Tension and agreement in French-speaking not-for-profit sector

Download article in original language : BE0007318NFR.DOC

In June 1999, following difficult negotiations and serious skirmishes between employers, government and trade unions, an agreement was reached on improving the status of the not-for profit sector (healthcare and socio-cultural activities) in Belgium's French-speaking community (Wallonia and Brussels). The difficulties arose because the sector is underfinanced, the French-speaking community faces structural difficulties and there are extreme discrepancies within this heterogeneous sector.

On 15 December 1999, the Belgian federal government conceded to the demands of the not-for-profit sector (healthcare and socio-cultural activities) and earmarked BEF 6 billion in the federal budget for the purpose of funding the "social Maribel" scheme (BE0001303N), which seeks to encourage job creation in the not-for-profit sector by reducing employers' social security contributions under certain conditions.

Since the federal government had accommodated some of the not-for-profit sector's demands, it was obvious that pressure would be put on the communities (ie the governments of the Flemish-, French- and German-speaking communities) and regions (ie the governments of Flanders, Wallonia and the Brussels region), in the hope that they would in turn release financial means for the sector's employers and their employees. While the Flemish government's budget may have the necessary leeway to meet many of the not-for-profit sector's claims, this hardly applies to Belgium's three French-speaking federated entities - the Brussels region, Wallonia and the French-speaking community (Wallonia-Brussels).

After several strikes and rounds of negotiations, agreements on improving the position of the not-for-profit sector were eventually secured in the Brussels region and Wallonia. They cover those associations involved in the field of mental health, family assistance and socio-occupational integration.

In the French-speaking community, the organisations representing employers and employees in the socio-cultural, healthcare and youth services sectors concluded a framework agreement with the community's government on 29 June 2000. This agreement had initially been negotiated on 22 June, but trade union members had immediately challenged it: they found that the the proposed reviews of pay scales were vague and rather unfavourable for employees. At this point, pay scales in the socio-cultural sector were still on a par with, or even below, those of the civil service, which meant that they were lower than those of the healthcare sector, governed by joint committee 305 (CP 305.1). In addition, the framework agreement covered the period from 2001 to 2006, and this term was deemed too long by the social partners' negotiators, especially given the prospect of new negotiations on the refinancing of the French community, which is the only level of power in Belgium that largely depends on allocations by the federal state, the Walloon region and the Brussels region for its resources.

The framework agreement signed on 29 June contains a multiannual plan covering only the period from 2001 to 2005. This plan covers the following issues:

• surveying and classifying employment in the not-for-profit sector (because of a complete lack of transparency in the sector);

• harmonisation of pay scales across the different subsectors;

• a very gradual alignment of the socio-cultural sector's pay scales with those of the healthcare sector (governed by CP 305.1);

• new arrangements for employees approaching retirement age;

• access to training for workers who participate in reintegration schemes in the not-for-profit sector;

• community-level legislation on the reform of plans to reduce unemployment, in keeping with the policy implemented by the Walloon regional government; and

• improving the social dialogue within the sector.

The revised framework agreement was approved by the trade unions, which expressed satisfaction that the idea of a refinancing of the French community (and consequently of the not-for-profit sector) had been set as a key political prospect. Similarly, employers' organisations welcomed the fact that the socio-cultural sector had been put on a par with the traditional not-for-profit sector (ie healthcare).

However, besides the problematic nature of employers' organisation in the not-for-profit sector (BE0003305F), this framework agreement may have perverse effects. Despite the fact that the French community will allocate BEF 1.2 billion over five years, the harmonisation and alignment of pay scales will compel the socio-cultural sector (in which a diploma has not been a prerequisite for obtaining employment) to introduce pay scale nuances that are unlikely to take account of the self-training of workers participating in reintegration schemes which occurs in the sector. Some associations in the sector may thus well be heading towards acute internal social conflicts.