Social partner involvement in the 2002 NAP

Download article in original language : IT0206305TIT.DOC

This feature examines social partner involvement in Italy's 2002 National Action Plan (NAP) for employment. It is one of a set of similar features for all the EU Member States, written in response to a questionnaire.

This feature outlines how Italian social partner organisations have been involved in Italy's 2002 National Action Plan (NAP) on employment. Under the European employment strategy, each year the EU Member States draw up NAPs in response to the annual Employment Guidelines.

Similar features on social partner involvement in the 2002 NAPs have been drawn up by the European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO) national centres in all the EU Member States, in response to a questionnaire. Details on the background to this exercise, and the questionnaire used, can be found at TN0206102F. Readers are advised to refer to the questionnaire in conjunction with this feature.

Procedural aspects

The 2002 NAP was presented by the Italian government on 6 June 2002. During its preparation the government consulted the main employers' and trade union organisations (around 30 of them). Besides the social partners, the government also consulted representatives of the regions and the provinces, to which important functions relating to the labour market and vocational training have been delegated. The government had formal talks with the social partners specifically about the 2002 NAP on only one occasion, 22 April 2002, when it presented the framework of the NAP.

Assessments by the social partners on the timing and form of consultation differ. The main divergences of opinion are between Confindustria, the main employers' organisation, and the three main trade union confederations - the General Confederation of Italian Workers (Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro, Cgil), the Italian Confederation of Workers' Unions (Confederazione Italiana Sindacati Lavoratori, Cisl) and the Union of Italian Workers (Unione Italiana del Lavoro, Uil).

According to Confindustria, preparation of the 2002 NAP was preceded by the drafting in autumn 2001 of theWhite Paper on the labour market (IT0110104F), which defined the labour policy objectives that the recently elected centre-right government intended to pursue during the legislature, and the means to achieve them. Unlike in the past, when the social partners were belatedly informed about the contents of the NAP, according to Confindustria in 2002 the reference framework for the NAP was thus defined ahead of time.

The union confederations take an entirely different view. In the past they they have complained of being involved belatedly in the NAP process, and by means of only a limited number of meetings, and in 2002 they again expressed strong dissatisfaction over the degree of their involvement in the definition of the NAP. They point out that only one meeting was held, and it occurred on 22 April, which was late in terms of the schedule for presenting the NAP.

According to Cgil, there was no dialogue between the government and the social partners on the 2002 NAP. The government, it claims, did no more than organise a meeting to present the NAP. The procedural aspects of drawing up the NAP have also been criticised by Cisl, which claims that the practice followed in Italy in this area does not allow the government and the social partners to use the NAP as a document for the definition of labour market policies and for monitoring those that have been implemented. It believes that the preparation of the NAP should begin earlier, with more continuous consultation with the social partners.

With regard to the extent to which the social partners' views are represented in the NAP, the unions are dissatisfied with the fact that their suggestions have not been incorporated in the Plan. According to Cgil, this is the result of a lack of dialogue between government and the social partners.

The NAP does not contain a section written by the social partners. It is not viewed as a joint government/social partner text and the social partners did not sign it.

Matters of policy content

Objective D of the 2002 Employment Guidelines calls for a 'comprehensive partnership with the social partners for the implementation, monitoring and follow-up of the employment strategy'. As seen above, the social partners are not in agreement on the existence and extent of such a partnership.

With regard to the social partners' assessment of the policy content of the NAP and the government's employment policy, the assessments of the employers' organisations and the unions again differ greatly.

Confindustria is satisfied with the general approach of the NAP, given that its three main areas of intervention - measures to combat irregular work, reform of the education and training system, and reform of the labour market - are those that it regards as being of crucial importance. According to Confindustria, the measures envisaged, which were already set out in the White Paper, should modernise the Italian labour market.

The labour policies and reforms pursued by the government have been severely criticised by the unions, and this led to conflict in spring 2002 (IT0205101N), although dialogue between government and social partners resumed at the end of May (IT0206102N), albeit with splits with the union ranks (it seems that the government will be able to find an agreement on its reforms with Cisl and Uil, despite Cgil opposition). One of the most controversial issues is the government's proposed reform of Article 18 of law 300/70 (the Workers' Statute). This Article provides for reinstatement of workers dismissed without 'just cause ' or 'justifiable reason ' and the government plans, for an experimental period, to replace reinstatement with financial compensation for certain groups of workers. According to the government and Confindustria, this would give greater flexibility to the labour market and increase employment, whereas the union confederations view it merely as a reduction of workers' protection.

Accordingly, Cgil's verdict on the 2002 NAP is highly critical. For Cgil, the NAP 2002 merely restates the government's labour market programme and is not, as it should be, a document which defines specific measures and policies to promote employment.

Cisl's criticisms of the 2002 NAP - alongside the procedural issues mentioned above - concern principally the Plan's analysis of 'atypical' work in Italy. The NAP concentrates on part-time and fixed-term contracts, while ignoring the increasingly widespread use of 'freelance work coordinated by an employer' (IT0011273F). Consideration of atypical work in all its forms would alter the NAP's assessment that there is insufficient flexibility in the Italian labour market, Cisl claims. Moreover, according to Cisl, the 2002 NAP does not spell out a strategy for the development of Southern Italy, where unemployment is particularly high.

Some of Cisl's criticisms of the 2002 NAP concern the perceived lack of a closer link between social policies and employment policies. Moreover, the NAP 2002 does not analyse the impact on employment of the measures introduced in recent years to promote equal opportunities and gender mainstreaming. Cgil has criticised the NAP's provisions on continuing training, in that it does not deal with implementation of funds for continuing training (IT0202103F), even though the relevant law on such funds dates back to 1997 (IT9702201F).

Bargaining

The 2002 Employment Guidelines promote collective bargaining in the areas of:

• improving the quality of work and employment (in general);

• modernising work organisation (guideline 13);

• lifelong learning in the context of competence and skill development in enterprises (guideline 15);

• 'active ageing' (guideline 3);

• strengthening equal opportunities for men and women (tackling the gender pay gap, desegregating the labour market, reconciling work and family/private life etc) (guidelines 16,17 and 18); and

• social integration by way of better access to the labour market for groups and individuals at risk or at a disadvantage, such as people from ethnic minorities, migrant workers, long-term unemployed people and people with disabilities (guideline 7).

Since November 2001 (when the 2002 Employment Guidelines were sent to the Member States), no important agreements have been reached in national sectoral bargaining in any of the areas listed. As mentioned above, the period since late 2001 has been marked by a resurgence of conflict following over the government's labour market reform proposals.

Commentary

Dialogue between the government and the social partners on the 2002 NAP 2002 was strongly influenced by the abovementioned conflict between the government and trade unions over labour market flexibility, which broke out in autumn 2001 (IT0201277F).

These events aside, opposing assessments of the NAP have been made by the social partners as regards both procedural aspects and content. Particularly strong dissatisfaction has been expressed by the Cgil, Cisl and Uil trade union confederations, which maintain that the preparation of the 2002 NAP saw the government strengthening its tendency to regard the NAP, not as a strategic document and as an opportunity to reflect carefully on labour market policies and monitor their results, but as a sort of formality.

Also at issue seems to be what is meant by 'social dialogue', with different interpretations given to it by the unions and the government. The first actions of the centre-right government marked a sharp break with the concertation approach that characterised, especially at particular junctures, Italian industrial relations during the 1990s. (Marco Trentini, Ires Lombardia)