LO makes proposal on resolving demarcation disputes

In November 2002, the Confederation of Danish Trade Unions (LO) issued proposals for the resolution of demarcation disputes among its member unions, which are a persistent problem. It proposes a new negotiation and conciliation process between the unions in dispute, including the possibility of membership ballots among the workers concerned, plus heavy fines for unions failing to comply with decisions. This initiative is part of an overall modernisation of LO, but has met with differing responses from member unions.

In connection with its efforts to modernise the trade union movement, the Confederation of Danish Trade Unions (Landsorganisationen i Danmark, LO) has come up with proposals in order to resolve the long-running problem of demarcation disputes among member unions. Notably, for 12 years, the Trade Union of Public Employees (Forbundet af Offentligt Ansatte, FOA) and the General Workers’ Union (Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark, SiD) have been in dispute about which of them should organise bus drivers in Copenhagen (DK9909146N). Another example of a disputed membership group is hotels and restaurant workers. LO's proposal – which was presented at a meeting of the executive committee on 15 November 2002 – would allow LO to impose heavy fines on unions which cannot, or do not wish to reach agreement, or leave it to the members to decide the issue through a ballot.

Current situation

According to LO's current rules, demarcation disputes between member organisations are decided by the executive committee. The decision is normally taken by a 'demarcation committee' which is composed of a judge and two top LO officials. The only possible sanction is expulsion from LO, and this has never been used. A confederation is not likely voluntarily to reduce its membership and especially not when it comes to such a large member union as, for instance, SiD.

Over the last 10 years, the demarcation committee has dealt with 11 cases, though there have been many more demarcation disputes which it has not considered. On top of this, there have been a number of disputes among unions about individual members or broader issues. The greatest problems arise in connection with the outsourcing and contracting out of public tasks (DK9709129F). An example of this was the outsourcing of bus routes in Copenhagen, which led to the continuing demarcation dispute between FOA and SiD. In addition, the emergence of new work tasks, such as those related to new information technologies, may lead to conflicts.

Disputes should be solved internally by unions

The main principle of LO's proposal is that demarcation disputes should be solved internally between the unions concerned. For this purpose, a number of 'rules of the game' are proposed:

• a union which becomes aware of demarcation dispute would have a duty immediately to send a request for negotiations to the other unions involved, which would then have to start such negotiations within one month;

• if the negotiations end without any solution having been found, the unions concerned would have a duty to seek conciliation assistance from LO, lawyers, labour market researchers or others within a period of three months after the breakdown of the negotiations. If the parties fail to agree on a conciliator, the appointment would be made by LO's management; and

• if the conciliation process does not lead to a solution, a ballot would take place among the union members concerned within a period of three months, allowing them to decide which of the unions they wish to be members of. The unions would then meet for new negotiations in which the result of the ballot would be given great weight.

The LO demarcation committee – chaired by a judge – would take a final decision only if this negotiation and conciliation process ends a deadlock. If the unions fail to respect the decision, fines could be imposed upon them by the demarcation committee.

The proposal also includes four instruments which could used by unions to prevent, and negotiate solutions to, demarcation disputes:

• clear demarcation agreements which define the borders within which unions are to organise members in a given field based on the criteria of occupational skills, work functions or geographical location. The unions should, however, ensure the support of their members – for instance through a ballot;

• common agreements whereby two or more unions jointly are parties to an agreement with the relevant employer. This may prevent demarcation disputes, because the members will be working under the same terms and condition irrespective of which union they belong to;

• mergers and amalgamations among unions are recommended as the most effective method to avoid demarcation disputes. This could start on a small scale with the establishment of joint local union offices; and

• shared membership whereby the individual member obtains membership and the related advantages in two or more unions without, however, having to pay union dues that are higher than if the person concerned was a member of a single union.

Commentary

This initiative should be seen as an element in the current major initiative for a modernised LO (DK0210101F). The president of LO, Hans Jensen, has declared that he is ready to discuss the content of the proposal for the future resolution of demarcation disputes which he has presented to the executive committee. However, he has made it absolutely clear that the end result must be a system which will – once and for all – resolve the unfortunate internal disputes which are so harmful to the reputation of the trade union movement. According to Mr Jensen: 'The new LO will focus fully on promoting the interests of employees and in this connection it is of decisive importance that we do not waste our energy on quarrelling about which unions should organise what members. Instead, we should join our efforts to fight to organise the employees which are not today members of any trade union.'

Mr Jensen can expect strong opposition. As might be expected with an initiative related to demarcation disputes, there were differing opinions among the 20 LO member unions. The Danish Metalworkers’ Union (Dansk Metal), SiD and the Union of Workers in the Wood and Building Industry (Forbundet Træ, Industri, Byg, TIB) - two of the larger unions - have been especially sceptical about the proposal. They find that some of the elements of the proposal are unrealistic. This applies, for instance, to the ideas of joint agreements and ballots among members about which union they wish to belong to. It could lead to huge internal problems if the members were free to 'shop around' among unions in this way. According to the critics, this could mean that a union could argue that there is a demarcation dispute and then 'poach' other unions' members prior to a ballot. Other major unions, such as FOA, support the proposal and believe that it will make it possible to find a solution which will also give members more influence. (Carsten Jørgensen, FAOS).