Denmark's LO trade union confederation is set to return to a central position in Danish politics after 10 years of absence. Despite opposition and proposed amendments from major unions at its congress in October 1999, LO succeeded in having its welfare policy programme, "welfare requires commitment", adopted. Consequently, LO now has a mandate to enter direct political negotiations with the government concerning the shape of Denmark's future welfare society. The programme forms part of an LO strategy aimed at replacing the trade union movement's traditional defence of strict employee interests, with a more socially responsible approach.
After its congress in 1991, the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisationen i Danmark, LO) was arguably very near to seeing the end of its particular position in Danish society. The adoption of a new structure of bargaining cartels, bringing together its member unions within various sectors, laid the basis for the emergence of strong new bodies which could participate in industrial relations in place of LO. The fact that collective bargaining was to be conducted outside LO's control implied that the unions' umbrella organisation was to be run down. However, eight years' later, the LO congress held in Copenhagen on 24-29 October 1999 has changed this perspective (DK9911155N). The adoption of a resolution entitled "welfare requires commitment" has now provided LO with a political mandate to negotiate on behalf of the trade union movement with the government of the day, in matters relating to the future of the "welfare society".
Responsibility or defence of interests
In the programme adopted at the October conference, LO describes the "welfare society" as: one which "ensures the individual person a fundamental security and which offers the citizens a number of services which are important in their everyday life"; and as "not a accidental occurrence, but on the contrary the result of many years daily and political struggle in order to secure a good society to live in. The welfare society will never be a completed project. It has to be developed continuously and adjusted to the challenges and the ... problems it faces." In a forecast released by LO on the second day of the congress, it described the development of Denmark's economic policy over the coming four years as a choice between a "narrow defence of interests" or "social responsibility". If the trade union movement automatically leads a struggle in favour of narrow employee interests, the result, it is claimed, will be economic stagnation and tax increases. By contrast, a responsible "priority effort" will in the long run result in regulated growth and increased employment. "Welfare requires commitment" mentions matters such as outsourcing and user fees in public services positively, as useful tools for economic regulation.
Another central issue in the LO programme is the relationship between the labour market and the political system. A stronger collaboration between the two spheres can, according to LO, improve the "welfare society". The collaboration suggested by LO would be reflected in an improved division of labour. Politicians should continuously ensure the welfare effort in key areas such as sickness and health, children and older people, and education and social security. However, a much larger number of tasks have to be addressed in collaboration with the social partners, which will consequently take responsibility in order to maintain contact with their members, and accordingly a large proportion of citizens, in order to secure their democratic commitment.
Change of roles
The leadership's main opponent within LO on the question of the welfare policy has in recent years been the important General Workers' Union (Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark, SiD) which has acted very independently. In autumn 1998, SiD abandoned the agreement between LO and the Danish Employers' Confederation (Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, DA) on a new labour market reform, which reduced the maximum period of daily unemployment benefit and intensified the effort against unemployment (DK9810187F). Shortly afterwards, the SiD president Poul Erik Skov Christensen criticised the government's reform of the early retirement scheme (DK9812197F), which contributed to the Social Democratic Party's largest internal crisis in recent times. SiD seemed to be gaining a role as a political player, but events during the 1999 congress suggest that it has now lost out in this area to LO. The turning point for LO was the major dispute during collective bargaining in the private sector in spring 1998 (DK9805168F). This dispute created an unexpected possibility for LO to step back into the spotlight after 10 years of decentralised bargaining and, together with DA, to reach a responsible solution to the dispute. While this effort did not succeed, as the government intervened to end the dispute, the course of events showed the confederation in a more active role (DK9910151F).
LO made great efforts to take up the possibility offered to make an effective return to centre-stage. After the spring 1998 dispute, the confederation demanded a strengthening of tripartite negotiations with DA and the government. This resulted in the September 1998 labour market reform. At the same time, Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen had major problems in achieving the necessary support in his Social Democratic Party for his proposals on outsourcing public sector tasks. The scene was thus set for LO to emerge as a new player in the welfare policy area. LO therefore conducted a survey, distributing a thorough questionnaire to 3,000 respondents between the age of 18 and 66 years, supplemented with extensive interviews and dialogue meetings. The result was the welfare policy programme, "welfare requires commitment", which takes a less dogmatic attitude towards privatisation, outsourcing and user fees than has been usual in the Danish trade union movement. Even though the presidents of two major LO affiliates - Mr Skov Christensen of SiD and John Dahl of the Union of Commercial and Clerical Employees (Handels- og Kontorfunktionærernes Forbund, HK) - harshly attacked the proposal's statements on outsourcing and user fees, it was adopted at the congress. The opponents succeeded in having 45 amendments to the proposal adopted, and SiD proclaimed a victory in relation to the original wording of the text. However, Max Bæhring, president of another major LO union, the Danish Metalworkers' Union (Dansk Metalarbejderforbund), did not agree: "It was mostly rhetoric and small changes", he stated during the congress.
Commentary
LO's leadership has won the battle on drawing up the confederation's contribution to the debate on welfare policy, despite some setbacks. In future, LO's affiliated unions will have to commit themselves to a coherent programme which contains priorities in welfare and a responsibility to society and the economy as a whole. In tripartite negotiations with the employers and the government, LO will now be stronger - which may prove important when negotiations over a reform of adult education and further training (voksen- og efteruddannelsen, VEU) reach a conclusion in late 1999 (DK9910150F). Following the dispute in spring 1998, the political parties have shown an interest in the use of the labour market policy as a tool to control the course of trade conditions, and the politically strengthened LO can now emphasise the second main area of its new programme: "a stronger collaboration between the labour market and the political system can improve welfare society". Despite the leadership's victory, the programme was very close to bring defeated. If a proposal to reduce the status of the programme from a binding policy paper to a non-binding debate paper had been accepted at the LO congress, the leadership's strategy would have failed. Nevertheless, this did not occur; the adoption of the welfare programme became a historic victory, which brought LO - and president Hans Jensen personally - back to a role as central player in relation to trade unions, political authorities, members, and the public in general.
However, the day-to-day management team of LO cannot act as it pleases in future. It will still be necessary to ensure a mandate on specific issues from the executive committee, where the main affiliates have seats. LO's possibilities for influence are still dependent on ongoing support from the member organisations - if not, LO will not be able to prove that it is worthwhile to the political system to include the social partners in the drafting of reforms. The key outcome of the congress's adoption of the new welfare programme is that LO has obtained a right of political initiative which increases the room for manoeuvre. (Carsten Jørgensen, FAOS)