Conflict over Alitalia's suspension of flight attendant union's rights

Download article in original language : IT0509303FIT.DOC

In August 2005, Italy's Alitalia airline unilaterally suspended recognition of the trade union rights of Sult TA., the largest union representing flight assistants. Alitalia justified its action on the grounds that Sult had refrained from participating in negotiations on renewal of the company's collective agreement. The airline’s action sparked widespread debate on its legitimacy and provoked a 48-hour strike by Sult members. Mediation by the government failed to resolve the dispute, and the union announced a wave of industrial action, thereby threatening the viability of Alitalia’s financial recovery plan. The dispute is taking place amid a climate of increasing unlawful conflict in Italian essential public services.

The most recent report by the Guarantee Commission (Commissione di Garanzia) - the body responsible for enforcing compliance with the law on strikes in essential public services (law no. 194/1990, amended by law no. 83/2000) (IT0004266F), which seeks to strike a balance between acquired rights (those of workers on strike) and constitutional rights (to life, education, mobility, security, health etc) - singles out air transport as the sector recording the highest level of industrial conflict in 2004.

The Italian air transport sector features many typical causes of industrial conflict, including: the troubled economic situation of Alitalia, Italy’s flagship airline (IT0404304F); a set of specific factors concerning services delivery; and a marked fragmentation of trade union representation.

As regards Alitalia’s situation in particular, the report stresses that after a period of industrial peace following a September 2004 deal on renewal of the collective agreement for pilots, ground staff and flight assistants (IT0410104F), and after a memorandum of understanding signed in October 2004 by the government, the Prime Minister, Alitalia and the trade unions (IT0410104F), in the early months of 2005 tension increased as negotiations proceeded on implementation of the September and October 2004 agreements, and as Alitalia attempted to regain efficiency by curbing costs (IT0504103N).

In the first four months of 2005, 61 strike announcements in air transport services were lodged with the Guarantee Commission. In more than 50% of these cases (33 announcements), the Commission reported breaches of the law. In 42 cases the strike was called off or postponed, while in 19 cases the strike went ahead. As regards flight attendants in particular, when presenting the Guarantee Commission’s report to the presidents of the two chambers of parliament, the Commission’s chair, Antonio Martone, said that strikes by this group on 10 February and 16 March 2005 exemplified how industrial action by just one category can have severe effects on an entire sector. In this case, a walk-out by less than 10% of the workers on duty led to the cancellation of more than 100 flights.

Sult’s union rights withdrawn

In this context, on 4 August 2005, Alitalia announced with immediate effect that it would no longer grant to the autonomous flight assistants trade union, the Unitary Union of Transport Workers - Air Transport (Sindacato Unitario Lavoratori dei Trasporti Trasporto Aereo, Sult TA), trade union rights under Title III of the Workers’ Statute (for example, the rights to organise employees’ meetings in the workplace, or special time off for workers representatives). Sult, to which 20.8% of unionised flight attendants belong (67.20% of the workforce is unionised), is the most representative union in the bargaining unit concerned. In response, Sult announced a 48-hour strike, which was initially scheduled for 30 and 31 August but then postponed until after the 'summer truce', to 6 and 7 September. Postponement of the strike gave the Minister of Welfare, Roberto Maroni, an opportunity to attempt mediation with the managing director of Alitalia, Giancarlo Cimoli, at a meeting held on 2 September in Rome.

Alitalia’s reasons

According to an Alitalia press release, Sult’s union rights had been suspended because of its refusal to participate in the process of renewal of collective agreements, which began with the signing of the 18 September 2004 agreement (IT0410104F), was followed by the accord of 5 October 2004 (IT0410104F), and concluded with an implementing agreement om 25 February 2005 (IT0504103N): 'After signing the first of these various agreements, SULT repeatedly refused to endorse the others.' Moreover, Alitalia argued, its action was justified by a judgment issued on 4 August 2004 by a Rome tribunal, which ruled that SULT was no longer considered a signatory to the collective agreement for flight assistants.

Sult’s reasons

A statement issued by Sult maintained that, by signing the agreement of 18 September 2004, 'it had grudgingly endorsed a deal that severely penalised workers'. It had not signed the implementing agreements because it wanted 'to hold talks with Alitalia in order to reconcile increased productivity and savings, on the one hand, with acceptable working conditions, safety, and protection of cabin crews on the other'. With the support of another autonomous union also deprived of its union rights by Alitalia - Italian Flight Attendants Associated (Assistenti di Volo Italiani Associati, Avia), which represents 10.20% of unionised flight attendants - Sult considered Alitalia’s action to be in breach of Article 39 of the Italian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of trade union association.

Position of the union confederations

The sectoral trade union federations affiliated to the main confederations have not taken an official position on the Sult-Alitalia dispute, and any opinions expressed reflect those of their various internal factions. However, the general secretary of the Italian General Confederation of Labour (Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro, Cgil), Guglielmo Epifani, has described the decision to suspend Sult’s union rights as 'illogical', given that it was taken the day before the beginning of the summer truce on strikes in air transport. Nevertheless, he added that by refusing to take part in negotiations, Sult had shifted the burden of Alitalia’s financial recovery onto others unions: 'I am well aware of the hardships suffered by the flight attendants, and I think that in the past months the company has made mistakes with its shiftwork policy, but it is one thing to represent these issues, quite another to stand back.'

Government’s position

The Minister of Welfare, Mr Maroni, a Northern League (Lega Nord) deputy, has sided with Sult, declaring that if conflict internal to Alitalia is increasing and damaging the company, this is due to the company’s refusal to talk to a union representing many flight attendants. Alitalia’s decision, the minister continued, was 'inopportune and discriminatory'. He sought to mediate between the parties at a meeting held in Rome in early September. However, after Mr Cimoli confirmed Alitalia’s decision, the attempt failed.

Other initiatives have been taken by the Minister of Infrastructures and Transport, Pietro Lunardi. Following a ruling by the Guarantee Commission that the strikes of 6 and 7 September were unlawful (because they did not comply with the rule that there must be an interval of at least 20 days between distinct strike actions), Mr Lunardi served writs ordering the strikers to return to work, in order to prevent 'grave and irreparable harm to the constitutional right to free movement'.

The strike

Despite Minister Lunardi’s injunction, Sult decided to go ahead with the strike on the planned dates of 6-7 September. It therefore incurred a fine imposed by the Guarantee Commission amounting to between EUR 2,500 and EUR 25,000, while for individual workers the fine will be up to EUR 250. Following talks with the parliamentary majority and the government, the other organisation deprived of its union rights, Avia, decided to postpone its strike (of 24 hours’ duration) until 13 September.

According to Sult, its strike led to the cancellation of 90 flights over the two days, while Alitalia announced that only 80 out of the 940 flight attendants belonging to SULT had gone on strike.

Commentary

The absence of a law on trade union representation rights is highlighted by the latest Alitalia case. In Italy there are no criteria, either legislative or contractual, that clearly regulate access by trade unions to the rights laid down by the Workers’ Statute. Discussions have been in progress for some time on a law to regulate labour representation. A special committee created by the three main union confederations to find a joint solution to the problem (IT0412306F) had not managed to do so before the summer break.

The lack of such a law has evident effects in essential public services, where union fragmentation is at its highest. An extremely large number of autonomous unions assert their presence with highly aggressive bargaining strategies, hampering the concerted management of industrial relations in the sector.

Finally, the Sult affair has certainly not helped to ease Alitalia’s economic difficulties. According to statements by its leaders, Sult has no intention of accepting Alitalia’s decision on its rights, and even less will it subscribe to the company restructuring plan drawn up Mr Cimoli, which the other trade unions have signed. Sult has announced a strike-plagued autumn if Alitalia does not alter its stance. Given Sult’s importance in the bargaining unit, further exacerbation of the conflict may have major repercussions on the viability of Alitalia’s restructuring plan, thwarting the efforts made to date by all the actors involved (with the exception of Sult) to regain the competitiveness necessary to revive Alitalia. (Edoardo Della Torre, Ires Lombardia)