AF union confederation to be dissolved in 2001

In June 2000, the council of representatives of the the Confederation of Norwegian Professional Associations (AF) decided to dissolve the organisation, marking the culmination of a long period of turbulence within AF. The confederation will be formally dissolved in 2001.

On 21 June 2000, the council of representatives of the Confederation of Norwegian Professional Associations (Akademikernes Fellesorganisasjon, AF) took a unanimous decision to dissolve the trade union confederation. This is the culmination of a long period of turbulence within AF, in which several member associations have left the organisation to join a new confederation for academically-qualified staff, Akademikerne (NO9711133F). An attempt to create a new confederation in cooperation with the Norwegian Confederation of Vocational Unions (Yrkesorganisasjonenes Sentralforbund, YS) (NO9905132N) failed earlier in summer 2000, when AF opted out of the merger process on the recommendation of its elected board, made on 14 June (NO0006195N). The council of representatives upheld the board's recommendation to end AF's involvement in the creation of a new union confederation, and also found that, in light of the recent disintegration of AF, there is no longer a sufficient foundation on which to base the continuing existence of the confederation. AF will formally be dissolved some time in the first six months of 2001.

Background

AF was founded in 1975 as a politically independent confederation for academically-qualified and professional employees. In 1995, it comprised 36 member unions representing almost 250,000 employees. At the time it was the second largest union confederation in Norway and had the highest membership growth of the country's three main confederations. Its recruitment base is predominantly made up of graduates of advanced colleges and university-educated professionals, a majority of which are employed in the public sector.

Despite a concentration of employees with higher education, there have always been tensions between AF member associations, mainly between those representing employees with with a state (advanced) college education (such a nurses and teachers) and those representing employees with a university education (such as lawyers, doctors). These tensions have grown in recent years with the inclusion of several female-dominated associations with state college education, and have been generated by conflicting views as to whom to give priority to in wage settlements; female-dominated groups with a state college education or groups with higher university education. This, and a general dissatisfaction with AF's organisational profile, led several associations to leave the organisation. By 1999, AF had lost almost half its membership base. At the same time, two other associations were signalling their intentions to leave: the Norwegian Society of Engineers (Norges Ingeniørorganisasjon, NITO) finally gained independence from AF in January 2000 (NO9901111N); while the Teachers' Union Norway (Lærerforbundet) is still deliberating a merger with the Norwegian Unions of Teachers (Norsk Lærerlag, NL) (NO9904127N).

Failed merger of YS and AF

This process of fragmentation forced AF to rethink its organisational strategies and policies. The council of representatives initiated an internal evaluation of the situation early in 1998, which led to the adoption of new organisational principles and the election of Aud Blankholm as the new leader of the confederation in January 1999. The hope was to provide new incentives for a revitalisation of the organisation. On 20 May 1999, the leader of YS, Randi Bjørgen, and Ms Blankholm took a joint initiative to consider the basis for a possible merger of YS and AF, with a view to creating a new union confederation. The ambition was to create a completely new organisation, with a new name and a new organisational structure. An independent union, the Norwegian Police Federation (Politiets Fellesforbund, PF) joined the process at a later stage. The merger would have meant a pooling of approximately 360,000 members.

However, from the outset there was internal discontent within both YS and AF concerning the creation of a new employee confederation (NO0002179F). The YS bargaining cartel in the state sector, YS Stat, was opposed to the large degree of centralisation of powers envisaged in the report of the joint steering committee considering the basis for the new union confederation, which was made public on 7 February 2000. According to YS Stat, this would impede member unions' ability to pursue normal trade union activities, and deprive individual unions of their basic collective rights, such as authority over their own collective agreements. The proposal was also rejected on the same grounds by the largest YS union in the municipal sector, the Norwegian Association of Health and Social Care Personnel (Norsk Helse- og Sosialforbund, NHS). There was also some opposition within AF, but more important was the alternative agendas of associations such as the Teachers' Union Norway, which meant that they only half-heartedly participated in the deliberation process.

Neither Ms Blankholm nor the board of AF found any reasons to continue the deliberation process, and as such recommended an end to AF's involvement. Although several possible scenarios were considered, the AF council of representatives nevertheless decided to end the deliberation process and to dissolve AF. The main reason for opting out, according to Ms Blankholm, was the apparent opposition within YS to the creation of a new confederation. However, there are also good reasons to believe that 2000's favourable wage settlement (NO0006194F) may have encouraged certain groups within AF to opt for independence rather than further cooperation.

Commentary

Aud Blankholm blames the present situation in which AF finds itself on a wage policy which has been hostile towards academic and professional occupations, and not so much on the internal problems of AF itself. This policy, according to Ms Blankholm, has lead to a fragmentation of the Norwegian labour market, with the creation of a fourth trade union confederation, Akademikerne, and several organisations choosing to stand alone in wage bargaining. Yet one of AF's main problems has been the long-running interest gap between members with a university education and those with a state college education, which has placed a strain on the internal unity of the confederation during wage settlements. Many groups have become displeased with the apparent failure of AF sufficiently to represent them in wage bargaining, and as such many feel that they are better off alone or in seeking to form alternative alliances.

The decision to dissolve AF indicates that the two largest remaining affiliated associations, the Teachers' Union Norway and the Norwegian Nurses' Association (Norsk Sykepleierforbund, NSF), which represent the main bulk of the remaining members, do not view AF as a viable alternative any more. A possible solution to AF's problems would indeed have been to include a new merged teachers' organisation in the organisation. However, this seems at the moment to be a highly unlikely outcome, especially since a significant number of teachers in both teachers' unions prefer to see an independent union. Those in favour of an independent teachers' union may have an even stronger case after 2000's favourable wage settlement.

Many commentators believe that the dissolution of AF may enable the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisasjonen i Norge, LO) further to strengthen its position in Norwegian industrial relations. LO's deputy leader,Gerd Liv Valla, has on several previous occasions hinted at a future merger of LO, AF and YS (NO9907140F), and she has also taken the initiative to improve services to members with higher qualifications and strengthen the recruitment of these groups by LO (NO9901110F). Furthermore, a merger of YS and AF would have significantly challenged LO in the public sector, making the two organisations almost equal in size, but instead LO will now have one confederation fewer to contend with in the public sector wage settlements.

Thus, the organisational map is being redrawn at the time of writing, and as such it is hard to determine and too early to say what consequences the break up of AF will have for Norwegian industrial relations. On the employee side, there is a variety of interests pulling in different and often opposite directions, yet at the same time there is a general recognition of the desirability and the need for greater centralisation of trade union powers, especially in relation to wage formation (NO0007198F). However, the bargaining system is presently being revised by a public committee with the view to changing the rules concerning bargaining and wage formation, and the findings of this committee will beyond doubt have a bearing on collective bargaining in Norway in the future (NO9906135F). (Haavard Lismoen, FAFO Institute for Applied Social Science)