Social Dialogue and the FNV  a presentation by Eelco Tasma, senior policy advisor of the FNV, Dublin, novembre 26th, 2009

Our position Of the three trade union confederations the FNV is by far the largest We have 1.4 million members, CNV about , and MHP our unions differ from members to 750 (soccer players) the employers side is comparable VNO-NCW is very large and powerful MKB and LTO take care of specific interests

History of social dialogue It is said that ‘poldering’ is deeply rooted in our history, because we had to fight the water together Objectively speaking the choice for the tri-partite model was made after World War II Building up the country again was believed to be best done in harmony between employers, employees and government For many years this was the dominant model, throughout the system

Institutions and positions From World War II in social security, health care, advisory boards, etc. Things went wrong in 1993 Reason: growth of disability benefits in economically hard times Social Partners were considered guilty in a Parlementary Inquiry After that the influence diminished What’s left is the Council of Work and Income

And of course the SER The SER still proves its strength Thorough analysis of problems Balanced propositions employers vs. trade unions independent members with a political colour Recent breakthroughs in health care insurance, disability insurance and unemployment reglulations Problematic: labor laws and pension age

In times of crisis Political parties need and use social dialogue But you also need a minister of Social Affairs who can listen and keeps the balance Positive: part-time unemployment Asked for bij both social partners Government: new arrangement

In times of crisis Not just for temporary disasters, but also for economic setback Position for trade unions Agreement is necessary and plan for educating workforce Criticism: Keeping weak companies alive and thus interfering with ‘natural selection’

In times of crisis But this is not the case: it concerns completely healthy companies that face a drastic downfall in business And it works: unemployment was predicted to go up to 7% in 2010 and then to even 10% In stead it goes up from 3,5% to 5,5 and maybe to 7%: much lower than in neighbouring countries

In times of crisis We criticise the government for not stimulating the economy more and for not using the crisis as an opportunity for making new green policies, for instance What they did was too little too late Now we face major cutbacks, maybe up to € 35 billion

In times of crisis Propositions have to be put forward without taboos But also without vision and principle Like: who must pay for the crisis And who will carry the highest burden First testcase: pension age

In times of crisis Both state pensions and collective arrangements will go up from 65 to 67 years Which is very dishonest for lower paid workers and the less educated The social democrats in our government have not made a balanced deal

In times of crisis The only way to stop this development was an agreement to form an alternative in the SER This has failed, due to the employers, who had no real interest in a deal They were satisfied with the proposal of the government

In times of crisis This again shows the necessity of balance in interests It also shows that the poldermodel does not mean that there is no conflict of interests between trade unions and the employer lobby Trust is key: it comes by foot but disappears by horse

In times of crisis What we face now is a whole number of cutbacks We agree with the economic necessity, but not with the choices that threaten to be made The amount (9 vs. 35 billion) and just looking at the spending and not also at state income (top rate and tax deduction multinationals)

Results of dialogue in crisis No panic and no uproar No radical steps when not needed Relativally mild consequences for (un)employment On the long run… we don’t know yet Other countries stimulate the economy more, but look at us for labor market measures

Conclusions on Social Dialogue The SER has a rich history and still a promising future Our strategy has to change with the dominant political current The Dutch model is strongly linked to our culture, but the advantages of a permanent dialogue with employers seems obvious What other countries should consider: a Foundation of Labour as a place for open discussion with employers