Strengthening social dialogue in the graphical industry

A new report, issued in September 2000, looks at ways in which European graphical sector trade unions could strengthen social dialogue and cross-border trade union networks in their industry.

September 2000 saw the publication of a report on Strengthening social dialogue and cross-border trade union networks in the graphical industry, drawn up by a team of researchers at the Centre for European Employment Research at the University of Strathclyde, Scotland, as part of a project involving a number of graphical workers' trade unions and supported financially by the European Commission. The report: includes four position papers examining specific issues; highlights areas which need action on the part of trade unions; and concludes with an action plan.

Context

The report notes that although there are European-level social partner organisations within the graphical industry and a limited social dialogue process exists, the sectoral dialogue lags behind that which has been established in many other sectors. Specifically, it notes that the employers' organisation Intergraf has rejected requests from the graphical sector of UNI Europa (the European regional organisation of Union Network International) for the establishment of a sectoral dialogue committee (EU9902150F).

Further, trade unions have not yet developed structures to enable them to operate on a cohesive cross-border basis. The report maintains that this restricts their effectiveness in developing a social dialogue process with multinational enterprises. It also states that although the 1994 EU Directive on European Works Councils (s) has succeeded in establishing EWCs for the purposes of information and consultation, the social dialogue process as a whole should be wider than this, in that it should deal with substantive issues which affect workers, such as working time, holidays, equal opportunities and bonus systems.

The report claims that strengthening the social dialogue process in the European graphical industry would be an effective way of maintaining the competitiveness of the industry – by means of increased labour market and work organisation flexibility – while at the same time ensuring employment security for the industry's workers. It states that in order to strengthen the social dialogue process in the industry: "there needs to be established a trade union network, and other mechanisms, which allow the graphical unions in the various EU Member States to act with greater cohesion on occasions when common issues (eg changes in work organisation, the introduction of temporary workers) are the subject of consultation or bargaining."

Position papers

The report contains detailed position papers, discussed at a conference of trade unionists and researchers held on 15–18 June 2000 in the UK, which give an analysis of the situation in the industry in the following areas:

• corporate structure in the graphical industries - trends and patterns;

• technological innovation and the impact on skills;

• changes in he organisation of work and flexibility; and

• barriers to cross-border cooperation by graphical workers.

Conclusions

After debating the papers, the conference drew a number of conclusions relating to the requirements and courses of action needed to strengthen social dialogue and cross-border cooperation amongst graphical workers. The report details these, categorising them into five separate areas.

Fundamental transnational trade union rights

The report states that a key development which would help graphical trade unions is the establishment of fundamental transnational trade union rights. These should include, as a minimum, the right to organise employees, the right of employees to have their employment conditions determined by collective bargaining and the right to undertake industrial action without the limitations of national borders.

Simultaneous action

The report identifies a need for graphical trade unions to demonstrate to graphical multinationals and to their own members that they are capable of acting in a simultaneous and cross-border manner, across the EU and beyond. It argues that this would make multinational companies take them seriously and make them reconsider "divide and rule" policies.

European Works Councils

Graphical trade unions should give priority to establishing EWCs in companies which have yet to comply with the EWCs Directive. They should also seek to strengthen the Directive. The report estimates that 70 graphical multinationals come under the scope of the EWCs Directive and that, to date, 42 EWCs have been established in this sector, representing 60% of eligible companies. Although it acknowledges that this is a relatively high penetration rate, 28 companies in the sector have still to negotiate an EWC.

Traditional and new membership

The report argues that graphical trade unions should continue to protect the interests of traditional graphical workers while expanding membership with the new media sector. It notes that in 1994, print media accounted for 57% of the communications industry while electronic media accounted for 43% – by 2005, the respective proportions are forecast to be 34% and 66%.

Skills development

Graphical trade unions should ensure that their members have access to training, retraining and lifelong learning in order to acquire and develop the skills relevant to an industry which is progressing rapidly and where technology is constantly changing.

Action plan

The final part of the report is devoted to an action plan devoted to the strengthening of social dialogue, which was agreed by graphical union representatives attending the June 2000 conference. The main points of action are as follows:

• to support the inclusion of fundamental trade union rights in the EU Treaty (EU0011278N). To this end, this report should be submitted to the European Commission;

• to coordinate collective agreements in the graphical and new media sectors in European and North American countries;

• to exchange experience and information regarding technical developments, collective bargaining, education and health and safety in the sector;

• to strengthen EWCs in transnational companies in the sector, focusing on the introduction of sanctions on companies which do not respect information and consultation rights, and to give priority to establishing EWCs in those companies which do not yet have one;

• to protect the interests of traditional graphical sector workers while expanding membership in the new media sector;

• to agree a date when all plants in every country of a specific new media multinational will be subject to a membership recruitment drive;

• to support research and information projects about the sector and to sustain educational projects in Asia, Africa, Europe and South America; and

• to develop a joint cross-border strategy for dealing with all graphical multinationals.

Commentary

This detailed report highlights a number of problems which need to be overcome by trade unions in the graphical sector before an effective cross-border social dialogue can be established. Some problems, such as those associated with globalisation and the resulting creation of company structures in order to implement pan-European and global business policies, are common to all sectors. However, others, such as the rapidly changing nature of the sector due to the development of new technologies, are more specific to the graphical sector.

While the wish to strengthen the social dialogue at all levels is an appropriate trade union response to meeting the challenges posed by these problems, it will be difficult to make any progress at sectoral level while employers continue to reject requests for the setting up of a sectoral dialogue committee. Social dialogue structures at the level of the multinational company – principally through EWCs – arguably appear to be somewhat better developed in this sector than in many others and it would seem that if graphical trade unions concentrate their efforts on strengthening these structures and pressing for the negotiation of EWCs in all companies within the Directive's scope, this may make a real difference to the social dialogue process at this level. (Andrea Broughton, IRS)