|
31
March 2008
Following a debate at
the Executive Committee on 4 March in response to Laval, Viking
and other decisions expected in similar cases the ETUC passed
a resolution stating: “One thing is very clear: for the
ETUC and its members the outcome of these two cases represents
a major challenge. How to establish and defend labour standards
in an era of globalisation? And in these cases the ECJ does
not sufficiently recognise and allow trade unions to defend
their members and workers in general against social dumping,
to fight for equal treatment of migrant and local workers,
and to take action to improve living and working conditions
of workers across Europe.”
“The idea of social
Europe has taken a blow.” the resolution goes on “Put
simply, the action of employers using free movement as a pretext
for social dumping practices is resulting in unions having
to justify, ultimately to the courts, the actions they take
against those employers’ tactics. That is both wrong
and dangerous. Wrong because workers’ rights to equal
treatment in the host country should be the guiding principle.
Wrong because unions must be autonomous. And dangerous because
it reinforces critics of Europe who have long argued that
the single market would inevitably threaten social standards.”
It concludes: “It
has now become urgent for the ETUC to develop a joint and
coordinated strategy with its members to prevent conflicting
collective agreements in cross border situations and the potential
scope for abuses and manipulation arising from this…The
ETUC calls on the European authorities to recognise that these
cases are not solely about the models in Sweden and Denmark
but have European wide implications. We call for early action
to reassure unions that fundamental rights are not diminished
by the free movement provisions of Europe. Already some are
linking ratification of the EU Reform Treaty to correcting
these cases. The ETUC supports the EU Reform Treaty, and that’s
why urgent action is necessary. Because it would be naïve
of the European and national authorities to conclude that
these cases will not be increasingly in the minds of workers
and trade unions.” We will await developments with interest.
|
