Controversy surrounds Spanish temporary workers in the Netherlands

Download article in original language : ES9710227NES.DOC

A Dutch temporary employment agency has contracted several hundred young people in Spain to perform temporary jobs in the Netherlands in the run-up to Christmas 1997. This has had repercussions on public opinion and amongst the social partners, not only because there are many thousands of unemployed people in the Netherlands but also because, according to some reports, these workers do not seem to have suitable working conditions.

A Dutch temporary employment agency has contracted several hundred young workers in Spain, through a similar Spanish company, for projects that may last from one to three months in the Christmas 1997 gift campaign. The news has concerned the Dutch trade unions and Parliament, and has confused public opinion which finds it hard to understand how workers can be brought from another country when there are 400,000 unemployed in the Netherlands (6% of the active population).

The contracting company points out that it has resorted to the Spanish job market after seeking in vain in the Netherlands and several other nearby countries (Germany, Belgium and the UK). The reason for this phenomenon is that in the Netherlands no one is apparently prepared to work for only little more than the minimum wage and on such short contracts. For unemployed Spanish young people, however, this salary (PTA 1,000 per hour) is far more than they could earn in their own country where they are accustomed to short-term contracts.

The agreed working conditions are nine hours per day, travelling expenses, board and lodging (in youth hostels) and PTA 1,000 gross per hour. The real conditions seem to be different. A large group returned after a week claiming that the conditions of accommodation and food were unacceptable, that the working day had been increased and could be 11 or 12 hours and that some had been forced to work in agricultural jobs for which they had not been contracted .

The alleged breach of contract had not been detected by the representatives of the Dutch trade union confederation, FNV, who visited the youths during the first few days and were satisfied with the working conditions and accommodation. The union is now returning to visit the workplaces. The Employment Service Bureau has also reacted, stating that though the conditions offered by the temporary employment agency are legal, it had acted rashly and failed to make a sufficient effort to seek workers domestically. In response to these problems, the contracting companies are thinking about negotiating the conditions with the workers .

At this moment there are some 400 "immigrant" workers, but a figure of 1,000 may be reached over the coming weeks. The most relevant point is that the "importing" company is thinking about repeating the operation for other types of jobs that are not popular amongst Dutch people, above all those in agriculture (such as harvesting flowers) with a very short season. According to some of these young people, this has already started to happen. If the subject is considered in these terms, it seems evident that a wider debate is necessary to take into account the conditions under which this labour mobility should take place so that it does not infringe labour rights.

Finally, certain aspects of the subject that do not fall strictly into the area of labour relations should also be considered. Many of the young people who have accepted the offer state that the operation attracted them not only for the money but also for the opportunity to get to know the Netherlands. This is similar to the case of thousands of young people from central and northern Europe who work in the Spanish tourist resorts in summer as waiters and guides or in other catering jobs.