The 2008 reform of trade union representativeness has transformed the industrial relations landscape in France. A new study commissioned by the French government makes a first assessment of the reform’s impact. The aim of reducing the number of trade unions has not yet been achieved, although unions recognise that their representativeness is in danger. The increasing professionalisation of trade union work could also create a gulf between union leaders and ordinary employees.
Introduction
A report (in French) published in February 2011, and commissioned by the Ministry of Work, Employment and Health, examines the impact of the reform of representativeness in 2008 (FR0808039I) on industrial relations in 12 French companies.
It is inevitable that the trade unions considered representative will vary between companies and that the occupations of union members will not be the same. The report states:
Trade union pluralism is not necessarily the same from one establishment to another, and it can be restructured at various rates due to the electoral cycle not being harmonised at company or group level. This complexity generates a relative uncertainty, not only for the trade unions but also for human resource managers.
To be recognised as representative within a company, a trade union must achieve 10% of the votes in professional elections. Only if it achieves or surpasses this threshold can a union continue to participate in collective bargaining. The aim of the reform is to:
- strengthen the legitimacy of the role of trade unions and collective agreements;
- reduce the number of trade unions;
- create an environment in which unions have to either work cooperatively to strengthen their position or merge.
The study demonstrates that the reform’s aim to simplify the trade union landscape within companies has not been achieved because there are very few instances where the number of worker representatives has fallen or industrial relations within companies have become more straightforward.
Unions’ representativeness in danger
The study also looked at those unions that lost their representative status at the last professional elections. These unions are unable to designate workplace representatives or to influence negotiations; they either see their members move to another union or manage to maintain a local organisation under the status of ‘representative of the local union’ (RSS), granted by the law of 20 August 2008 to those unions that lose their representativeness.
According to the report, RSS status does not provide ‘a sufficiently solid base from which to maintain trade union activity’. This is because the loss of representative status brings with it a reduction in the means or resources granted to representative unions, including:
- less time paid for by the employer for representatives to be released to carry out trade union duties;
- loss of access to relevant information from the company;
- loss of allocated space on-site for trade union activities.
Growing professionalisation of trade union work
The study’s findings support the fears of those concerned about the increasing institutionalisation of trade unions in France. Indeed, the study reveals a growing centralisation of union expertise which encourages the ‘professionalisation’ of the work of trade unions. This tendency is primarily due to the increased expertise required to undertake trade union activities, and it could result in the emergence of a gap between ordinary employees and trade union leaders.
The greater emphasis given by the 2008 reform to the first round of professional elections, which determine a union’s representativeness, has modified the behaviour of employers. Thus, an agreement at company or establishment level is only valid if it is signed by one or more unions representing a total of 30% of votes cast in the first round of the election. In addition, an agreement cannot be opposed by unions representing less than 50% of the votes cast in the election.
An article (in French), in the daily newspaper Les Echos, comments that as a result of these new rules, it is ‘no longer a question [of the employer] relying on an agreement with the smaller, weaker, trade unions or employing openly anti-union strategies’. The new law forces companies to seek agreement from those unions achieving 30% of the total votes. This strengthens those unions able to reach this threshold.
Commentary
The progressive introduction of the 2008 law should ensure its implementation is smooth. The reform of representativeness has not so far caused a ‘big bang’ in the union world, with the accompanying harsh reality that those unions deemed less representative are eliminated. Nevertheless, the reform has profoundly modified industrial relations in France. The overall verdict will not be known until 2013 when, following the first complete cycle of professional elections, the Minister for Employment reveals the results of the next round of these elections at sectoral level. It is likely that certain trade unions will then be eliminated from the process of social dialogue on sectoral level and will be forced to merge or disappear.
Frederic TURLAN, HERA