Dispute at Belgian Red Cross

Download article in original language : BE0312303FFR.DOC

In November 2003, representatives of the Belgian Red Cross and its trade unions signed a final agreement which ended a dispute which started between them two months earlier, following the dismissal of four workers.

On 11 September 2003, the Belgian Red Cross (Croix-Rouge de Belgique/Belgische Rode Kruis) dismissed four people for serious misconduct, sparking a major dispute. Those dismissed were the director of the department for 'reception of refugees' and three employees at the Le Merisier reception centre at Fraipont, one of whom was both the director of the centre and the trade union representative for the National Federation of White-Collar Workers (Centrale Nationale des Employés/Landelijke Bedienden Centrale CNE/LBC). On the basis of an internal audit carried out at the Fraipont centre, the management of the Red Cross accused the staff concerned of 'having made asylum seekers work in unusual conditions, which are in contradiction with the safety rules and in a context which is outside the norms of community work' (quoted in La Croix-Rouge on 19 November 2003). 'It is a case of having put people to work with a total absence of social protection and without any coordination of workplace safety. Asylum seekers were allocated to building site work involving the infrastructure of the Fraipont centre,' stated Jean-Pierre Arnould, the director general of French-speaking humanitarian service of the Red Cross. The management also took the workers involved to court.

The trade union delegates at the Red Cross - CNE/LBC and Belgian Union of White-Collar Staff, Technicians and Managers (Syndicat des Employés, Techniciens et Cadres de Belgique/Bedienden, Technicien Kaders van België, SETCa/BBTK - claimed that these dismissals were unjustified and from 15 September organised a rotating strike at all the organisation's sites, whilst still maintaining a minimum service. They also appealed to the Minister for Social Affairs, Maria Arena, and to the Minister for Employment and Pensions, Frank Vandenbroucke, to 'disarm the conflict'. Two days later, a delegation from the trade unions requested that Ms Arena appoint a representative 'to hear the different parties and give an objective account of what is happening, produce a report on the work of the residents in the asylum seekers' centres and to make a proposal to legislate on the matter'. Ms Arena therefore commissioned the Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers (Agence fédérale pour l’accueil des demandeurs d’asile/Federaal Agentschap voor de opvang van asielzoekers, FEDASIL) to produce a report evaluating the extent to which the Red Cross centres conform to the convention set up between them and FEDASIL.

The trade unions contested whether 'serious misconduct' had occurred. JM Léonard of SETCa/BBTK stated that: 'Once the reasons for dismissal were known, six other centre directors out of the eight Red Cross reception centres came forward to explain that the facts of the case against their colleagues also pertained to their establishments and that no-one had raised an objection to them.' It is not forbidden to propose work to asylum seekers resident in the centres opened by the Red Cross, but these activities must be carried out for the community and on a voluntary basis. The communications director at FEDASIL stated : 'It may happen that, in agreement with the local council, asylum seekers may carry out minor work outside their centre.' The problem arises from the fact that this type of situation is not covered by any law. In the meantime, the director of each of the centres opened is expected to manage the situation prudently. Ms Arena recognised that there was a gap in the law in this respect and stated that she would be proposing a bill to parliament.

Course of the dispute

Having reached agreement on 30 September over a hearing for three of the dismissed workers, two representatives of the Red Cross and the two delegates from CNE/LBC and SETCa/BBTK met once more on 14 October and worked out a protocol of agreement. This meeting was organised by the Office for Conciliation (Bureau de conciliation du Ministère de l’Emploi et du Travail) and presided over by an official conciliator. On 16 October, the talks broke up and about 100 employees gathered in front of the Royal Palace in Brussels and asked Princess Astrid, the president of the Red Cross, to nominate an arbitrator. According to the management, the text of an agreement presented to a general assembly of employees had not been approved by the board of directors and contained new demands. On the other hand, the trade unions accused the management of submitting a text which did not correspond to the agreement reached.

Having heard all the parties, Princess Astrid commissioned the community president of the Red Cross, to 'take all those initiatives which could re-establish social peace'. The latter therefore asked the trade unions to suspend their action until the verdict of the Liège labour tribunal on the dismissals was announced after a hearing on 4 November. Management decided not to recommence negotiations with workers’ representatives until then. On 4 November, it was announced that an examining magistrate had been nominated for the case.

Finally, on 19 November, a protocol agreement which had been agreed the day before between the unions and the management, assisted by two conciliators, was ratified by the Red Cross Board of directors. This re-established social peace, with the judicial process following its course in parallel. The agreement covers the status of the persons concerned and provides an obligation, in the future, to establish a job description for the posts of director of a reception centre for asylum seekers and director of the department for the coordination of centres run by the Red Cross. Consequently, two of the four dismissed workers have been reinstated immediately and a third will be reinstated on 1 June 2004, at the latest. As for the director of the Fraipont centre, also the trade union delegate, his contract has been terminated. Furthermore, the agreement confirms a moratorium in effect with regard to dismissals and commits the management to consult with the trade union representatives before any restructuring of departments and services of the Red Cross take place, though this is regarded as inevitable

Negotiations on future of organisation

From June 2003, the Red Cross had undertaken negotiations with workers’ representatives concerning the future of the institution. From the point of view of the unions, the four dismissals constituted a manoeuvre by the management to 'divert attention and thus avoid having to reply to questions from the employees about financial and personnel management which is beneath contempt'. Thus, some weeks before this incident, an open letter, signed jointly by the trade unions, was sent to the Red Cross management, bringing into question the management, status and working conditions of employees. When asked about this, the director general of the humanitarian services of the Red Cross, stated: 'In the fiscal year 2002 we made a loss and this will still be the case in 2003. We have to digest some heavy investments. There are some choices that have to be made in order to return to a position of equilibrium without prejudicing the beneficiaries of our services. No diversionary manœuvre will change that.' In any event, employees and management seem to be in agreement on the necessity to modernise the Red Cross.

Commentary

The dispute brought about by the four dismissals was resolved through the agreement between the management and the trade unions. However, the negotiations on the future and operation of the organisation, which were interrupted by this dispute, are likely to be turbulent. In order to return to a balanced budget, the Red Cross intends to take budgetary and employment measures. However, the unions object to the organisation's budgetary and human resource management and are afraid of the repercussions on employment levels. (Marie Schots, IST)