trade unions (ICFTU) and the European trade union confederation (ETUC). 2. Varied political developments The countries in Central and Eastern Europe are too often referred to as a uniform block. There is no meaning in putting the same label on all post-communist states merely because they are situated geographically close to one another. There are great differences, both with regard to development level, degree of industrialisation and level of education. The countries in Central and Eastern Europe have therefore developed in somewhat different directions after the fall of the Wall in 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. A common feature of the change in most countries is, however, varying degrees of a neo-liberal ideology, as a counter-reaction to the old system. In some countries, there have been tendencies to populist and chauvinistic nationalism, which to some extent has created problems for minority groups. The speed of the developments has been quite varying. Countries like Poland, Slovenia, Hungary and the Czech Republic were quick to introduce democratic rule and have seen positive democratic developments. Other countries have had major problems while underway. In addition to the four above countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia succeeded in implementing changes, in order for these eight countries to be accepted as new EU Member States as from 1 May 2004. Countries like Romania, Bulgaria and Albania have not experienced such positive developments. In addition, Russia and most parts of former Yugoslavia found themselves in a league of their own. Russia has experienced many political and economic crises. Yugoslavia went into

Norwegian trade union support

593

ER 27,6

594

dissolution due to internal upheavals, and most new states experienced destructive wars and conflicts. The expectations were great with regard to what was going to happen through the transition to democracy and a new economic system. Most people thought the transitional period would not last long. Today we must realise that there still is a long way to go in many areas. Most countries have introduced multi-party systems and conduct democratic elections. But in many countries, an unduly number of small parties has come into existence. In Romania, 150 political parties were established during the first five years after the upheaval. In the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, 192 parties were registered in 1999 ! With weak democratic traditions, it is easy to understand that this is not a simple process. In some countries, there were no problems connected with the political change, while in others, the processes to establish real democracy were difficult. The turbulent presidential election in Ukraine in 2004 is so far the last example. After huge popular protests, a new electoral round was organised around Christmas, before the results of the elections were generally recognised. 3. Economic change The new regimes which came to power after the fall of the Wall have mainly been characterised by uncritical adherence to market liberalism. In the wake of the transition, prices in many countries become free, and subsidies to state-owned enterprises were brought to an end. This led to strong, economic recession in all countries. Many are still struggling with basic challenges with regard to how the market economy should be developed and function. Russia experienced the most dramatic economic recession, with its gross domestic product (GDP) being reduced by almost 50 per cent the first years after the transition. When the prices were released in 1992, the inflation was so high that the Russian rubel in a short time became almost worthless. The situation deteriorated even more by the dramatic devaluation 17 August 1998, when many people lost their savings, and wages were reduced by 70 per cent. After the devaluation, the Russian economy has experienced an impressive growth – not least thanks to high oil prices. The growth is, however, very unevenly distributed, and the distribution policy is not better off now in Russian politics. The countries have entered into agreements on loans and debt pay-off with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which in return have given them strict, economic injunctions. Requirements have been presented with regard to amendments in the banking system, introduction of customs tariff systems, changes in pension and social security systems, trade liberalisation, reinforced efforts against public corruption, establishment of tax and duty systems, and unwinding several types of state subsidies. In most countries, comprehensive privatisation programs have been carried through. In many countries, the sale of public property has led to conflicts, because friends of central politicians in powerful positions often were able to buy valuable enterprises at reasonable prices, so that the State lost huge revenues. Some countries did this in a more transparent and fair way. The Czech Republic, for instance, did first privatise small shops, hotels, restaurants and other smaller enterprises. Afterwards, the 3,000 largest public enterprises were transformed into limited companies where

most people could buy shares. After a third of the privatisation had been carried through, six million Czechs were shareholders. 4. Social conditions During the Communist days, there was officially no unemployment in the countries. Today, the registered unemployment is 15-20 per cent in several countries. The real unemployment is in most cases much higher. Some countries, inter alia, the Czech Republic, invested already in 1990 in the establishment of an active labour market policy with employment measures. This contributed to keeping unemployment at a lower level. At the same time, small groups have managed to enrich themselves from the restructuring. In 2000 for instance, there were about 100,000 millionaires in Russia, while the average woman and man have experienced a strong deterioration of their economic and social situation. Along with the increasing privatisation, several people lost their jobs. Many enterprises were so bad off that the workers for longer periods got no pay, and some employers speculated in holding back wages. The social security network has more or less crumbled away. In the poorest countries, there were no more funds for unemployment benefits, social or sickness benefits. In countries like Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, large parts of Former Yugoslavia and in parts of Russia, large parts of the population are living below the poverty limit, and the social distress is comprehensive. 5. The challenges facing the trade union movement The trade union movement in Central and Eastern Europe has for almost 15 years been working to find its new role after the restructuring. Under the old regimes, the trade union movement did mainly attend to welfare offers for workers. It had a minimum of influence on the wage level. Collective bargaining could not secure the rights of the workers, and unions had no real right to strike. In several countries, there was no systematic training of union representatives, or no form of active recruitment. As a point of departure, everybody was unionised. During the 1990s, the trade union organisations underwent radical changes. In many countries, new and alternative organisations were set up – not least based on the support from some trade union organisations in the West. This led to many conflicts, both with regard to the right to the trade union movement’s assets and the struggle about the members. The old organisations were reformed, but they have lost many members. This occurred because jobs were lost, because the employers in many places tempted with higher pay for non-unionised workers, and because the confidence in the trade union movement was weakened in general – particularly among the youth. The trade union movement is often seen as a part of the ‘‘old system’’. Most organisations try to appear and function like trade union organisations, as we know them from Western countries. However, it will still take a long time before they will be able to become efficient organisations as Western European trade union organisations are. In some cases, the structures exist merely on paper. It is a fact that in many places, there are still leaders longing back to their old roles and status from before the reform process. Many of them do not want radical changes. One of the most important obstacles to change is the lack of representative employers’ organisations. Normal negotiations and the conclusion of collective agreements require that also the employers are satisfactorily organised, and this is not the case in many countries.

Norwegian trade union support

595

ER 27,6

596

It was also clear that many organisations lacked a gender policy. Even though equal rights between men and women could be there on paper, many organisations were old-fashioned and very male dominated. There was a genuine need for new ideas, and promotion of real equality between men and women was an important area to address. Many trade union organisations have not made enough progress in the work to establish functional systems for membership registers, dues collection and the recruitment of new members. It is therefore difficult to establish how many members they actually have, and how many they have lost. Lacking membership registers do also make dues collection difficult. An important reason why there are no registers is often lack of confidence between the various levels in the trade union organisations. Local unions, national unions or confederations may have economic interests in maintaining uncertainty about their membership figures. A common feature for many is that automatic dues collection does not function. Consequently, the dues are not distributed to the national unions and the central trade union organisation. In Russia, the common practise is to collect the dues at the enterprise level, and the dues are mainly administered at the local level. The bulk of these resources are used on social welfare, such as holidays for the workers. Only rarely are some funds sent to the national union and the central organisation. The organisations therefore spend a lot of time and efforts on finding other sources of income. In some countries, the authorities have distributed the assets of the trade union movement between the reformed and the new organisations. Sometimes the organisations have spent a lot of time on quarrels about the proprietary right to holiday homes and other buildings, and the income from the properties that belonged to the trade union movement before the transition. Trade union organisations wishing to get started with systematic training of union representatives and recruitment of young people need resources to do so. Several international organisations such as the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the Council of Nordic Trade Unions (NFS) have therefore for many years been involved in training activities and skills transfer to the trade union movement of Central and Eastern Europe. In addition, several national confederations and individual national unions have also involved themselves in bilateral cooperation with their sister organisations. Both reformed and alternative organisations have become affiliates of the ETUC and the ICFTU, and a few have joined the ‘‘Christian’’ international trade union organisation, the WCL. In Russia, both the reformed FNPR and the two alternative Russian trade union organisations, the VKT and the KTR, have joined the ICFTU. The FNPR has contributed with about 32 million members, and the VKT and the KTR with about one million each. 6. International cooperation and Nordic coordination Human and trade union rights are still being violated in countries in Central and Eastern Europe. The struggle for gender equality in society and within the trade union movement remains a challenge. The ILO, the ICFTU, ETUC and the NFS have all developed a comprehensive cooperation with the trade union organisations in the countries aimed at securing trade union rights, strengthening the organisations and increasing the extent of training of union representatives. The ILO has set up offices in Russia and in Hungary. Most countries did at an early stage introduce legislation and

tripartite cooperation between workers, employers and the authorities. Much of the legislation was imported directly, and it has taken time to make the cooperation function. In 1997, LO-Norway entered into cooperation with the ILO on training of union officials in Russia. LO-Norway received assistance from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for a major training project, which was carried out in cooperation with the ILO workers’ department and the FNPR in Russia. The cooperation aimed at training of union representatives in several of the training institutions of the FNPR, and was concluded in 2001. Emphasis was placed on the training of union representatives capable of functioning as instructors at the local level, on a revision of the pedagogical material used, and on a radical amendment of the training methods. It was tried to upgrade the schools with new equipment, and use of computers were introduced as a key training method. It was not easy to win through with the changes and the modernisation. The trade union schools are still characterised by the management systems from the Communist days. The directors at these schools have great power, and they will in many cases not let others rule over them, and they do not want to introduce considerable changes in the operation of the schools. Many of the workshops were characterised by the wish for getting ‘‘old times’’ back. Little has happened in this field after the project was terminated, due to the difficult financial situation in the Russian trade union movement, and the weakening of the trade union movement. The ICFTU has coordinated its work through a separate committee on Central and Eastern Europe. The Nordic organisations have participated actively in this committee. The ICFTU affiliates from most European and some other countries also participate. Since it became clear that eight countries in the region would become EU members, focus is about to be moved further South and East to the countries that have not as yet qualified for EU membership, and to the former Soviet republics. The ICFTU has followed the trade union and political developments in these countries, and, inter alia, set up offices in Moscow and Sarajevo. The latter has been given the responsibility for South-Eastern Europe, and the Nordic trade union movement has, inter alia, contributed with funds for this office and for the ICFTU women’s and young people’s network in the region. The ETUC has organised the work on Central and Eastern Europe through a working group in which LO-Norway has participated. Many of the activities have been concentrated on preparing for the enlargement of the EU. The ETUC did, with EU support, finance coordinators from workers’ organisations to coordinate the preparations for affiliation in all candidate countries. The coordinators had also the responsibility for mapping out workers’ rights in their countries. Both traditional blue-collar and most white-collar trade unions in the five Nordic countries participate in the council of Nordic trade unions (known as NFS). Some of the co-operation between Nordic trade unions and Eastern Europe has been organised regionally around the Baltic Sea area. The NFS has coordinated the work of its affiliates through the Baltic Sea Committee. In the summer of 1999, it was decided to establish a new trade union network (BASTUN). The network has elaborated a 10-year visionary document for the work to improve trade union rights in the Baltic Sea area. This has, inter alia, been done through cooperation projects. The BASTUN cooperation includes the Nordic countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, Poland and Germany. Russia has delegated to the trade union movement in North-western Russia the task linked to the work on the Northern Dimension of the EU, and Germany is represented in BASTUN by the trade union movement in Northern Germany. The NFS office in

Norwegian trade union support

597

ER 27,6

598

Stockholm is the network’s secretariat. In the autumn of 2003, BASTUN was accepted as a strategic partner in Council of Baltic Sea States, and participates in the Council’s work linked to, inter alia, the world of work and employment. In the early 1990s, the NFS made a decision on an informal division of labour between the Nordic trade union organisations. The Danish trade union movement should focus on Lithuania, the Swedes on Latvia, and Finland on Estonia. The Norwegian Trade union movement should focus on Northwest Russia. This should secure as rational use of resources as possible. The financing arrangements of the Nordic industrial unions and the Nordic authorities covered all the Baltic countries – particularly with regard to industrial establishments. The informal division of labour was eventually weakened, and today it is of little practical significance. The trade union movement in every Nordic country decides in practice itself where it wants to use its resources as a priority, but information on the work is exchanged between the organisations. 7. Common border between Norway and Russia – traditions for cooperation The cooperation across the Norwegian-Russian border has existed for several hundred years. Earlier in history, trade in the Northern areas was in particular important for the economy in Northern Norway, Russia and Finland. This so-called Pomor trade even developed its own language. After the Russian revolution, and not least during the Cold War after World War II, the cooperation was limited. It should, however, be mentioned that Soviet soldiers liberated Finnmark from German occupation towards the end of World War II, and then retired. This contributed to strengthening the popular relations between the Norwegian and the Russian populations in the area. LO-Norway conducted a policy towards the Russians that was not appreciated by all organisations in the ICFTU. Even during the Cold War, there were political contacts at various levels between the Norwegian and the Russian trade union movements. The trade union movement functioned to some extent as a political bridge builder across the Iron Curtain. Some national unions were more active than others, and not least did the trade union movement in Norway’s three northernmost counties involve themselves strongly. Nowhere in Europe is there a larger social and economic distinction between each side of a national border than between the counties of Finnmark in Norway and Murmansk in Russia. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, large parts of Northwestern Russia have experienced a severe economic recession, while the Norwegian economy has progressed – not least thanks to generous oil revenues. A few miles away from each other, there is thus a highly developed welfare state on one side, and a society with increased poverty and recession on the other. The general recession in the Russian economy explains some of the differences, but in addition, the Russian workers who earlier received additional pay for working in Arctic areas have now experienced that this pay has been considerably reduced or removed. This has also led to considerable emigration from Murmansk to other parts of Russia. Both the trade union movement and humanitarian organisations have involved themselves in trade union, social, cultural and humanitarian work to bridge this gap. In addition, a separate Barents secretariat in Finnmark contributed to making other popular organisations and business and industry in the two countries establish contacts and cooperation. LO-Norway gives particularly priority to cooperation with the trade union movement in North-western Russia. Cooperation was, however,

developed with FNPR and some national unions at the central level, but particularly with the FNPR structures in Murmansk County. As from 1997, this also incorporated Archangels County. As a main rule, there have been annual meetings between the organisations where also representatives from Northwestern Russia and North Norway participate. The cooperation between the Russian and the Norwegian trade union movement is first and foremost about transfer of skills – not about assistance to the operation of trade union organisations. Much of the cooperation has been run by LO-Norway’s national unions, and builds on the cooperation of the national unions with their sister organisations. In addition, LO-Norway’s district and youth secretaries have participated actively. Each year, about 15-20 single projects have been organised. The emphasis has been placed on the training of union representatives in topics such as organisational knowledge, legislation and agreements, and tripartism in the world of work. Several courses have also been held on equal rights between men and women in the trade union movement and on trade union youth work, which shall ensure new recruitment to a trade union movement, which often has been dominated by older men. Trade union youth committees have been established in several regional national union structures in North-western Russia, and the number of woman union representatives is growing. In 2001, the Fafo Institute for Applied Social Science made an evaluation of LONorway’s co-operation with FNPR in Russia. The evaluation recommended, inter alia, that efforts should be made to ensure fewer projects with an explicit geographic focus on Murmansk and Archangel. Along with a reduction of the funds from the Norwegian authorities over time, amendments have taken place in this direction. Russian expertise is increasingly being used for the courses. The idea is that training of Russian union representatives must build on existing Russian laws and agreements – not on export of a ‘‘Norwegian’’ model, which often is far away from the Russian reality. The Norwegian trade union movement has knowledge to teach, and experience to share. But – we must also be humble. We also have to learn from others. This is an illustrating example: in the cooperation with the Russian trade union movement, we have for several years underlined the struggle for equal rights between men and women. When summing up the cooperation between LO and the Russian trade union movement in 2003, LO noted something interesting. The Russians now have a larger share of women participants at courses and conferences than LO-Norway. The cooperation with the trade union movement in Northwestern Russia is still LONorway’s highest priority. The trade union situation in most republics in the former Soviet Union is not that clear. LO-Norway has therefore decided to await cooperation with the trade union movement in these countries. It would require more knowledge, personnel and financial resources than what we so far have today for LO-Norway to establish co-operation with trade unions in these countries. .

8. Manifold cooperation LO-Norway has mainly been involved in cooperation with so-called ‘‘reformed’’ trade union organisations and national unions. This has been a conscious political choice. Despite their background from the old system, these organisations were mostly the most representative ones; they had most members, and represented the trade union history and culture. Several of the so-called ‘‘alternative’’ organisations have in many cases been small and very dependent on foreign financial support in order to survive. LO-Norway’s position has therefore sometimes been different from the line followed by

Norwegian trade union support

599

ER 27,6

600

other ICFTU affiliates. One example is contacts with OPZZ in Poland, which the ICFTU-affiliated Solidarnosc takes a negative stand to. Alternative organisations in several other countries have become affiliates of both the ETUC and the ICFTU. LO-Norway has not been involved in project cooperation of significance with these organisations, but has kept contacts at the level of inviting them to our congresses. In addition to the work in Russia, LO-Norway did also make the decision to give priority to cooperation with the trade union movement in Slovakia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. LO-Norway and its national unions have also been involved in some cooperation projects in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. A Nordic investigation at the end of the 1990s did, however, show that there were so many trade union projects in the three countries that the relatively small trade union organisations did not have enough resources to receive and organise more delegations and courses. Nordic business investments have to a high degree gone to the Baltic states, and it has been important to keep track of what these enterprises are doing, inter alia with regard to workers’ rights when they are setting up businesses in other countries. In addition, LO-Norway and its national unions have been involved in some minor projects in Hungary, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. Some of LO-Norway’s national unions had already established cooperation with their sister organisation in Slovakia when LO-Norway in 1997 entered into a committing cooperation with the confederation KOZ SR. The trade union movement in Slovakia is struggling with a weak organisational structure, reduced membership, poor participation of women, and difficulties in cooperating with the employers. The cooperation was regulated by a cooperation agreement for the period 2002-2004, but the cooperation has been reduced, due to the authorities’ reorganisation of the support to the new EU states as from 2004. After the Dayton Agreement on peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina, LO-Norway as from 1977 developed cooperation with the confederation SSSBiH in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Several Norwegian national unions also cooperated with their sister organisations in the country. The Bosnian trade unions still have problems with cooperation across the ethnic lines, and it has turned out to be difficult to develop the structures in SSSBiH. The power and the resources lie in SSSBiH’s national unions, and they have not demonstrated enough strength to consolidate the central organisation. The national unions need joint systems for membership registers, legal skills, training of union representatives, English language skills to be able to participate in international organisations, equal rights work etc. In the years after LO-Norway financed the rehabilitation of the People’s House in Sarajevo, most of the activities have been channelled through the ICFTU Sarajevo office. However, some work is also bilateral, including co-operation between a district of LO-Norway and local unions in one of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s cantons. LO-Norway has all the time wanted to promote trade union cooperation across ethnic borders, but this has turned out to be difficult. Some of LO-Norway’s national unions have also initiated cooperation with other organisations in Former Yugoslavia, but so far to a modest extent. 9. Long-term objectives – but short-term financing The objective for LO-Norway’s cooperation with the trade union movement in Central and Eastern Europe is to contribute to the establishment of democratic trade union organisations. A strong trade union movement can be an advocate of, and active co-player, in the work to strengthen and carry on democratic social developments. Contributing to the establishment of strong trade union organisations in these

countries is not only about solidarity, it is also about contributing to creating peace. It is also important in order to protect what the trade union movement has built of trade union, economic and political rights. Without strong trade unions, cheap labour and weak workers’ rights and environmental standards could become motivating factors for greedy investors and employers when it comes to where investments, trade and industry end up in Europe. Due to the role of the trade union movement under Communist rule, many young people today choose not to join a union. It is therefore important to contribute to a renewal of the trade union movement, so that it serves the interests of the workers in a good way. LO-Norway wants to be a reliable and predictable long-term partner with the organisations with which we are cooperating. Although the objective for the work requires long-term efforts, the financing has continued to be short-term – and increasingly more unpredictable. As from 1998, the Norwegian Parliament started reducing the allocations. LONorway’s activities have been reduced, since LO-Norway itself has limited resources for solidarity work. The lack of long-term financing has made it difficult to develop long-term plans and agreements. LO-Norway has therefore the past few years spent the funds from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for a number of relatively small cooperation projects. LO-Norway and several of its national unions have as from 2002 made significant contributions to the work in Central and Eastern Europe, in order to compensate for some of the reduced public assistance. The trade union cooperation through the ETUC on EU issues has become even more important since the new countries have become EU members. The Norwegian assistance given through the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for cooperation with the trade union movement in the new member states was reorganised into a recipient-oriented financing arrangement in the course of 2004. Norway contributes with funds for economic and social cohesion in the new member states. LO-Norway has exerted pressure on the Norwegian authorities in order to ensure that also the social partners have access to apply for projects and programmes through the financing arrangements. LO-Norway believes it is possible to contribute to developing the industrial relations in all new member states with the help of these funds. They need trained union representatives who can function as advocates in the work on the implementation of the EU labour legislation for the benefit of workers, and on the development of the plan on social dialogue of the EU Commission, as the national and European tripartite cooperation is called. It is also necessary to follow Norwegian and other international groups setting up business in these countries. The application procedure is comprehensive, and there are some ‘‘obstacles’’ or barriers underway. A long application procedure, bureaucracy, lacking language skills and high contributions from the applicant are some of the challenges. What LO-Norway fears the most, is that the authorities in the countries where there is a tense relationship between the social partners and the authorities will halt project applications at the national level. It will be a great challenge for LO-Norway and the national unions to follow this work the next years. 10. The future Solidarity should remain the headline for our co-operation with the trade unions in the countries in Central and Eastern Europe. It is of mutual interest that there are strong, democratic and self-financed trade unions in all countries.

Norwegian trade union support

601

ER 27,6

602

Wages and working conditions are under strong pressure in Western Europe. Employers and some governments attack trade union rights in the West, with a hidden or open threat that production may be moved to countries with weak unions and liberal legislation. Social dumping is increasingly an issue, when workers from Eastern Europe increasingly compete in a joint labour market. Instead of a xenophobic response to such challenges, trade unions should jointly fight to avoid a ‘‘race to the bottom’’ in working life. Only strong trade unions with joint vision and strong solidarity among themselves can fight back the neoliberal policies and the power of the transnational corporations. It is in this perspective the co-operation and support between trade unions should be seen in the future.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia

Borislav Majtan President, Slovak Trade Union of Workers in Wood Processing, Forestry, Paper and Cellulose and Water Supplies (TUWFPCW), Bratislava, Slovak Republic

603

Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to examine how the Slovak Labour Code has evolved as a result of the ‘‘velvet revolution’’ which saw Czechoslovakia begin the transition from a ‘‘command’’ to a ‘‘market economy, the establishment of a separate Czech Republic and a Slovak Republic and Slovakia’s accession to membership of the European Union. Design/methodology/approach – The paper attempts to provide an empirical contribution to the understanding of how the process of industrial relations is evolving in the new democracies of Eastern and Central Europe in the post-communist period. Findings – The paper highlights how the detailed codification of trade union rights of the communist era have been drastically reformed in light of the Slovak Republic adopting a market economy and adopting the EU’s social acquis communautaire. The governments desire to liberalise and encourage a more flexible labour market has seen many of the old powers of the trade unions transferred to other forms of employee representation such as works councils and works trustees. Research limitations/implications – The author has described the strategy of the government to marginalise trade unions by introducing works councils and transferring functions to them, which had previously been performed by the trade unions. Originality/value – The paper provide an interesting insight into how ‘‘players’’ in the ‘‘employee relations game’’ perceive the re-codification of the Slovak Labour Code. There seems to be a mixed response to the changes, for whilst the union claims that it is able to boast a 95 per cent success rate in winning cases in the courts arising out of the rights and protections provided for employees in the Labour Code, and not withstanding the very low incidence of industrial action, the paper notes with some irony that there is significant school of opinion amongst Slovak trade unionists that the price that they pay for all of this is some of the lowest wages in the region. Keywords Trade unions, Employee relations, Industrial relations, Collective bargaining, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic Paper type Case study

This article focuses on the Labour Code developments in the Republic of Slovakia from the perspective of the Slovak Trade Union of workers in wood processing, forestry, paper and cellulose and water supplies (TUWFPCW) which has around 35,000 members, and is one of the largest and most influential trade unions in the Republic. The ‘‘Velvet Revolution’’ At the end of the 1980s, significant political and social changes took place in the former Czechoslovakia, which presented the trade union movement with formidable challenges. The transfer from a ‘‘command’’ economy to a market economy in 1989 brought with it a social and welfare ‘‘market orientation’’, which profoundly impacted on trade union activities and the Labour Code. With the peaceful separation of the former Czechoslovakia into two sovereign republics on the 1st January 1993, the process of liberalising the Slovak economy and social and political systems accelerated. The early years of the new Republic presented challenges for all Slovaks – especially the trade unions. Privatisation, political instability – especially during the time of the

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 603-612 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626135

ER 27,6

604

feud between President Kovac and Prime Minister Meciar – and the governments attack on the power and rights of the trade unions did not auger well for the future. The trade unions disenchantment with the government reached its peak when the government introduced the Wage Regulation Act, which gave the government powers to intervene in collective bargaining and wage determination. The unions disengaged from dialogue with the government and the ‘‘tripartite body’’ in June 1997 in protest and only returned to it after the general election, which was held in the autumn of 1998 returned a change of government, which appeared less hostile to the trade unions. This period of relative peace lasted until 2002 when a hardening of government’s attitude to trade unions took the form of proposals to amend the Health and Safety at Work legislation and most important, the Labour Code which would have the effect of taking away important powers from the trade unions. So – the first 16 years of post-communist Slovakia – have been somewhat turbulent for the trade unions, as they have struggled to adapt to operating in a market economy. One of the biggest challenges was the way in which the relationship between the state and the trade unions changed quickly and dramatically. From a benevolent state which viewed the trade union movement as an integral and important part of the country’s institution, the governments in the immediate post-communist period quickly set about distancing themselves from the trade unions who they saw as being impediments to the liberalisation of the Slovak economy. The new exigencies of the market and the adoption of crude Western economic reforms in order to pursue European Union membership. Whilst these reforms created a situation which was favourable and welcomed by many Slovaks, high levels of unemployment combined by drastic cuts in social security benefits to the unemployed were areas of considerable concern to a large percentage of the population – and in particular to the trade unions who were having to cope with the strange and novel challenges arising out of Slovakia’s adoption of a ‘‘freemarket’’ system and an ever increasing haemorrhage of union membership. It is against this background and these experiences that characterised the nascent ‘‘free’’ Slovak Republic that this article, which focuses on the TUWFPCW and its experience of the developments, which have taken place with regards to Slovakia’s Labour Code, has been written. Because of the trade union’s lack of experience of operating in a market economy TUWFPCW contacted the European Graphical Federation (EGF)[1] its fraternal European trade unions center in the ‘‘free world’’ and requested help and assistance. This lead to the UK’s Graphical, Paper and Media Union (GPMU)[2] providing enormous help and assistance in organising education and training seminars for the Trade Union’s officials and members who were now required to operate in market economies. In order to describe and explain the development of the Labour Code (Labour Law) in Slovakia, several factors need to be mentioned at the beginning. Former Czechoslovakia was in 1919 a founder member of the International Labour Organization (ILO). On the 1 January 1993 Czechoslovakia was peacefully divided into two states and as a consequence the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic were created. That separation notably influenced and is still influencing the development of the Slovak Labour Code. The first Labour Code in the former Czechoslovakia was introduced in 1965. This Labour Code was amended 33 times till the first re-codification took place in Slovakia in 2001. After 1989, in order to accommodate the liberalization of the labour market,

22 amendments were adopted. The most recent Labour Code re-codification took place in 2003. The original Labour Code of 1965 contained relatively huge powers and competencies for trade unions especially in the fields of: .

creation, changes and termination of the work contract,

.

determination of working time, overtime work and night-work,

.

determination of holidays,

.

compensation wages during short-time working,

.

approving working conditions in the enterprise in compliance with the Labour Code and ensuring that they were applied in a meaningful way in the enterprise,

.

employees participation in the management of the enterprise,

.

work protection, especially safety and health protection at work and compensation in the case of employment accidents and occupational diseases,

.

social policy of the enterprise.

These competencies of the trade unions were arranged into four groups: (1) Decision-making rights of the trade unions. They were able to forbid work in cases of risk to the health or to the life of the employees. (2) Making joint decisions. This meant that a decision made by the employer was valid in law only after reaching agreement with the trade unions. (3) Trade union cooperation with the employers. Accordingly the employers were obliged to negotiate their decision before it became effective. (4) Controlling competence. This included the right to monitor compliance of the collective agreements, compliance with the conditions of health, safety and protection at work, observation of the wages and compliance with all regulations provided by the Labour Code. There is good reason to argue that these sort of trade union legal competencies, which were enjoyed prior to the political changes, have to some extent had an influence on the more recent individual and collective rights and protections that have been introduced into European Union member states via the Social Chapter in the EU Treaties. The latest modifications to the Labour code which took place in 2003 in the Slovak Republic have had quite wide ranging implications for the trade union movement and the role it plays – especially with regards to the definition of ‘‘employee representatives’’ and their competencies, e.g. .

Trade Union Organization is defined, the role of trade unions is made clear and the ‘‘right to strike’’ by the trade unions and the ‘‘right to lock-out’’ by the employer is spelt out.

.

Works Councils are required to be established (in enterprises with more than 50 employees).

.

A Works trustee must be elected in enterprises with less than 50 employees, but with at least five employees. (The rights and responsibilities or the works trustee shall be equal to the rights and responsibilities of the works council).

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia 605

ER 27,6

606

.

Employee Representatives responsible for safety and health protection at work must be elected.

The 2003 modifications to the labour code incorporate changes, which facilitate employee representatives being involved in all these areas of representing and protecting the interests and welfare of employees. With regards to employees rights to be ‘‘informed’’ and ‘‘consulted’’ and the establishment of employee representatives – these are a direct result of Slovakia incorporating the EU’s Acquis Communautaire and in particular Council Directive 2002/14/EU, which stipulate the general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, and from article 21 of the amended protocol to the European Social Charter. The substantive elements in Directive 2002/14/EU have now been incorporated into the Labour Code, and oblige the employer to take such measures that enable the employees or their representative to obtain such information as might impact on them or the security of their jobs. The representatives also have to be invited to be present at decision-making meetings dealing with issues, which could substantially affect the interests of the employees. The constitutional coalition freedom and ILO agreement no. 135 regarding the protection and rights of employee representatives activities in the enterprise, the European Union Directives and the European Charter of fundamental social rights, require that the interests of the employees in relation to the employers will be protected – not only by the trade unions but also by other legal forms of representation such as works councils and works trustees. Right of employees to information and consultation The employees have the right to be provided with information and consulted about the economic and financial situation of the enterprise by the employer and about future planned activities in a proper time and in a way, which is understandable. The employees have the right to express an opinion about the information they have been consulted on are entitled to submit their own proposals. The new legal provisions also includes the employees right to receive ‘‘multinational’’ information, and to enter into negotiations regarding the employees interests within the framework of the European Works Councils provisions and the procedures for gaining access to multinational information and negotiation. Regarding the information to be received by the employees and their representatives, this is restricted mainly to data which relates to the economic and financial situation of the enterprise, and which is needed as a resource for collective bargaining. Regarding the ‘‘proper time’’ in which the employer must give notice of proposed collective redundancies, the Law stipulates that the term of notice shall be no less than one month prior to the collective-redundancy taking place. Forms of participation The form of participation in which the trade union organization, works council or works trustee takes part and which relates to the formation of working conditions for the employees at the moment comprise: .

joint decision making,

.

negotiating/bargaining,

.

right to information,

.

controlling activity.

Unlike the original labour code provision, the new amendments permit the trade union organisation in the workplace and the works council to act simultaneously. In the case of workplaces with less than 50 employees, then the works trustee is competent to fulfil the responsibilities of both the trade union and the works council. The latest Labour Code with the amendments brought in to satisfy the EU’s social acquis communautaire provide the following separation of powers: (1) Trade Union Organisation. If both a trade union organization and a works council exist in the workplace, then the trade union organization have the following rights: Controlling fulfilment of the obligations in the collective agreements, Right of collective bargaining, Right to information. (2) Works Council. Right of making joint decisions, Negotiating, Right to information, Controlling activity. If there is only a trade union organization operating within the workplace, then in accordance with the Labour Code Provisions, it performs the roles regarding the participation of the employee representatives in all forms of participation as well as fulfilling its collective bargaining responsibilities. Where there is only a works council operating at the workplace, then it performs the roles of the employee representatives in making joint decisions, negotiating, information and controlling activity – but is not entitled to engage in collective bargaining. In a nutshell, the powers and competencies of the trade unions and the employee councils within the workplace are now very similar, with one important exception, which applies to collective bargaining. According to the recent amendments to the Labour Code, the trade unions continue to retain the monopoly over the right to engage in collective bargaining. The relationship between the employee representatives and the employer presume that the employees are engaged in the affairs of their employer, such as: (1) risk anticipation, (2) increasing employee efficiency and productivity, (3) promoting the employees participation in the future of the enterprise and (4) promoting the enterprise’s competitiveness. Trade union organization The Labour Code places an obligation on the employer to facilitate the functioning of the trade union organization at the work place. The status of the trade union organizations is clearly defined by the Law and by the statutes of each particular trade union. The new version of the Labour Code also defines trade union organization. When a trade union is involved in collective bargaining it is required to represent the interests of all employees regardless of whether or not they are members of the trade union. The Labour Code Amendment also redefines the operating conditions of the works council and the works trustee, which relate to the number of employees at the workplace.

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia 607

ER 27,6

608

A works council must be established in enterprises, which have 50 employees or more. A works trustee must be appointed at workplaces with less than 50 employees providing there are at least five employees. The employees have the right to choose the works council or works trustee in the following cases: .

after expiration of his term of office;

.

after the resignation of the works council, if the resignation was agreed upon at an employees meeting;

.

after suspension of the works council by an absolute majority of the present employees during voting.

When the number of employees drops below the limits laid down in the Labour Code – the employee’s council ceases to exist. From the point of view of the works trustee’s competence, it is significant that his rights and obligations are equal to the rights and obligations of the works council. Although the works council and the works trustee are given more competence in the field of making joint decisions, or previous approval, the collective agreement always takes precedent with regards to the adjustment of working conditions. Right to negotiate, right to information The recent amendments to the Labour Code have brought it in line with EU Directive No. 2002/14 EC, that provides for employees to be ‘‘informed’’ and ‘‘consulted’’ by the employer. The amendments also bring the Code in line with article two of the protocol amendment of the European Social Charter. These amendments clarify the position with regards to the right of employees to be informed and consulted. These rights focus primarily on factors, which might impact significantly on the employee’s terms, conditions and security of employment. For example: .

the situation, structure and the expected development of employment and the planned measures,

.

the essential matters of the enterprise’s social policy, the arrangements for improving sanitation during work and in the working environment,

.

the decisions that lead to principal changes in the organization of work or in the contract of employment’s terms,

.

the organizational changes that are considered as a restriction or a stoppage to the employer activity or to a part of it, merger, fusion, division, change in the legal form of the employer,

.

preventive measures to prevent work accidents, occupational diseases and the health protection of the employees.

These new rights require that the consultation must be accomplished in a reasonable manner in a proper time with an appropriate content. The aim of the information and consultation process is to reach a joint agreement. Even if no agreement can be achieved the consultation must be adhered to. The aim of the consultation process is to provide the opportunity for the employer and the employees to discuss issues and for the employer to provide the employee with the relevant facts. The employees then have the opportunity of proposing a solution and presenting arguments from the employee’s point of view.

This right to be informed and consulted apply equally to the economic and financial position of the enterprise. The employer, however, may refuse to provide such information if it is seen as violating his ‘‘trade secrets’’. The employer may also ask the employee representatives to consider some of the information offered to them as confidential information.

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia

Conditions for the activity of the employee representatives The employee representatives have to be provided with appropriate facilities to enable them to carry out their duties effectively. The employer is obliged to provide the employee representatives a free of charge room furnished with appropriate furnishings and to cover the expenses connected with the maintenance and the technical operation. Regarding ‘‘time off’’, the amendments to the Labour Code stipulate that the activities of the employee representatives that are directly related to the fulfilment of the tasks of the employer are considered as a work performance which deserve appropriate remuneration. In evaluating the activities that are directly connected with the fulfilment of the employer tasks, it is important to refer to the Labour Code provisions. According to the new legal provisions the employee representatives are protected against victimisation by the employer because of their activities as an ‘‘employee representative’’ e.g. the employer cannot terminate an employee representative’s contract of employment whilst he or she is an ‘‘employees representative’’ and neither can the contract be terminated for at least a period of six months after the employee has relinquished his or her duties as an ‘‘employee representative’’. On the other hand, the new legal amendment makes it binding on the employee representatives to maintain confidentiality with regards to information that has been designated by the employer as confidential.

609

The protection of the employee representatives against termination of the employment contract Cancellation or immediate termination of the employment contract of the employee representatives requires previous approval from the employee representatives. The Law assumes that approval was given if the employee representatives do not formally refuse to grant approval within 15 days following the date the employer gave notice of his intention to terminate the employee representative’s contract of employment. However, the existing veto of the trade union organization against termination of the employment contract of a trade union official has been somewhat weakened as the courts now have the powers to examine the validity of the employer terminating the employment contract. The court ruling may confirm termination of the employment contract providing they are satisfied that it would be unjust or unreasonable to expect the employer to keep the employee’s job open. Trade Union of Workers in Wood Processing, Forestry, Management of Water Supplies and Paper and Cellulose Industries (TUWPFWPC) Having described the developments in the Slovak Labour Code, it is the intention of this paper to outline how those developments impact on the TUWPFWPC’s collective bargaining and representational activities on behalf of its members. The TUWPFWPC – one of Slovakia’s largest and most influential trade unions comprises some 35 thousand members working in four sectors – Forestry, water supply management, wood processing industry (timber and furniture industry) and the cellulose and paper

ER 27,6

industry. Its members include blue-collar workers, white collar workers and workers with academic degrees. With respect to the protective character of TUWPFWPC’s activities, they are two-fold: (1) collective bargaining and conclusion of collective agreements;

610

(2) handling of the legal claims of its members. The collective bargaining in Slovakia is regulated by the Collective Bargaining Law, which the trade unions’ consider as modern and on the whole acceptable. This Law provides for two kinds of collective agreements, namely, ‘‘Sector’’ collective agreements and ‘‘Enterprise’’ collective agreements. TUWPFWPC have four Sector collective agreements that were negotiated between the trade union and the employers’ federations in the respective sectors. The Enterprise collective agreements are concluded in the enterprise between the trade union organizations and the statutory representatives of the employers. The relationship between the Sector collective agreements and the Enterprise collective agreements is characterized by the following principle – the Enterprise collective agreements provide the possibility of negotiating conditions of employment that are better than the Sector collective agreements. Regarding the content of the collective agreements, their provisions and obligations usually include the following items: .

Defining the mutual relations between the contracting parties. Basically this matter is concerned with the definition of the content and the forms of the relations that are laid down in the already mentioned Labour Code, which proscribes the limits of trade union competence.

.

The creation, changes and termination of the employment contract.

.

Indemnity.

.

Redundancy compensation.

.

Duration and scheduling of working time, overtime and holiday entitlement.

.

Remuneration and rewards packages, especially the forms and scale of the wages components.

.

Welfare of the employees, especially the enterprise’s social policy and its financing. Employees catering and transportation of employees to the working place.

.

Concretization of the safety matters and health protection at work.

Benefits from the collective agreements in the Slovak Republic are valid for all employees regardless of whether or not they are members of a trade union. Although the process of collective bargaining may appear troublesome and complicated, the trade unions’ realistic demands made to the employers federations are mostly acceptable to them No disputes have to date occurred in concluding the Sector collective agreements – and there has been no need of a mediator or arbitrator in terms of the Law. The situation is the same with regards to the enterprise collective agreements. However, it is worthy of note that having collective agreements without conflicts is not universally celebrated as a ‘‘good thing’’, its critics claim that it goes a long way

to explain why wages are so low in Slovakia – including the sectors covered by TUWPFWPC. The union’s second important activity is in the field of handling the legal claims of its members. The legal service of the trade union is basically as follows: .

legal consultancy (mostly answering questions and giving advice),

.

consultation activities in solving complicated problems,

.

direct negotiation with the employers where the claims of the employees based on the Law or on the collective agreements are not respected,

.

free of charge representation of our members in recovery of their claims in Courts.

Such forms of legal services are offered only to the union’s members. With regards to the legal service, the union employees its own legal specialists, and because of the complexity of the labour, wages and social legislation, the legal aid in the union divided into two categories: (1) Direct advice and consultations: This is done on the basis of personal contacts by phone and in writing, handling grievances/complaints and proposals in specific enterprises, having direct discussions with the statutory representatives of the employer. (2) Providing legal aid at the court: Currently, most of the problems the union has to deal with surround the termination of the employment contract, especially because of organizational/financial reasons, consequently paying out redundancy packages and dealing with the collective redundancy of the employees. Regarding the representation of members at the court, the union is able to record that the success rate of its own lawyers in representing its members is encouragingly high – and is estimated at around 95 per cent. The union holds the view that any future amendments of the Labour Code must focus on its social character – and in particular, its protective function which the trade unions consider is one of its most important functions. The Labour Code originated in the period of the industrial revolution and its purpose was to help solve the enevitable conflict between labour and capital within the workplace. The trade unions consider that up to date, the balance of power industrially between labour and captital has favoured capital at the expence of labour. That is why it was necessary for State intervention in the sphere of the so far purely private sector, to be engaged in the relatioship between the employer and the employee – its aim being to achieve the optimum balance in the legal status of the employer on one hand and the employee on the other. Conclusions This paper has attempted to describe how the Slovak Labour Code operates in practise and how the 2003 changes are a result of wider political, social and economic changes that are themselves a function of Slovakia adopting a market economy, splitting from the former Czechoslovakia, privatisation and meeting the conditions by which paved the way to European Membership in 2004.

The Labour Code in the Republic of Slovakia 611

ER 27,6

612

The current government feels obliged to continue down the road of creating a more flexible labour market which it hopes in turn will encourage more investment from both outside and within the Slovak Republic. The new Labour Code – without doubt has introduced innovations that have transfered powers once enjoyed exclusively by the trade unions to other forms of employee representatives such as Works Councils and Works Trustees. However, it can be argued that the the new Labour Code which has incorporated the appropriate social provisions of the European Union’s acquis communautaire offers opportunities in the area of information and consultation rights with regards to both national Slovak enterprises and European wide businesses which have opperations in Slovakia. The fact that these opportunities are there also for competing forms of employee representation may well provide a stimulus and encourage the Slovak trade unions to develop skills and and acquire techniques in recruitment, retention and organisation with a view to establishing a strong union presence in workplaces capable of gaining control of works councils and works trustee positions. Moreover, the Labour Code still contains a clear right for trade unions to take strike action as well as allowing employers to lock-out workers. Most important, the trade unions still retain the monopoly over collective bargaining and wage determination. There is no doubt that the trade unions in the Republic of Slovakia have still many challenges to overcome – not least being the need to rationalise the Slovak trade union movement. At the moment the membership count is in the order of 600,000 members who are organised into 37 independent trade unions – in short, just too many to be economically sustainable, and hence their is aneed to urgently explore ways by which mergers might take place which would facilitate amuch more economical use of scarce resources, and at the same time build stronger and more effective trade union organisations. Notes 1. The European Graphical Federation (EGF) is now Uni-Europa Graphical (UEG). 2. The Graphical Paper and Media Union is now a sector in the UK’s giant Manufacturing Union Amicus i.e. Graphical, Paper and Media Sector Amicus (GPMS). Further reading Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter, s.v. (1988), ‘‘Rights to information and consultation’’, Article 2. Amending Directive 97/74/EC concerning European Works Councils. Capitulation of the Slovak Labour Code – full wording (2003). Anon. (2000) Central and South-Eastern Europe, Europa Publications Limited. Directive 94/45/EC Concerning Euopean Works Councils. Eurpean Social Chapter (revised) Strasburg.3.v. (1996), Artic, 21 (The right to information and consultation). ILO Convention No. 135, adopted at Geneval on 23.6.1971 concerning workers representatives. (he convention stipulates that workers representatives shll not be subjected to any harm for their activity as a representative). Sergi, B.S. and Bagatelas, W.T. (Eds.) (2004), The Slovak Economy and EU Membership, Bratislavia.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

‘‘Change and continuity’’ – the experience of trade unions in the cultural sector of the former Soviet Union

Change and continuity

613

Vladimir Kamen Deputy General Secretary, Consultative Council of Cultural Workers’ Unions, Moscow, Russia Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to map the critical changes in the history of trade unionism in the countires which until the late 80s early 90s formed the USSR, and spans a period from 1905 to 2005. Design/methodology/approach – The author has chosen to assess the role of trade unions in the former Soviet states by placing them into their historical context. The diversity of their development in the various states is discussed and the painful transition journey they made in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union is described as a means of explaining the structure and role they play in the newly created democracies within the region. Findings – The paper emphasizes the powerful and influential role that trade unions enjoyed under the old regime when they were very much – de facto – an arm of the state machine. Their role as overseers of social and welfare benefits and enforcers of health and safety regulations and guardians of the Labour Code is compared with that in the post-communist period when the new governments throughout the region quickly transferred those functions back to the state and in most cases consciously set out to marginalize the unions. The paper summarizes the state of play of the trade unions in the region as they seek to adapt to the new conditions and establish a new raison detra. Research limitations/implications – The existing literature contains few accounts of trade union activity and how it changed as a result of the collapse of communism in the former Soviet territories. This study of the Cultural Workers Union provides a sound base from which to launch further research into the development of free trade unions in other sectors of the region in the postcommunist period. Originality/value – This paper’s primary value is that it starts to fill a gap in our understanding of employee relations in the new democracies of what was the USSR and in particular the form that trade unions have taken, the role they play and the challenges that they face. Keywords Trade unions, Employee relations, Russia, Eastern Europe Paper type Case study

2005 is a special year to many trade unionists throughout the former Soviet Union (and throughout what used to be the Russian Empire), for at least two reasons. First, it is the Russian trade unions’ centenary year. Second, the perestroika reforms that have contributed a lot to ending the Communist experiment began exactly twenty years ago, in 1985. I believe both anniversaries offer a unique chance for an insight into the past, present – and maybe even the immediate future – of trade unionism in this part of the world. What follows is a humble attempt at such an insight limited to the cultural sector of the former Soviet Union. Historical background: one hundred years in a page I think I should begin with reminding the reader that the ‘‘core’’ Russian Empire had known no freedom of association until the 1905 manifesto of tsar Nicholas II whereby basic democratic rights and freedoms were granted to the empire’s subjects. Thus, until that moment trade unions had been illegal de jure throughout the country save certain

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 613-623 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626144

ER 27,6

614

jurisdictions outside the ‘‘core’’ territory that enjoyed some autonomy (such as Poland and Finland). Printers were among the first to make use of the newly-granted freedom, and several typographers’ Unions were formally recognized and registered in several localities throughout the Russian Empire (e.g. St. Petersburg and Moscow; Kiev, Ukraine; Baku, Azerbaijan; Grodno, Byelorussia) during 1905 – although we are reasonably sure that some of them had existed beforehand as underground cells. Following the Bolshevik-led revolution in October 1917, trade unions quickly fell under their control. Nationwide Unions of graphical workers and of arts workers were set up in the Soviet Russia in 1919. After the reunification of the Soviet Republics into the Soviet Union in 1922, these Unions absorbed similar organizations in other constituent Republics. Branches of these Unions were also set up in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania after 1945, replacing such sectoral Unions as had existed in these countries during the brief period of their independence between the two World Wars. In April 1953, a decision was taken to amalgamate the Unions of graphical workers, political education and cultural establishments employees and of arts workers into a single Soviet Cultural Workers Union (CWU) that covered virtually the whole of the culture, media, entertainment and arts sector. (It is noteworthy that contrary to the West European tradition, the paper processing and packaging sector has always been organized by the Timber, Wood and Paper Workers’ Union in the former USSR. In 1989, the Soviet CWU was transformed into an All-Union Federation of Cultural Workers’ Unions; however, the CWU organizations in the three Baltic Republics and Georgia chose to opt out of it. The Federation was disbanded in January, 1992, following the formal decision of the founding member states of the USSR (Byelorussia, Russia and the Ukraine) to dissolve the Soviet Union and set up the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Thereupon, 10 national Cultural Workers’ Unions decided to form a regional co-ordination body known as the Consultative Council of Cultural Workers’’ Unions. 3 more joined the Council since 1992, so that it now brings together Cultural Workers’ Unions operating in all the states of the former USSR save Estonia and Latvia. In Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the republican CWU organizations were transformed into national federations of Cultural Workers’ Unions. In Lithuania, following a savage union-busting campaign in the early 90s, the LKDPF, Lithuanian Federation of Cultural Workers’ Unions, remains the only nationwide sectoral union in the media, arts and entertainment area. Alongside it, there are enterprise- or company-based Unions (of which the Television Workers’ Union appears to be the largest), mostly affiliated with this or that national trade union confederation. The developments in Estonia and Latvia were at first broadly similar in that the graphical workers’ unions that had existed in these countries until 1940, were reconstituted there around 1990 as part of the respective cultural workers’ federation (in Latvia) or alongside it (in Estonia). The two Latvian organizations (which are currently independent of each other) appear to be well rooted and consolidated, whilst in Estonia things have evolved in a much less promising manner: both the printers’ union and the umbrella cultural workers’ organization seem to have grown defunct. On the other hand, Estonia features a positive development that appears to be unique in the post-Soviet region, in that several craft sections of an association of theatre practitioners – which had, in fact, existed there since the times of the Russian Empire – have evolved into genuine and representative trade unions of actors, ballet dancers, theatre technicians etc.

In contrast to the Baltic States, the union structure in the cultural sector has remained practically unchanged in the CIS since the demise of the Soviet Union. The Cultural Workers’ Unions still cover virtually the whole of the culture, media, entertainment and arts sector, with insignificant exceptions here and there (e.g. in Russia) in some ancillary sectors such as sports and tourism.

Change and continuity

‘‘From crib to deathbed’’ Of course, the ‘‘transmission belt’’ metaphor – both famous and trite – was a true description of the Soviet trade unions’ situation and condition. One cannot deny it. True, but with a caveat: to a certain extent and up to a certain point in time. When I joined the staff of the CWU Central Office in 1983 the hold that the ‘‘ruling and guiding force’’ had on the trade unions was not at all as absolute as it once had been. However, the Soviet Union was not just a centrally planned economy but, in a way, ostensibly a centrally planned society, and the unions had a carefully defined place and thoroughly crafted role to play in it – and so they did. In an economy and a society held to be free from any antagonism between the employer and employee – because, let’s face it, ‘‘employers’’ and ‘‘employees’’ were all ‘‘comrades’’ (and yes – members of the same trade union), and the terms and conditions of employment were, by and large, centrally established – Soviet trade unions grew into a kind of an all-encompassing structure benefiting from what amounted to a de facto closed shop and overburdened with all kinds of missions that would seem, at best, unusual from a marketplace perspective. Indeed, I heard some seasoned union officials say that the union looked after employees and their families literally ‘‘from crib to deathbed’’, and I would say there wasn’t much exaggeration in that statement. So let us have a closer look at what we – as a more or less typical sectoral Union – were and did in those days. To begin with, the Cultural Workers’ Union – just as all the other sectoral Unions – was organised along the so-called ‘‘industrial and territorial’’ lines. In practical terms, that meant two things. First, the Union would organize all the trades and occupations within a loosely defined ‘‘industry’’, ‘‘sector’’, or ‘‘subsector’’ (in practice, the totality of establishments coming within the jurisdiction of a certain ministry or agency). Here is a couple of practical examples illustrating this principle. It stands to reason that a large broadcasting centre such as the Ostankino Centre in Moscow, or a large printing and publishing concern such as Moscow’s Pravda or Izvestia, should have a sizeable motor pool, and employ many drivers and mechanics. Yet these people were members of the Cultural Workers’ Union rather than of the Road Transport Union because they were employed by an establishment that came within the sectoral jurisdiction of the CWU. Conversely, the employees of three huge securities printing houses were members of the public employees union (PEU) because these enterprises were controlled by the Ministry of Finance, and hence came within the sectoral jurisdiction of the PEU. Secondly, the rank-and-file would be organized ‘‘company-wise’’ rather than ‘‘territory-wise’’: basic branches of our Union were set up in enterprises, organizations and establishments of the cultural sector. Exceptions were very few: several territorial branches were set up in such megalopolises as e.g. Moscow, to cater for those freelancing professionals (journalists, writers, composers, visual artists) who were not affiliated to their respective professional associations and hence could not join the CWU organizations set up in their territorial branches. Depending on the aggregate number of affiliates in this or that locality, and on the number of establishments

615

ER 27,6

616

covered in this or that subsector, e.g. libraries, theatre companies, graphical enterprises etc., there would, of course, be one or several co-ordination levels (district/town, region/ territory etc.), but the basic organizing unit was ‘‘company’’, or ‘‘establishment’’ in the broadest sense. CWU enjoyed a practically 100 per cent coverage within its sectoral jurisdiction. Well, frankly, all the Unions were similarly privileged – just about everybody was a member of a Union because it literally paid to be a member: Union members were paid sick leave at preferential rates (50 to 100 per cent of one’s wage or salary depending on one’s length of service) but a non-unionised worker on sick leave would be paid onehalf of his/her wage/salary irrespective of the length of service. And, sure enough, the government had delegated administering sick leave pay to the unions. This was not the only mission that would have come naturally within the preview of the government in a market economy but was delegated to trade unions under the Soviet system. By virtue of the Labour Code, unions oversaw the application of – and in fact, enforced – the occupational safety and health regulations and labour legislation. They administered the distribution of vacation vouchers to most recreational facilities – publicly-owned as well as those belonging to enterprises and, of course, to Unions themselves. Occupational safety inspectors, labour law inspectors and ‘‘authorized medical advisers’’ (with a responsibility for the enforcement of occupational health regulations and the distribution of vacation vouchers) accounted for at least one-third of the Soviet CWU’s full-time staff throughout the country. (I hasten to add that the costs of attending to these missions, including these staff members’ payroll and charges, were covered by a governmental subsidy rather than out of the Union’s budget.) Collective bargaining with nominal ‘‘employers’’ – however strange this may sound to those readers who have never had the privilege of living ‘‘east of the iron curtain’’ – was an important part of the Union activities in those times. It is true, however, that much of those negotiations and of the resulting agreements would have looked highly unorthodox to an average Western trade unionist. Initially collective bargaining had been restricted to industrial enterprises (which meant that in the CWU jurisdiction it was chiefly to be found in the graphical sector), and it was only around the mid-1980’s that it expanded into such cultural establishments as theatres, libraries, museums, workers’ clubs and the like. In a nutshell, one could say that perhaps the most striking difference between collective agreements negotiated in a market environment and those negotiated in a centrally planned economy was that the latter paid much less attention to wage rates, since these were basically centrally established. (However, we as a Union could – and often did – influence rate-setting through interaction with the respective government agencies (and sometimes Communist Party bodies) – just as we could and did influence the legal framework in terms of labour conditions, occupational safety and health. I am not saying that was enough, but the tools were there and they did work at times.) This being the case, collective agreements would usually deal with recognition and status of the Union branch, extra remuneration (bonuses and the like), working time, work patterns, paid leave, health and safety, and with a lot of social matters, the reason for this latter feature being that enterprises and organizations, especially large ones, were conceived in the Soviet system as providers of various social and cultural services (including housing, gardening plots, recreational and vacation facilities, etc.) to employees and their families. Union branches would be typically put in charge of administering the provision and distribution of these benefits and services – which might, in a way, be compared with certain social aspects of the mission of works

councils in some larger corporations in the EU. The labour law actually required the employer (i.e. the enterprise/organization) to provide office, communication and secretarial facilities to the Union branch enabling it to transact its business, and to make available to the branch an equivalent of a certain percentage of the salary fund to be used for funding social and cultural activities for the sake of the employees and their families. Collective agreements would typically copy these provisions. It is true that the Soviet labour law conferred extensive powers upon trade unions in terms of the employees’ legal protection, particularly in dismissal matters. Nowadays many managers and experts in law and economics argue that these provisions were too restrictive and acted as an unnecessary brake on managerial initiative and, indeed, on economic development, but our view as trade unionists is that while they may have been somewhat excessive in certain situations they, above all, acted as an effective deterrent against the abuse of managerial powers and provided for substantial employment security. I would be entrenching upon the truth if I did not mention among our most timeand effort-consuming tasks co-ordination of the notorious ‘‘socialist emulation’’ – a pastime indulged in by just about the whole working population of the ‘‘Land of Soviets’’. Readers will, I hope, excuse this little bit of cynicism coming from a person who witnessed this movement – probably quite sound and useful at its outset (as proved by many corporations all over the industrial world which have adopted – and adapted – some of its basic principles and values to their own benefit as well as to that of their employees) – evolving into what was in most cases a mere formality if not an exercise in hypocrisy and a waste of much time and effort that trade unions might have employed productively elsewhere. When the wall fell . . . and thereafter Frankly, I do not believe that anyone could have anticipated the scope, force and speed of changes that swept across the former communist bloc during the late’80-s and early’90s. The change has certainly caught the unions – including the then ‘‘heirs’’ of the Soviet Cultural Workers’’ Union – very much unawares, which meant that they had to adapt to the new, rapidly changing economic, social and political realities ‘‘on the fly’’, often without having the time to ‘‘sit down’’ and reflect on the optimal course to be adopted – and this has sometimes resulted in loss of credibility and inadequate use of scarce resources that the unions had at their disposal. A glance upon the sector Over the fifteen years since the transition to a marketplace economy began, the cultural sector has grown much more heterogeneous that it had ever been during the Soviet period. In a way, what has been happening there reflects the divergent economic and political paths that various former Soviet republics have taken upon accession to independence. What follows is an attempt to give a brief description of these different development patterns as they show up in various cultural industries and subsectors, with a focus on the printing and publishing sector. Looking at the this sector, one observes a wide variety in terms of technology and working conditions (large up-to-date complexes coexist with small antiquated and unsafe local and/or provincial print shops) as well as of ownership (most large combines had been Communist Party property then were nationalised and consequently underwent corporatisation) throughout the former USSR. Most postSoviet governments seemed, in a way, to be in two minds as to what their strategy

Change and continuity

617

ER 27,6

618

vis-a`-vis this sector should be like (in a nutshell, it was a question of ‘‘selling’’ or ‘‘keeping’’), and that lack of clarity has more often than not resulted in a protracted and difficult restructuring process that is obviously not yet over in several key economies of the region. Where divestment strategies have been adopted they would typically involve several stages. Lithuania is a case in point. Nine of its large printing enterprises date back from the Soviet era and have been first incorporated and then partially privatised. During the first stage of ‘‘restructuring’’, a certain part of these print houses’ shares was made available to their employees against their ‘‘investment vouchers’’; the second stage consisted in selling stakes in these companies to outside investors. The government has kept a controlling stake (65-70 per cent) in most of those large enterprises; moreover, two large print houses (AB Spauda in Vilnius and AB Spaustuve ‘‘Spindulys’’ in Kaunas) have been declared ‘‘strategically important’’ and thus barred from privatization. By contrast, most medium-size (20-100 employees) and small (under 20 employees) printing enterprises have been privatized. At the same time, the government actually favoured creation of new businesses of every size in the sector. In fact, the country’s largest and most modern and successful private printing and publishing enterprises, the Lietuvos Rytas and Respublika newspaper print houses, were ‘‘built from scratch’’ by the respective newspaper publishers during the 1990’s rather than restructured from previously existing state-owned enterprises. More than 80 per cent of the country’s publishing houses and nearly 70 per cent of its printing enterprises (employing 3/4 of the printing sector’s total workforce) are now privately owned. A similar pattern is to be found in Estonia and Latvia. Moldova, Russia and the Ukraine have taken a largely similar, if somewhat more hesitant, path. For instance, during the first stage of the Ukrainian graphical sector restructuring, the legal status of most enterprises was changed to that of fully government-owned joint stock companies, which was seen as a prerequisite to privatization. At the same time, the Ukrainian government has kept a controlling interest in many large enterprises, and the regional and local authorities have done the same in respect of smaller businesses in their respective territories. As in Lithuania, some larger printing enterprises have been declared ‘‘strategically important’’ and thus barred from privatization to date. Most of these were subsequently urged by the authorities to join the so-called ‘‘National Printing and Publishing Joint-Stock Corporation’’ (DAK Ukrvydavpoligrafiya), a kind of a government-controlled holding shaped up in 2002 and early 2003, currently bringing together 31 of the country’s largest graphical enterprises and exercising control over the totality of their stock. On the other hand, upon incorporation of many graphical enterprises, a sizeable part of these new companies’ shares was made available to the employees against their ‘‘investment vouchers’’; some cases of full employee buy-out have been registered, of which the Donechyna company, a large printing and publishing house in the East Ukrainian city of Donetsk, appears to be the only real success story. Russia has embarked upon an ambitious programme of incorporation and privatization of several dozens of its largest printing and publishing houses that have hitherto been owned by the federal Government. In Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan national governments appear to have sold off most, if not all of publicly-owned printing and publishing assets. All of the above-mentioned countries have encouraged or at least have not hampered the development of privatelyowned businesses in the printing and publishing sector, whereby the private sector is

now dominant there in terms of output, workforce employed and number of enterprises. By contrast, in Belarus, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the printing and publishing sector remains almost exclusively government-owned, and the reasons cited are of a political nature rather than economic. For instance, the six largest printing enterprises in Belarus are controlled by the national government through its sectoral agency, plus several sizeable print houses in the constituent regions, owned by the respective regional authorities (one of these latter is, in fact, a joint-stock company where the employees own a 15 per cent stake collectively, ostensibly acquired with ‘‘privatization vouchers’’). It is not clear whether any of the other print houses have been incorporated; most of them are definitely fully-owned government enterprises. A small number of newly-sprung medium-sized and small private printing and publishing houses accounts for a minor percentage of the sector’s output and is generally ‘‘frowned upon’’ by the authorities. An unpleasant feature that most graphical assets inherited from the Soviet period share is that they are either obsolete or ‘‘worn-out’’. This is especially true of the small and medium-sized local or provincial print shops where equipment and technology often date back to the 1940-s and even 1900-s. For example, in Belarus some estimates are putting the current depreciation of printing machinery at publicly-owned printing plants at no less than 75 per cent. These enterprises are thus in dire need of massive investment if they are to remain afloat. However, in general, national and local authorities retaining a controlling interest in graphical businesses, whether large, medium-sized or small, have been unable to provide or attract the investment necessary for their restructuring and modernization, so much so that these print houses lose value, and workers are laid off in some cases. It is noteworthy that so far, there has been little foreign direct investment in the existing printing businesses; newspaper publishers, advertisers and book publishers seem to be the principal investors, whilst Western investors appear to prefer constructing new plants ‘‘from scratch’’, being deterred from overhauling pre-existent plants by what they perceive as excessive social costs of such projects. As far as the rest of the principal subsectors of the cultural sector – such as film production, distribution and exhibition, broadcasting, live entertainment, cultural institutions – are concerned, most of them had been supported by public money, to varying extent, during the Soviet period. Of course, as someone once nicely put it, these sectors were ‘‘residual claimants’’ on the Soviet government’s budget, but, nevertheless, those working in this area did enjoy a tangible employment and income security – in return for toeing the ideological line. Things changed abruptly with the demise of the Soviet Union. As part of a liberalisation strategy that the post-Soviet governments embarked upon in the early’90-s, they withdrew both their control and (largely) financial support from the cultural sector. (The latter part was clearly not intentional, for the treasuries simply lacked the funds to honour the requirement of their domestic cultural legislation – where it did exist – to spend a certain percentage of the national budget on culture.) However, the bulk of the cultural sector remained public (i.e. national, regional or municipal) property, consisting of a network of ‘‘establishments’’ founded and fully owned by the national, regional or local authorities, which were supposed to cover their running costs (but more often than not failed to do so, through lack of funds or sheer mismanagement; hence the outstanding debts, above all salary debts, popularly known as non-payments, that all but paralysed most of the cultural sector throughout the NIS

Change and continuity

619

ER 27,6

620

in the second half of the 90s). Moreover, the 90s saw a massive shedding of social and cultural facilities by enterprises that had built them during the Soviet period for their employees and their families and were now required to divest themselves of these ‘‘non-core’’ assets as a prerequisite to incorporation and/or privatization. These facilities have been ‘‘picked up’’ by the respective regional and/or local authorities, but the problem was that the new owners often lacked the funds to keep afloat even what they had possessed before, let alone these new acquisitions. In many cases throughout the former Soviet Union, such owners would rather sell these institutions to the private sector and sacrifice their cultural profile than recognise them as essential public services and treat them accordingly. It is true that most of those cultural and entertainment establishments have so far been barred from privatization – unfortunately, there is ample evidence across the former Soviet Union showing that it does not save them from being simply closed and discontinued by the authorities that own them under an all-purpose pretext of their inability to fund them. At the same time, a vigorous private sector sprang up in the early 90s in most post-Soviet States in such areas as electronic media and audiovisual production, and privatisation is becoming reality, for instance, in Russia’s public film production sector following the adoption of a new privatisation law in December, 2001, and of a governmental privatisation programme in early 2002. Liberalisation is also making inroads in the hitherto almost 100 per cent publicly owned network of live performance and cultural institutions (theatres, libraries, museums, workers’ clubs etc.) as plans are being laid down by several Governments throughout our subregion to gradually replace the current ownership and control structure with a different one, based on the concept of an ‘‘autonomous not-for-profit organisation’’ and believed to be better adapted to the marketplace conditions and similar to what prevails in the cultural and live performance sector of most industrialized economies. Daunting challenges for the unions – and the way ahead Sweeping changes in the cultural sector have been but a small part of the wholesale restructuring of our economies and profound changes in the fabric of our societies and in our way of life. Throughout the former USSR, authorities were taking over many missions and powers (e.g. enforcement of labour law and occupational safety and health regulations, administration of social security benefits) that had been delegated to Unions under the Soviet system, and the unofficial closed shop has been abolished. Whilst this was generally in keeping with the international labour standards and the experience that industrialized countries had accumulated over decades, it also meant the loss of considerable economic and human resources that trade unions had used in furtherance of their other missions, such as legal aid to members. It made unions less attractive to some of their members – we can brand this behaviour as consumerism but the facts are there. Other factors that contributed to loss of membership were specific to our sector. For instance, some Unions, such as the Russian CWU, have suffered membership losses among professionals: journalists, actors, musicians, film makers, broadcasters, writers. The reasons were, alas, obvious: these crafts felt they were inadequately represented in the Union decision-making structures and believed they lacked attention to their specific problems on the part of the Union. Nevertheless, the newly-constituted national Cultural Workers’ Unions managed to retain the bulk of their membership in most post-Soviet countries. However, whilst unionization remained substantial in public sector, emerging new private businesses in the printing, publishing, audiovisual production and broadcasting sectors have, in

general, tried to keep trade unions away from their establishments, let alone sitting down to bargain with them. Cases of union-busting were not infrequent in the public sector either; moreover, the region saw at least two massive union-busting campaigns (Lithuania, early and mid-1990s; Belarus, 1999-2001). Moreover, the national CWU’s, especially their respective Central Offices, suffered an abrupt deterioration of their economic situation. The underlying reasons were twofold but linked. One was the decision by the AUCCTU – the by then defunct Soviet TUC – dating back to the second half of the 1980s and taken as part of the drive to do away with the ‘‘democratic centralism’’ in the Soviet trade union movement – to allow primary trade union organizations to keep up to 65-70 per cent of the total dues collected by them for their own use. The other was the economic slump and skyrocketing inflation of the early 1990s. A combination of these two factors ‘‘did in’’ such savings as the unions’ Central Offices had accumulated and turned the inbound flow of dues into a trickle. For instance, the current Statutes of the Russian Cultural Workers’ Union contain a provision whereby its Central Office is entitled to a mere 3 per cent of the aggregate dues collected. It is obvious that this is even less than subsistence-level funding, that the Union simply cannot deliver under these circumstances and thus gets into a kind of a vicious circle: ‘‘we pay you peanuts – you do not deliver – we cut contributions further back – you do not deliver’’. . . And yet our Unions were facing daunting challenges. As has been argued above, privatization and deregulation appeared to have become the prevailing trends in the printing and publishing sector in most post-Soviet states. Clumsy fiscal, customs and industrial policies pursued by many post-Soviet governments acted as a deterrent to investment in and development of the printing and publishing sector rather than encouraged it. Our Unions had to assume a higher profile in the restructuring and privatization processes, move quickly to define their role in the first (voucher) and second (investment) stages of the privatization drive – and to make sure that this role was formally recognized in the relevant enabling legislation and/or regulations. They also had to make sure that the workers’ interests were taken into consideration and protected when new, often job- and even profession-shedding typesetting, printing and finishing technologies, and flexible work patterns were introduced by eventual new owners. In other subsectors of the cultural sphere, workers had typically pursued their professional activities within the framework of a permanent employment relationship until the early90s. However, economic liberalisation in the culture and entertainment sector following the demise of the Soviet Union, as well as expansion of an upstart private sector in electronic media, film production, distribution and exhibition, resulted in a shift of these workers’ employment patterns towards much greater flexibility (for instance, most film makers and audiovisual performers, many journalists and musicians had become de facto self-employed in Russia, Ukraine and the Baltic States), and their earnings were consequently diminishing in real terms and losing stability. In a series of legislative and regulatory initiatives typically culminating in the adoption of new Labour Codes, legislators and Governments of many post-Soviet states ‘‘threw the doors wide open’’ to fixed-term employment contracts in the live performance sector, which meant taking away most of employment security whilst providing nothing substantial in return. The earnings of an overwhelming majority of performers, especially outside the capital cities, have been well below the respective nationwide average earnings ever since the transition began.

Change and continuity

621

ER 27,6

622

I should also mention a cluster of issues peculiar to an important professional group organized by our Unions that has a kind of a dual status. These are performing artists, i.e. actors, musicians, singers, dancers, variety and circus artistes etc., who are both workers (their professional activities being mostly pursued in the former Soviet Union within the framework of an employment relationship) and holders of intellectual property rights in the product of their professional activities, the performance. The post-Soviet legislators generally provided in the early 1990s for a legal recognition of the performers’ rights to control and be remunerated for the use of their performances, and most national laws have been revamped considerably since then to take the latest WIPO treaties into account. Nevertheless, these rights still tend to be poorly enforced in most post-Soviet countries or, in some cases, even fail to be implemented altogether. Performers’ collecting societies are typically ‘‘dormant’’ or non-existent, and there is a clear lack of cooperation and networking among trade unions, artistic associations and collecting societies in the sector. Many segments of the cultural sector had thus become subject to direct interplay of the market forces, which had all but done away with the uniformity of working conditions and rates of pay, as well as with the monopoly position of government agencies as the Unions’ interlocutors at the sectoral level. However, employers – public and private alike – were in no hurry to take over from the government and engage in genuine sectoral social partnership with the Unions. In most cases, they were either not affiliated to an employers’ association, or the association was but a lobbying body, or else employers empowered a sectoral government agency to bargain collectively with the union at sectoral level. All of these challenges had thus to be urgently addressed, but past experience could offer little help. The Consultative Council of Cultural Workers’ Unions and the kindred Global Unions – the international graphical federation (IGF), media and entertainment international (MEI), international federation of actors (FIA) and international federation of musicians (FIM) – believed that in order to rectify the situation and enable the national CWU’s in the former USSR to tackle the challenges they were facing it was urgently necessary to bring massively in and disseminate as widely as possible the experience of social dialogue, tripartism, support for the public service and democratic collective representation of the graphical, media, entertainment and cultural workers’ socio-economic interests accumulated over decades by kindred Unions in industrialized democracies. Since the mid-1990s, a series of parallel and ongoing projects designed to provide training to and promote development of the region’s Cultural Workers’ Unions, co-funded by the European Commission, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, FNV Mondiaal of the Netherlands, LO/TCO Bistandsnamd of Sweden and other donors, has, we believe, helped to bring about a tangible change for the better. Despite considerable setbacks that most of these Unions experienced in the late ’90s when they had to concentrate on struggling with massive non-payments of wages and salaries they appear, after all, to have been able to capitalize on the positive developments in their structure and activities that started showing up as a result of those trade union training campaigns. As an example, most of the region’s Unions have managed to set up and maintain a collective bargaining structure adapted to the economic conditions prevailing in their sector. For instance, the Central Committee of the Cultural Workers’’ Union of the Ukraine negotiates a ‘‘blanket’’ sectoral agreement for the printing, publishing and electronic media with the government agency for the mass media sector that represents the sector’s managers and employers in the absence (so far) of a fully-fledged

employers’ association. There are intermediate-level agreements with similar bodies in the regions. As a rule, individual company/enterprise branches negotiate their own detailed agreements with the respective managers on the basis of these agreements. The usual term of validity is two, three or four years for all the three levels; a procedure for annual reviewing and updating is usually provided for. The guidelines and advice provided during the trade union development campaigns are reportedly used extensively in formulating the employees’ demands and negotiating agreements. The Head Office and regional offices of UCWU have prepared a number of guidelines and best practice papers which are regularly made available to the Union branches. The Cultural Workers’ Unions of Lithuania, Russia and the Ukraine have taken the lead in using their positive relationship with prominent graphical employers to encourage the sector’s employers and managers to come together and set up employers’ associations capable of maintaining social dialogue, including collective bargaining, with their union counterparts at the sectoral level. Such an association has already been set up in Russia and signed an agreement with the Russian CWU which the latter sees as a first step towards fully-fledged social partnership. Recognizing that the ‘‘consolidated government’’ is still the principal employer in the broader cultural sector of all the CIS countries and is bound to remain so in the near future, several national Cultural Workers’ Unions have sought to join forces with other unions representing employees of what is commonly referred to as ‘‘the budgetfinanced sector’, i.e. the Teachers’ and Public Health Employees’ Unions, in negotiating rates and conditions with the respective governments. In Russia, the three Unions have gone farthest along this road and set up an Association of Budget-Financed Sector Employees’ Unions; elsewhere in the CIS, e.g. in Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and the Ukraine, the co-operation has been constant but not formalized. Having lost the power to initiate legislation, national CWU’s have been making ample use of their Western colleagues’ advice on lobbying the legislators and governments and using the judicial system to reach their ends. In the mid-90’s, the governments of Kazakhstan and the Ukraine introduced fixed-term employment contracts in the live performance sector, which, given economic circumstances that prevailed there at that time, meant taking away most of employment security whilst providing nothing in return. The Cultural Workers’ Unions managed to block these initiatives and took their respective Governments to Constitutional Court. Both Constitutional Courts have eventually ruled against the governmental regulations and decreed them null and void. Of course, much remains to be done yet. Most of the challenges referred to above are still looming large. However, we in the Consultative Council believe that the cultural workers of the former USSR and their Unions have managed to steer through the most difficult period – with the invaluable help and support from our colleagues in the industrialized democracies – and are confident that the region’s Cultural Workers’ Unions will be able to continue finding innovative, inventive responses to future challenges and to provide efficient and effective services to their members.

Change and continuity

623

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

ER 27,6

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

The Dutch trade unions – and their support activities in central and eastern Europe Rene van Tilborg

624

President FNV KEIM, President Uni – Graphical, Vice President Uni-Europa Graphical, Rijswyk, The Netherlands Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to explains how the Dutch unions evolved in the post war period and the reasons why they committed such significant resources to developing strong links and assisting the new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe complete the ‘‘Transition Process’’. Design/methodology/approach – The author draws on his first-hand experience as the president of the Dutch graphical union, and for many years president and vice president of the sector’s international trade union federations – to give an insight as to the rationale behind international trade union cooperation and solidarity. Findings – The paper suggests that the help and assistance provided by the West European workers organisations, although costly has brought added value to the enlarged European Trade Union movement in so much as it has ensured that the Central and Eastern European trade unions have been able to complete the transition period. Originality/value – The paper provides a first hand account of the difficulties that trade unions in the former soviet block countries had to deal with during the transition period, and how trade unions in the West had to overcome ideological and historical prejudices in order to provide help and assistance to their sister unions in Central and Eastern Europe. Keywords Trade unions, Eastern Europe, The Netherlands, Training Paper type Case study

Introduction It might be helpful to start by placing the Dutch trade unions in context as they were shortly before the changes of 1989, which finally reunited Europe. This might help the reader to understand why the Dutch trade unions members were so willing to support their unknown colleagues in Central and Eastern Europe, and elsewhere, over such a long period. Trade Unions for obvious reasons give recruitment and the promotion of solidarity a high priority as a means of developing strong organisations, which are capable of dealing with the day-to-day problems in labour relations that are faced by their own members. However, grass roots members do not always recognise the importance of promoting solidarity and effective trade union co-operation with sister trade unions across national boarders. It has to be constantly explained and justified or the union leadership will lose the support of its members for international cooperation. This paper will therefore describe briefly the experiences of the Dutch trade unions just before the changes in Central and Eastern Europe took place, how they became involved and eventually became totally convinced that networking workers organisations throughout Europe in this increasingly globalised world was absolutely necessary and in their own self-interest. Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2005 pp. 624-634 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455 DOI 10.1108/01425450510626153

The Dutch trade unions – a brief history Throughout most of the last century Dutch society was divided on the basis of religion. Protestants, Catholics and Humanists coexisted peacefully within the framework of

national law each having their own educational systems, schools, clubs and also their own trade unions. The origin of those unions lies in the nineteenth century – and as elsewhere, the graphical trade union can claim to be the oldest. It was founded on a national basis in 1866 by a merger of six local graphical unions, that had been formed a few decades previously The socialist unions were by far the largest organised groups of workers – with some three-and-a-half times more members than any other grouping. After five years of German occupation and during the ‘‘restart’’ of Dutch society, a reformed system of industrial unions was introduced. Although there were still a lot of sectoral identities as far as the graphical sector was concerned, the bookbinders, lithographers, typographers and rotographer workers came together to form the General Dutch Graphical Workers Unions (ANGB). By the end of the ‘‘swinging 60s’’, the divisions within society based on religion became far less important. It was therefore opportune for the Socialist Unions (NVV)[1] together with the Catholic (NKV)[2] and Protestant Unions (CNV)[3] to develop much closer links with a view to eventually creating one national centre. The socialist and catholic unions eventually succeeded and created from NVV and NKV the FNV[4] in 1976, with a total membership through 14 associated unions of 1.2 million members. The Protestant Christians took the decision to remain on their own as CNV with approximately 300,000 members. In addition to these two groupings, a white-collar middle management union exists MHP[5]. Once the Catholic and Socialists unions had consolidated the merger, which had created FNV as a single Trade Union Center, they had to convince their individual affiliates to merge at sector level. This trend towards closer cooperation at sector level led to the merger of the Socialist and Catholic graphical unions and the creation of Druk en Papier FNV in 1978. The late 1970s were a time of rapid technological change and hence the newly merged graphical union adopted the sub-title – ‘‘Information Makers’’. The third wave of mergers and rationalisation of trade unions in the different sectors was partly based on the positive experiences of the mergers, which had initially created FNV and then Druk en Papier FNV, and partly on the economic necessity of unions to come together. In the mid 90s, after a slow but constant process of declining membership (Trade union density fell from 39 per cent in the 1960s to less than 30 per cent by the mid 1990s). Four of the industrial unions of the FNV came together to create the biggest union within the FNV, Bondgenoten[6]. The financial position of Druk en Papier FNV (the information makers) was less problematic. Hence from a position of relative luxury Druk en Papier FNV was able to develop closer cooperation with different unions and groupings of artists – whilst avoiding some of the problems that the German graphical union (Druk en Papier) experienced when they merged with unions representing ‘‘creative workers and artists’’. The general aim was to create a media union. It took Druk en Papier FNV four years to finally create a union, which included artists of every variety – workers in paintings, culture, performers in music and the theatre all of whom appreciated collective agreements almost as much as industrial workers. The ‘‘free-lance’’ artists were offered services which included advice on contracts, tax etc. The integration of these new workers in the visual and performing arts made Druk en Papier a most important counter partner of the Government in matters concerning the cultural budget. Recognition of its importance was well deserved as the union could claim that it represented both the ‘‘creative’’ and ‘‘information’’ sectors of the wider media industry – and that an important part of its ‘‘mission’’ was to promote the ‘‘freedom of expression’’ within our democracy.

The Dutch trade unions

625

ER 27,6

626

The trade union situation in the central and eastern Europe (CEE) of 1989 It is difficult to see whether what was done in those days was visionary or was just what had to be done at the time to deal with the unexpected events of 1989 that no one had planned. I think it was the latter. No one in the union movement organised or masterminded the changes that took place in Central Europe in that unforgettable year and there is no sound evidence to suggest that anyone in the trade unions secretly supported any movement to promote changes before that year. We were all children of our time promoting peace and pleading with the soviet authorities to provide opportunities to have at least some contact with friends, loved ones, and relatives who lived on the other side of the ‘‘Iron Curtain’’, as the ‘‘frozen border’’ had been named since its closure at the end of the second world war. Neither did anyone really know what the consequences of the changes would be after the period of transition. What is clear is that the events of 1989 have resulted in far more dramatic and traumatic changes than was anticipated at the time when the German Chancellor, Dr. Helmut Kohl offered a few marks to the warmly welcomed former East Germans citizens of the newly reunited Germany. But in those years, for the most part, all the unions in the West including the Dutch were mainly operating within their national borders. They had national collective agreements, they were negotiating with national employers organisations. International contacts were mainly bilateral and based on the good will of individuals to develop visions for the future and to plan steps to make international trade union solidarity a reality. More often than not, the international work of trade unions was limited to developing links and becoming acquainted with sister trade unions across national boarders. Those years within the mainly European orientated International Graphical Federation (IGF)[7] the main international contacts of the Dutch union were with the Nordic Graphical Unions (NGU) which comprised, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Iceland the British national graphical association (NGA) still under and with the German Union Druk en Papier. The other side of the Iron Curtain was only approached with great care. In those days it was tentative and mainly with Hungary, the GDR, SDTB and its Graphical Secretariat and with the Russian cultural workers (CWU) – it could hardly be qualified as cooperation with Central and Eastern Europe. It was more curiosity and a well-intentioned relationship based on the exchange of information. We really wanted to know what was happening there, but the political left in the Netherlands was still working on recognition of the GDR rather than thinking about tearing down the Iron Curtain. As for the Graphical Unions we really had other things on our minds and were totally occupied representing and protecting the interests of our members whilst, at the same time – struggling to maintain the graphical identity in spite of all the technological changes that were increasingly making redundant skills and crafts that had characterised the industry for generations. The implications of ‘‘the second technological revolution’’ in the graphical industries were far reaching and complicated. Should you fight or deal with the journalists? How could the claims of engineers and technicians (the desk top specialists) to jurisdiction over computer technology be accommodated and reconciled with the interests of traditional graphical workers? These questions had to be answered and the problems solved. It retrospect, it was these very problems arising out of technological change that provided another reason and need for promoting international cooperation!

Ideas, opportunities and limitations Rapid technological innovation, and the collapse of the Berlin Wall made developing stronger international links good sense. The Dutch graphical union was not very well placed to play a leading role in the international federation for trade unions in the graphical sector – the IGF. This was because the Dutch Union had been somewhat marginalised as far as the IGF was concerned as a result of an incident at the London IGF Congress of 1967. The difficulties arose out of the Congress agreeing to accept the affiliation of the French communist graphical union CGT that caused the Dutch Union and others to walk out of Congress and resign from the IGF in protest. What ever the rights or wrongs of the position where, it meant that the Dutch Graphical Unions, where silenced at the international level for more than a decade. So – the problems of technological change and the demise of the Soviet Union provided an opportunity for the Dutch union to re-enter onto the international stage – and there was an unmistakable eagerness amongst the membership to participate – to join in – and to cooperate. It was therefore against this backcloth that Druk en Papier FNV set out with a will to find itself partners both within the Dutch borders, but also internationally. We formed think tanks and working groups on special subjects and confronted the ‘‘embarrassment of 1967’’ with a strong determination to get over it: It was a little ironic that the Dutch union became once more an affiliate of the IGF at the CGT organised IGF Congress in Paris where the venue was their recently opened new headquarters. This incident illustrates, they way in which all Unions in Europe (and the rest of the world) had to through adjust, adapt and build working relationships with the their counterparts from the former communist world. It was not always easy, as the Dutch experience demonstrates, but the difficulties proved not to be insurmountable and the reconciliation between the previous ideological antagonists has now been completed. Nevertheless until 1990 most of the support to Central and Eastern European countries was spasmodic and considered as a kind of development aid. There was some exchange with Hungary, Russia, GDR and a few others but clearly, the time had come for a different approach. This was reflected even in our Congresses where there was a growing demand for more structured cooperation. A more structured approach The IGF and the EGF had an organisational structure, which was based on ‘‘language groups’’. These groupings were put together in a quite arbitrary way and to a disinterested observer would not make a lot of sense, for example Hungary was placed in the ‘‘English’’ language group. Why? Probably because its President was a multilingual former Hungarian athlete who had understandable English. It is probably true to say that the basis on which language groups were put together had a three-fold rationale. First, ‘‘cost’’, second, ‘‘political’’. And third – most important – ‘‘pragmatism’’. Although the Dutch did not favour the old language structure of the IGF the Union was influential in forming one of the new groups almost entirely based on language similarity and comprised the German, Swiss and Austrian Unions. For us it was a kind of intellectual think tank. There was an intense (four times a year in the beginning) exchange of experiences which focused on the political changes that needed to be made in the graphical unions of Europe and their international and European federations, the IGF and the EGF, but hardly any one knew exactly what would be the best way to bring about those changes. Sharing experiences was the least we could do – and that in itself generated beneficial results. Although the German language group spent a minimum of time in preparing for meetings of the IGF the EGF, it never the less

The Dutch trade unions

627

ER 27,6

628

wielded considerable influence and over time it grew into an informal, but disciplined group which had its own statutes and a formal budget. It also developed quite clear objectives which included exploring ways and means to build an effective network for Central and Eastern European contacts. It was during this period that the IGF had started to develop into a much more international organisation with specifically European issues being increasingly handled by the EGF. Within the IGF – apart from the German language group, there was also the Nordic NGU group, a South European Group, which was probably less active than the other groupings, and of course the representatives of Great Britain and Ireland into an English language group. At that time there was not yet a Central and Eastern European Group and contact with the unions from the other side of the Iron Curtain was restricted to developing links with individual Western European unions. This of course was not the most satisfactory arrangement, and the opportunity to integrate the CEE countries came with the changes of 1989. The definitive end of the cold war With the collapse of the Soviet system, the old trade union structures that had served the IGF were no longer adequate, and hence there was a need to review the organisations priorities and the way in which the international union work was structured. Of course it was not done overnight – but slowly as usual. But this is not surprising given that very few people at the time could with any certainty predict what the 1989 changes would mean for the world – let alone the international trade union movement. This was certainly the case with regards to the Dutch Union which could not even start to guess as to the magnitude of those changes and the effect they would have in the long term. The former Soviet bloc trade unions who had always been considered as enemies, or at least organisations that could not be considered as partners became overnight partners and colleagues. Probably the best account of relations between the former communist trade union movement of the East, the Free German Trade Union Confederation (FDGB) and West Germany’s German Trade Union Federation (DGB) is to be found in Manfred Wilke and Hans-Hermann Hertle Das Genossen Kartel, die SED und die IG Druck und Papier/IG Medie¨n. The immediate effect of the post-1989 climate was that all the pro-communist trade unions in South Europe e.g. The French General Confederation of Labour (CGT) Unions and the Spanish Workers Commissions (CCOO) could freely ‘‘come in out of the cold’’. In short, the changes of 1989 made closer cooperation in South Europe possible and enabled our international organisation to have for the first time, a real North – South European dialogue as far as trade union work was concerned. Within the IGF at that time, the formation of these ‘‘Groupings’’ was to extent arbitrary in terms of both language and geography. For example, what constituted ‘‘South Europe’’? How far did it encroach on East Europe? In spite of these problems, in the mid 90s, the first conference for South European and Middle Eastern Unions was organised with representatives also attending from some North African unions as well as delegates from the Middle East, Turkey, Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal. One of the key issues that were topical in the early 90s was the effect of North African immigration into many North and South European countries, and the consequences that had for the workers and their trade unions, the social security system and the labour market in both North and South Europe. The Dutch FNV trade union and its members could see the benefits of developing international links and networks that were capable of dealing with such issues. The experience of creating close working links across

boarders with sister trade unions as described above, explains to a large extent, the reasons why Dutch trade unionists were prepared to support and fund similar networking activities in Central and Eastern Europe. However, these things do not happen overnight and it took four years after ’89 to organise the German Language Group’s first meeting, which focussed exclusively on developing a programme to stimulate networking with the central and eastern European unions. At that stage it was unclear which countries and which trade unions within those countries should be contacted with a view to offering seminars. The problem for the Western European trade unions was that we had very few contacts and lacked knowledge and understanding of the trade union organisations in the East There was also an internal difference of opinion within the Group which centred on whether to approach the ‘‘reformed’’ former communist trade unions, or restrict help and assistance to the new post 1989 trade unions that had no links with the old regime. The next question was how would the Group finance such ambitious plans for networking and cooperation in Central and Eastern Europe? How to find the means, the money, and resources The first experimental initiatives were financed by each of the unions in the Group themselves who selected a CEE union to develop links with. In the case of Druk en Papier FNV, they were assisted in the venture by government funding. The Dutch Government had taken on board the United Nation’s recommendation that 1.5 per cent of GPD should be reserved for financing ‘‘development politics’’. (That has since been reduced to 0.8 per cent.) Part of it was and still is distributed through organisations such as the Dutch trade unions. The only condition being the submission of a ‘‘project proposal’’, which detailed the aims, objectives and projected outcomes of the project. Project proposal were subject to careful scrutiny by government officials before funding was granted. This Budget was independently overseen by two national universities who also encouraged and welcomed the submission of projects from employers organisations as a means of demonstrating even-handedness in the distribution of aid to both employer and trade union sponsored projects. During the early 90s, the Dutch Government financed projects sponsored by FNV unions to the tune of approximately eleven million Euros per year. The general criteria for approval of projects were that whilst they could be aimed at promoting the acquisition of skills, knowledge and competences required by trade union officials, funds could not be used for purchasing office equipment, phones, fax machines, word processors etc. The approving bodies particularly favoured projects that dealt with gender issues or which were aimed at assisting developing countries. These General criteria, which governed the award of funding, meant that project submissions had to be quite specific and focused, which militated against support for seminar programmes that adopted a more general approach. In addition the principle of favouring ‘‘developing’’ countries worked against the emerging democracies of Eastern and Central Europe as ‘‘developing countries’’ where deemed to mean countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia although there were a few exceptions such as Albania and Moldova. A slightly more flexible source of funding was the German Frederick Ebert Foundation. Another possible source of funding was the European Union’s Phare[9] and Tacis[10] programme which were specifically set up to support and promote democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. The problem with these two sources was that awards were restricted to one year projects, which meant programmes of aid, which spanned two or more years, could only be supported by the commission for a period of

The Dutch trade unions

629

ER 27,6

630

12 months. France also had a rather rigid and restrictive set of procedures for funding aid programs as the French Government tended to only approve programmes that were aimed at French language countries. As for the United Kingdom, irrespective of the party in power, no provision for funding aid programmes existed. In short, the sources for attracting financial help to assist in funding aid programmes in Central and Eastern Europe were complicated and far from easy to access. The first efforts in practice The first experience of delivering aid and assistance to sister trade unions in Central and Eastern Europe was done with a lot of good intentions, but little experience and consequently, the seminar programme which was delivered was probably of limited value. The venue was the Journalist trade union’s training center at Lake Balaton, in Hungary. The British GPMU delivered the actual training with Geoff Hayward, the Nordic NGU with their Educational Secretary Eric Norling, the European Graphical Federation Secretary Rolf Walther, some others and myself. It was 1988 and just before the changes and no one at that time knew how soon the theme of the seminar which focused on how trade unions operated in market economies would have a direct relevance to Hungarian trade unions and their members. However, it was good experience for the trainers, and was important in so much as it was a foundation on which more structured and professional initiatives could be built at a later date. The German Language Group was founded in 1993 and in its first year its constituent unions managed to fund and deliver a modest programme of seminars for about six countries. In the Netherlands the annual congress of Druk en Papier FNV voted to contribute to the costs of running the programme using the union’s own funds The Nordic Group targeted the Baltics, the South European Group did very little to provide tangible aid to Central and Eastern Europe in those days and the GPMU developed strong links with Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. About the same time that the Language Groupings were starting to develop links with Central and Eastern European trade unions on an ad hoc basis, the Educational Secretary of the IJF organised a conference in Prague to discuss the necessity of further cooperation and developing a network between the Western European and Central and Eastern European trade unions. All the participants who attended the conference supported this general aim. During the debate the Netherlands welcomed this initiative and argued that the building of links that affiliates were involved in on a bilateral basis should be integrated into the international efforts of the IGF/EGF. This was accepted by the conference. The German Language Group’s programme of seminars continued to target the Baltics-Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Albania, Russia, Bulgaria, Romania and Moldova. In 1995 links and cooperation was established with the former Yugoslavian Republics. Establishing contact with Slovenia was not a problem nether was Croatia and extremely strong ties were developed with the Croatian President, who became the Coordinator of the Central and Eastern European Group when it was eventually formed a few years later. It was, however a little more difficult to find the right partner in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in Macedonia but we eventually managed it. In Serbia and Montenegro, (in those days still named Yugoslavia) the situation was very complicated. With some difficulty, we were able to organise with the help of the journalist union and the graphical union, which were situated in Belgrade, a meeting that was attended by some 60 trade union representatives from the six republics of the former Yugoslavia.

The meeting took place at a time of high political tension and views were expressed which spanned the whole political spectrum. Voices could be heard expressing proMilosevic views whilst other voices took an anti-Milosevic line. There were also those who did not want to declare any position. The Montenegro representative sat slightly distanced from the others silently demonstrating his country’s autonomy. The conference was held shortly after the NATO campaign against Serbia and the killing of 16 journalists as a result of the bombardment of the radio and television stations. Many of the Serbian representatives who attended that conference are no longer contactable or part of the network and have not participated in the seminar programme. A helpful format At the beginning of the seminar programme in the mid-90s, the German, Language Group adopted a format, which has been used every year since. The idea was actually quite simple. The political leaders of the participating Central Eastern European trade unions were invited for a conference each year prior to the seminars being held to provide an update on the progress they were making in their transition towards establishing market economies. The most recent reports published by the European bank from London were reviewed which provided a detailed assessment of the economic problems and achievements in each transition country. Participants would also provide country reports explaining how they were dealing with the privatisation process and the extent to which they were becoming involved in collective bargaining activities – which of course in the early days was rather difficult given the absence of employer organisations in most of the CEE countries, and where the trade unions had to negotiate with the state. Later, in the transition period, these meetings would deal with the European Union, enlargement and the progress that accession countries were making in assimilating the EU Acquis Communautaire. Each of these annual meetings would conclude with each of the participating countries indicating what subjects, topics etc they would like to see dealt with on the seminars. This allowed the programme of seminars to focus on the ‘‘needs’’ of ‘‘specific’’ countries, rather than offer a ‘‘one size fits all’’ package. In 1999, a special meeting was organised especially for lecturers The German Language Group – over the 1990s – had managed to recruit 18 lecturers from almost as many countries, nine from the west and nine from the East. The approach adopted was, as a matter of principle, to achieve balance and have at each seminar three lectures, one from the West, one from East and Central Europe and one from the country in which the seminar was being held. This ‘‘triangle’’ ensured that each of the subjects dealt with were covered in a broad and wide-ranging perspective. The most popular themes requested by the recipient countries to be included in the seminars focused on collective bargaining possibilities in their respective countries. Later in the programme of seminars we were able to access the research findings of Professor John Gennard of Strathclyde University who published an annual review of collective bargaining and collective agreements for the entire area covered by UniEuropa Graphical (formerly the EGF). Earlier in the programme, we had to collect this information directly from the contacts that we slowly building with our CEE sister unions. An equally important topic, which was popular with seminar participants, was ‘‘privatisation’’ and its implications for working people and their trade unions. The privatisation process was progressing throughout the region – but at different speeds. Some countries were pushing the process along as fast as possible, whilst others seemed to be blocking any progress at all, which appeared to be the case in Belarus and the Ukraine. A further topic dealt with on the seminars was the growth of

The Dutch trade unions

631

ER 27,6

632

activity by the Western European Multinational Companies within the newly liberalised economies of Central and Eastern Europe – and the consequence of this development. This was directly relevant to both participants on the seminar from the CEE countries and their partners from Western Europe who were starting to see the Multinationals transfer operations and jobs from the West to the ‘‘low-wage’’ countries of CEE. This topic also took on board the issue of ‘‘works councils’’, which had hardly been known in the region. This became a very popular topic on the seminars when the CEE countries started to implement into domestic labour legislation the European Union European Works Council (EWC) directive that had a profound impact on the relations between workers and the employers in the ‘‘candidate’’ countries. In particular, almost all the trade unions in the CEE countries looked on Works Councils with suspicion as they were not obliged to be composed of trade unionists, and yet they assumed powers that the trade unions had previously and exclusively enjoyed (a number of CEE countries had introduced and incorporated into their respective labour codes provisions for the establishments of Works Councils into individual workplaces). In short, they were seen as competing forms of workers representation. Another issue, which become increasingly important to seminar participants, was ‘‘organisation and recruitment’’. Trade union membership had plummeted in all the CEE countries with the collapse of the old communist regime and as a consequence the authority of the trade unions was seriously undermined and considerable financial pressures were placed on them. The pedagogical methodology adopted was very much ‘‘student centred’’ and designed to encourage maximum participation by all those attending the seminar. Hence, discussion groups and role-play activities featured strongly in the seminars. The approach of the German Language Group was multifaceted. We wanted to hear first hand and understand exactly what was happening in the former Soviet block countries, in the factories, and how the trade unions and their leaders were dealing with problems thrown up as their respective countries made the transition towards a market economy. We were also interested in the extent to which employers were organising themselves in a way that would facilitate collective bargaining activities and of course we wanted to know what the governments in these countries were doing in terms of employment legislation and workers rights. It has to be said that when we were developing our contacts and establishing ‘‘partners’’ to work with in the CEE countries – especially in the early period – we could never be sure that we had selected the most appropriate and ‘‘politically’’ acceptable individuals and organisations. So, this was the approach, which characterised the seminars, which were organised and sponsored by the German Language Group through the period that spanned from the 1989 ‘‘changes’’ and throughout the 1990s’. The quality and effectiveness of this work improved with experience and the feedback that was received at ‘‘evaluation meetings’’, which were held three times a year. At each of these meetings, reports we reproduced by the lecturers from both the West and the CEE countries and formed the basis for our discussions. The millennium – the different approaches come together Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, great changes were taking place throughout the whole of Europe. Globalisation, technological change, unemployment, attacks on traditional trade union rights, the growth of anti-union employers and attempts by certain Western European Governments to import the ‘‘American Social Model’’ all placed great pressures on the trade unions in Western Europe to adjust and adapt to these new

challenges. As far as the Western European graphical unions were concerned it became clear that their international work and in particular their ‘‘cross- boarder’’ work in Europe could no longer be done effectively without strengthening links and improving the mechanisms for cooperation and information exchanges. In order to deal with this the IGF and EGF merged with a number of other international trade union federations to form union network international (UNI)[11] and Uni-Europa[12]–the European regional organisation that was to be the new home of the EGF – which in turn became Uni-Europa Graphical (EUG). This new international trade union federation – the largest of its kind in the world – had the organisation and resources to assist the Western European Graphical review the way in which they were providing help and assistance to their sister organisations in the CEE countries. One of the direct benefits that came from this reorganisation was the enhancement of our profile in the eyes of the European Commission. They were impressed with the quality of the Seminar Programme that we had been running over the years – especially as our work in that area complimented the EU policy of promoting and facilitating ‘‘Enlargement’’. Most important we were able to access financing of our seminar programme from the EU’s social funds. One problem was that the EU financial contribution could only be used for activities involving member’s states and candidate countries. We still needed funds to allow our work to be continued with ‘‘non-candidate’’ countries. This was resolved by a number of UEG affiliates agreeing to make up the shortfall themselves out of their own union funds. The ‘‘German language group’’ therefore joined together with the NGU, the GPMU and the French CGT and pledged to provide 50 per cent of the total finance required to fund the seminar programme. The EU therefore agreed to support our work and made funds available, which allowed UEG to plan a longer-term seminar programme, which took the form of a ‘‘four-year rolling program’’. In short, our original intention to provide help and assistance to the newly formed trade unions of the former Soviet block as they made the transition from ‘‘command’’ to ‘‘market’’ economies is coming to an end. After all, 15 years is long enough for any ‘‘transition period’’. Each of the trade unions in the 18 countries in that region are now able to stand on their own feet, and whilst existing links will continue to be strengthened and cooperation extended, it will be on the basis of a partnership of ‘‘equals’’. Conclusions When the ‘‘Wall came down’’ both the West and East were faced with massive problems of political, social and economic adjustment, Nowhere was this more true than in the area of labour relations. Workers in the formers communist countries had to make a massive transition. Prior to 1989 there were no independent trade unions. The unions that did exist did not engage in collective bargaining as it is known in the West, there were no employers organisations, and all economic activity – especially as it related to wages and working conditions – was determined by the state. The workers had to start from scratch, they had to learn the ‘‘rules by which the free market game is played’’, they had to build strong and effective democratic trade unions, they had to learn how to conduct collective bargaining activities – and in many cases they had to assist employers to develop employers organisations with whom they could negotiate. These were considerable and awesome challenges. It was the responsibility of the Western European trade unions in the graphical sector to commit themselves to a work program aimed at helping the nascent unions in the emerging democracies of Central and Eastern Europe to meet those challenges – it is with some pride that we can

The Dutch trade unions

633

ER 27,6

634

conclude that the graphical trade unions of Western Europe did its work well, and it did it in time! Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7.

8. 9.

10.

11.

12.

Netherlands Federation of Trade Unions (NVV, founded in 1906). Catholic Federation of Dutch Trade Unions (NKV) as from 1964. Christian Trade Union Federation (CNV, founded in 1909. On 1 January 1976 the NVV and NKV merged to form the Dutch Trade Union Federation (FNV). In 1974 a new third confederation was formed, the Federation of Managerial and Professional Staff Unions (MHP). FNV Bondgenoten (FNV Allies) is the name of the new Dutch super-union founded by the merger of four unions organising across a wide range of sectors. These include chemicals, energy and other process industries, transport, metalworking, food, agriculture and services. With around half a million members, the Bondgenoten is by far the biggest union in the Netherlands. The Typographers’ International, founded in Paris in 1889, the Lithographers’ International, founded in London in 1896 and the Bookbinders’ International, founded in Nuremberg in 1907 merged in 1949 to form the International Graphical Federation (IGF); as an International Trade Secretariat (ITS) affiliated with the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). The European Graphical Federation (EGF) was the European regional organisation of the IGF and was established in 1988. The Phare Programme is a European Union initiative, which supports the development of a larger democratic family of nations within a prosperous and stable Europe. Phare does this by providing grant finance to support its partner countries in central and Eastern Europe through the process of economic transformation and strengthening of democracy to the stage where they are ready to assume the obligations of membership of the European Union. Between 1990 and 1996 Phare made available Euro 6,263 million to 13 partner countries providing know-how and investment support. The Tacis Programme is a European Union initiative for the New Independent States and Mongolia, which fosters the development of harmonious and prosperous economic and political links between the European Union and these partner countries. Tacos does this by providing grant finance for know-how to support the process of transformation to market economies and democratic societies. Between 1991 and 1996 Tacis has committed Euro 2,807 million to provide know-how and to cultivate links and relationships between organisations in partner countries and the European Union. Union Network International (UNI) was born on January 1st, 2000. It has 15.5 million members. It brings together about 900 unions; the world’s largest grouping of individual trade unions. Uni Europa (UE) is the regional organisation of UNI, and Uni Europa Graphical (UEG) is the graphical sectoral organisation of Uni Europa.

Note from the publisher Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards As part of Emerald Group Publishing’s commitment to supporting excellence in research, we are pleased to announce that the 1st Annual Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards have been decided. Details about the winners are shown below, 2005 was the first year in which the awards were presented and, due to the success of the initiative, the programme is to be continued in future years. The idea for the awards, which are jointly sponsored by Emerald Group Publishing and the European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD), came about through exploring how we can encourage, celebrate and reward excellence in international management research. Each winner has received Euros 1,500 and a number have had the opportunity to meet and discuss their research with a relevant journal editor. Increased knowledge-sharing opportunities and the exchange and development of ideas that extend beyond the peer review of the journals have resulted from this process. The awards have specifically encouraged research and publication by new academics: evidence of how their research has impacted upon future study or practice was taken into account when making the award selections and we feel confident that the winners will go on to have further success in their research work.

Note from the publisher

635

The winners for 2005 are as follows: Category: Business-to-Business Marketing Management Winner: Victoria Little, University of Auckland, New Zealand Understanding customer value: an action research-based study of contemporary marketing practice Category: Enterprise Applications of Internet Technology Winner: Mamata Jcnamani, Indian Institute of Technology Design benchmarking, user behaviour analysis and link-structure personalization in commercial websites Category: Human Resource Management Winner: Leanne Cutcher, University of Sydney, Australia Banking on the customer: customer relations, employment relations and worker identity in the Australian retail banking industry Category: Information Science Winner: Theresa Anderson, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia Understandings of relevance and topic as they evolve in the scholarly research process Category: Interdisciplinary Accounting Research Winner: Christian Nielsen, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark Essays on business reporting: production and consumption of strategic information in the market for information Category: International Service Management Winner: Tracey Dagger, University of Western Australia Perceived service quality: proximal antecedents and outcomes in the context of a high involvement, high contact, ongoing service

Employee Relations Vol. 27 No. 6, 2004 pp. 635-636 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0142-5455

ER 27,6

Category: Leadership and Organizational Development Winner: Richard Adams, Cranfield University, UK Perceptions of innovations: exploring and developing innovation classification Category: Management and Governance Winner: Anna Dempster, Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge, Uk Strategic use of announcement options

636

Category: Operations and Supply Chain Management Winner: Bin Jiang, DePaul University, USA Empirical evidence of outsourcing effects on firm’s performance and value in the short term Category: Organizational Change and Development Winner: John Mullins, National University of Ireland, Cork Managing merger integration: a social constructions perspective Category: Organizational Change and Development Winner: Sally Riad, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand Perceptions of leadership in the public library: a transnational study Submissions for the 2nd Annual Emerald/EFMD Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards are now being received and we would encourage you to recommend the awards to doctoral candidates who you believe to have undertaken excellent research. The deadline by which we require all applications is the 1 March 2006. for further details about the subject categories, eligibility and submission requirement, please visit the website: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/info/researchers/funding/dictirakawards/ 2006awards.html