UGT takes cautious stance on proposed labour relations reform

The trade union confederation UGT presented in May 2008 a detailed analysis of the government proposals concerning the reform of labour relations, highlighting the positive and the negative aspects and presenting topics for further discussion. In UGT’s view, the government proposals concerning some issues are better than its previous White Paper recommendations. However, despite agreement with the government on several aspects, there are some measures with which UGT still disagrees.

The General Workers’ Union (União Geral de Trabalhadores, UGT) presented during May 2008 a number of reports analysing in detail the proposals presented by the government on the reform of labour relations (PT0805019I), which are being discussed at the Standing Commission for Social Concertation (Comissão Permanente de Concertação Social, CPCS). The assessment shows that with regard to some issues UGT considers that the government proposals are much better than its White Paper recommendations, issued at the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008 (PT0802029I; PT0802039I). However, despite the agreement on several issues, there are aspects where UGT still stands in opposition to the government proposals.

UGT considers the proposed measures on adaptability related to parental leave and vocational training to be very positive but has a more reserved position in relation to the proposals concerning working time flexibility.

UGT welcomes the fact that the government proposal favours collective bargaining as a means of promoting internal flexibility, therefore reconciling the interests of the company with those of the workers and professional life with family life. UGT highlights and welcomes the fact that the government has withdrawn the proposal in the White Paper of Labour Relations that envisaged individual flexibility through direct agreements between individual workers and employers, thus bypassing collective bargaining.  Nevertheless, UGT states that is necessary to strengthen the coverage of collective bargaining and ensure that independent and representative trade unions can carry out negotiations to assure effective working time regulation through collective agreements.

UGT welcomes also the fact that the government proposal does not include the White Paper recommendation to eliminate from the Labour Code (LC) the normal daily period of working time. In addition, UGT demands further clarification on the working time issues that should be addressed by the Labour Code, namely a definition of working time, daily and weekly periods of normal working time, minimum and maximum duration of night work, limits on supplementary work, minimum duration of rest time, exemptions, and a definition of adaptability.

In relation to the government’s ‘working hours account’ (banco de horas) proposal, UGT argues the exceptional and transitional nature of this measure must be made clear, as should the collective bargaining framework and it also argues that the measure must meet the personal needs of  workers. UGT also argues that ‘concentrated schedules’ (horários concentrados), need to be better clarified in order to avoid deregulation of working time, lower wages, and instability by increasing involuntary part-time working.

In relation to collective adaptability in the workplace, UGT argues that this concept should apply only to the organisation of working time¸ and be implemented through collective bargaining. Finally ,in relation to forms of compensation, UGT demands further clarification, stating that it should not be possible to award non-monetary compensation to workers on low incomes, and that the interests of the workers must prevail.

UGT is strongly against government proposals to withdraw from the Labour Code the provisions stipulating that a reduction in working hours cannot imply the reduction of wages (art. 168 LC).

In relation to the regulation of dismissals, UGT asks also for further clarification, stressing the following points:

• any simplification of the individual dismissals procedure must not undermine workers’ rights in terms of being able to prepare their defence effectively;

• a worker’s reintegration in their former workplace must prevail in the case of unfair dismissal;

• provisions in relation to dismissals for failure to adapt (Art. 405 LC) must be further discussed in order to protect workers’ employment rights, because it is not acceptable to simplify the regime eliminating the existing guarantees, as well as the creation of new forms of dismissal through the new concept proposed by the government of ‘later functional failure to adapt’ (inadaptação funcional superveniente).

In relation to the measures aimed at fighting labour market segmentation, UGT welcomes the government’s view that they should be linked to social protection and employment policy, but is in favour of further improvement in order to fight precarious work.

Finally, in the more specific domain of labour relations, UGT welcomes the government proposal concerning the revision of the Art. 4 LC defining the relation between law and collective agreements, but highlights the fact that issues other than those identified in the White Paper should be also defined as areas where collective agreements cannot set out less favourable rules than those defined by law. UGT makes also recommendations in relation to the validity and lapsing of collective agreements, representativeness criteria and their effects, trade union autonomy, and workplace negotiations.

Commentary

UGT’s cautious assessment and approach, highlighting the government’s steps to withdraw some of the more controversial proposals of the White Paper on Labour Relations, which UGT has clearly criticised before, might indicate that this trade union confederation has the expectation that it will be possible to reach a position where an agreement on the reform of labour relations can be concluded. Due to the strong and clear opposition of CGTP to the general framework, if the government really wants to reach an agreement with the trade unions before presenting a draft Bill to the parliament (where the Socialist Party has the absolute majority), the government might be well advised to take into consideration some of UGT’s main demands.

Maria da Paz Campos Lima, Dinâmia