Download article in original language : BE9907180FFR.DOC
The integrated police law adopted in December 1998, based on agreement between Belgium's main political parties, provides for the overhaul of the various law-and-order forces (the gendarmerie, criminal-investigation department and municipal police), establishing federal and local levels and defining a new unified statute for the entire force. Because of the importance of the issues at stake, the police reform has caused an unprecedented labour dispute during 1999 between police unions and the Interior Ministry, leading to a breakdown in negotiations and highlighting the complexity of police trade unionism in Belgium.
In August 1996, following the kidnapping and murders of several young girls, Belgium was in deep shock. Scrutinised by a parliamentary committee, the so-called "Dutroux affair" (named after the main accused) tragically highlighted the many flaws of the judicial and police institutions responsible for investigating the children's disappearance. In May 1998, in order to prevent a repetition of such a tragedy, eight political parties - from both the governing majority and the opposition - signed the "Octopus agreement" which defines a new integrated police force with a two-level structure, federal and local. The reform is designed to overhaul the various existing law-and-order forces: the gendarmerie (gendarmerie/rijkswacht), the criminal-investigation department (police judiciaire/gerechtelijke politie) and municipal police (police communale/gemeentepolitie). On 7 December 1998, parliament adopted the law establishing the basis for the new organisation of the police. An official working group has been created to draw up the measures to put the reform into effect, providing for unified statutes for the entire force - covering discipline, trade union matters, pay and administration. Integrating the different structures is not easy, as each force had its own system of training, ranks, promotion, pay and discipline which are the result of historical differences in their origin and structure.
Trade union reactions
While the trade unions are not against the principle of a new police system, they were very quick to express the dim view they take of the measures adopted by the government, even before negotiations between the social partners (unions and Interior Ministry) had even started. At the forefront of the protest is the socialist General Central of Public Services (Centrale Générale des Services Publics/Algemene Centrale der Openbare Diensten, CGSP/ACOD), which wants to be closely involved in this reform which affects 40,000 public servants. As early as mid-January 1999, this union criticised the perceived absence, on the part of the Interior Ministry, of dialogue with the trade unions in the drafting of the law and its implementing measures. It expressed particular concern regarding the lack of a debate on concrete ways of financing this reform - a fundamental element of the integrated statute - and criticised certain provisions, some of which have already been applied: harmonisation of pensions schemes and pay scales, harsher disciplinary rules, introduction of a single bargaining committee in the gendarmerie and limitation of the right to strike. However, measures adopted in the field of trade union rights include a provision with a positive repercussion for unions. A decree implementing the law gives all police officers the right to strike providing that a strict notice procedure is respected. Despite its constraining and restrictive elements, this provision, directly applicable to gendarmes, gives them for the first time since the force was first set up in 1796, a fundamental union right that other police forces already have.
In February 1999, speaking on behalf of gendarmerie, criminal-investigation and municipal police officers, CGSP/ACOD repeated its concerns regarding the absence of dialogue and certain provisions regarding discipline and union rights. After stormy pre-negotiations, the union decided - in an exceptional move - to give notice of a strike for the end of February. The anger amongst the police was such that - at least to start with - it caused most of the "traditional" unions (ie those affiliated to the main confederations) and occupational unions to mobilise in solidarity.
During the following weeks, the dispute worsened and the talks with the authorities were punctuated by union actions, including two major demonstrations. The first one took place on 26 February. Initiated by CGSP/ACOD, it brought together several unions, both traditional and occupational. Participants demonstrated against the new disciplinary statute which they considered unacceptable on several points, including the lack of appeal, sanctions through pay deductions and a disciplinary committee structure without union representation.
Staff representation
This action had little effect as the parliamentary special committee responsible for the police reform approved the bill with no major amendments. However, the dispute revealed details of police trade unionism that has proved to be, throughout the dispute, particularly complex and intertwined. To negotiate officially with the authorities and be part of the single bargaining committee as set up by the act of 7 December 1999, a trade union organisation must represent at least 10% of all police personnel (ie at least 4,000). Thus only traditional unions - CGSP/ACOD, the Public Services Christian Union (Centrale Chrétienne des Services Publics/Christelijke Centrale van de Openbare Diensten, CCSP/CCOD) and the Free Trade Union of Public Services (Syndicat libre de la Fonction Publique/Vrij Sindicaat voor het Openbaar Ambt, SLFP/VSOA) - were admitted to the negotiations. However, these unions have limited weight, because on the one hand the overall unionisation rate is fairly low (with fewer than 20,000 union members, or 50% of police officers), and on the other hand police unionisation hinges traditionally and for the most part on specific occupational unions. To obtain trade union representation and participate in the coming debates, five autonomous unions from the gendarmerie and the criminal-investigation and municipal police forces have thus set up Belgium's first occupational trade union federation, the Autonomous Union of Belgian Police Forces (Syndicat autonome des Polices Belges, SAPB). With a membership of between 6,000 and 8,000, it has become the largest police trade union. Its mission is not easy, as the differences between the interests of its various components will emerge when the pay and administrative statutes are negotiated. A particular problem is the integration of the criminal-investigation department and the gendarmerie's Surveillance and Research Brigades (Brigades de Surveillance et de Recherche, BSR), two traditional rivals which have similar functions. Objections raised by the gendarmes, who felt they had been slighted vis-à-vis criminal-investigation personnel, are proof of such conflicting interests.
Breakdown of talks
On 19 March, on the initiative of the National Union of Gendarmerie Officers (Syndicat National du Personnel de Gendarmerie) and with the support of other organisations, 7,000 gendarmes (one-third of the workforce) from throughout the country demonstrated against the pay and administrative statutes which they considered unfair in view, among other matters, of their training and specialisation. They rejected the entire police forces reform and demanded the definition of guidelines for a new statute before the general election on 13 June 1999. This initiative too had no effect and the demonstrators' demands were ignored.
In May, negotiations were broken off and postponed until after the elections. The same breakdown occurred at political level. In the middle of the electoral campaign, opposition parties broke with the Octopus agreement because, on the one hand, they claimed that they had not been accurately informed of the progress of the negotiations and also felt that the implementing decrees were in contradiction with the spirit and the wording of the law on the integrated police force. The setting up of a hierarchical link instead of a functional one between federal and local police forces tends to steer it towards a single police force, closer to the Interior Minister's preferences.
Commentary
Born out of a political agreement and developed in a hurry without real consultation of parties concerned, the police reform raises major issues concerning a unified statute and working conditions and the key question of funding, as well as the very identity of each force, linked to their respective histories. The exceptional dispute that it has provoked highlights the complexity of police trade unionism and the balance of power between and within the various components of the police forces. Those factors, to which must be added the alleged extreme rigidity and "authoritarianism" of the Interior Minister, did not contribute to the successful completion of the negotiations, which were finally suspended until the next legislative session. The next government team will certainly have its work cut out to find a statute that satisfies all parties. (Patricia Schmitz, Centre de Diffusion de la Culture Sanitaire, Institut de Sociologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles (CDCS-ULB))
Reference: "Les polices en Belgique : histoire socio-politique du système policier de 1794 à nos jours", L Van Outrive, Y Cartuyvels, P Ponsaers, Bruxelles, Éd. Vie Ouvrière (1991).