Union proposes better distribution of membership fees

In light of the current weak organisational and financial capacities of sectoral trade unions, the Trade Union of Lithuanian Food Producers (LMPS) proposes redistributing membership fees and implementing the principle of direct trade union membership in Lithuania. It is hoped that this would strengthen the capacities of sectoral trade unions. LMPS argues that ineffective fee distribution is one of the main obstacles for the development of social dialogue in the country. However, no final decision to change the current situation has yet been concluded.

Financial situation of sectoral trade unions

Organisational and financial capacities of sectoral trade union organisations in Lithuania in general are very limited; in fact, these organisations suffer from a lack of skilled personnel as well as financial resources. According to some representatives of Lithuanian trade union organisations, the main reason for such a situation is the inadequate distribution of membership fees between local and sectoral organisations. For example, in the Lithuanian Trade Union Confederation (Lietuvos profesiniu sajungu konfederacija, LPSK), the country’s largest trade union organisation, usually about 80%–90% of membership fees is retained by the local organisation, whereas just 10%–20% of such fees is distributed between sectoral and central/national organisations. Moreover, in the Lithuanian Trade Union ‘Solidarity’ (Lietuvos profesine sajunga ‘Solidarumas’, LPS ‘Solidarumas’), 50% of membership fees is retained by the local organisation, while 20% of fees goes to the regional organisations, a further 20% is passed on to the central/national organisations and only 10% goes to the sectoral organisations. Without sufficient financial resources, sectoral trade union organisations cannot employ additional staff or experts in the field to provide local trade unions with high-quality assistance.

Discussion on redistributing membership fees

However, some differences exist between sectors. Typically, those sectors that retain a substantial part of membership fees are stronger and have the resources to provide their members with adequate assistance and access to consultations of highly-qualified experts. One of these sectoral trade union organisations, the Lithuanian Trade Union of Food Producers (Lietuvos maistininku profesine sajunga, LMPS), affiliated to LPSK, initiated a discussion on the redistribution of membership fees in LPSK as well as in other large trade union confederations. According to LMPS, ineffective fee distribution is one of the main obstacles to the development of social dialogue in the country.

As early as June 2006, LMPS circulated a message to all members of the Lithuanian trade unions stating the following:

In an attempt to make the organisation more effective and to serve its members to the fullest, we propose to start discussion without delay on the essential reform of trade union structures and membership fee distribution. […] The essential changes to trade union structures and the concentration of the membership fees can allow trade unions to recruit specialists with required qualifications for their activities. We think that, in this way, the Lithuanian trade unions will be able to fulfil their obligations: to ensure decent wages, legal protection and social guarantees for employees.

Among other things, the LMPS proposal suggested that ‘an agreement would be reached on the equal redistribution of membership fees (where at least 50% should be retained by a sectoral trade union) in all sectors of the LPSK and on the gradual switch to the concentration of full membership fee’.

Idea of direct membership

On 8 December 2006, the ideas put forward by LMPS were announced at the joint forum of all national trade union confederations (LT0612019I) and at the sitting of the LPSK Council. According to the Chair of LMPS, Gražina Gruzdiene, Lithuanian trade unions should start thinking about the possibilities of direct membership, where new members would be directly admitted to the union at sectoral level instead of forming trade union branches at company level – currently enjoying rapid growth. Direct membership would bring the following benefits: procedures of registering a company trade union could be avoided, employees from small enterprises could join a union more easily, membership could be retained if an employee were to start working with another enterprise from the sector, and the costs involved in providing services to trade union members could be reduced subsequently.

Although the representatives of LPSK and other large trade union confederations have debated the abovementioned issues, no decision has yet been taken.

Inga Blažiene, Institute of Labour and Social Research