Download article in original language : BE0403302FFR.DOC
In February 2004, after lengthy negotiations, management and trade unions at Belgian Railways (SNCB/NMBS) concluded draft agreements on the social aspects of the company's modernisation plan and on its future structure. However, the issues of workers' geographical mobility, flexibility and retraining were not resolved and were referred to the railways joint committee. The talks should be completed by the end of June 2004.
In June 2003, Belgian Railways (Société Nationale des Chemins de fer Belges/Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen, SNCB/NMBS) announced a modernisation plan, 'Move 2007', whose aim is to put the debt-ridden publicly-owned company back on the path to financial equilibrium before taking it towards profitability. In October, two trade unions - the General Confederation of Public Services (Centrale Générale des Services Publics/Algemene Centrale der Openbare Diensten, CGSP/ACOD) affiliated to the Belgian General Federation of Labour (Fédération Générale du Travail de Belgique/Algemeen Belgisch Vakverbond, FGTB/ABVV), and CSC/ACV Transport and Communications (CSC/ACV-Transcom) affiliated to the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (Confédération des Syndicats Chrétiens/Algemeen Christelijk Vakverbond, CSC/ACV) - broke off talks over the restructuring plan (BE0311301N). They claimed that management was planning 5,828 redundancies, out of the total workforce of 41,000, by 2005. However, the SNCB/NMBS chief executive, Karel Vinck, referred not to redundancies but to a workforce reduction of 4,544 via 'natural wastage', early retirement and use of a 'time-credit' scheme over 2004-5.
Social dialogue at SNCB/NMBS resumed at the end of January 2004. By mid-February, the unions and management managed to draw up a 'protocol of social agreement', which was to be ratified by the unions' membership and the company board by mid-March. Under the deal, the company guarantees 38,000 of the 41,000 present jobs until 3 December 2005. This means a reduction of 3,000 jobs, distributed as follows: 1,000-1,300 leaving through natural wastage per year; and approximately 500 staff taking voluntary retirement per year, from the age of 55 for less qualified staff and from the age of 57 for those with higher qualifications. Furthermore, the figure of 38,000 includes approximately 900 new recruits, according to the unions. The latter are, however, sceptical with regard to the voluntary redundancies since they feel the terms may not be sufficiently attractive.
In an interview given to the La Libre Belgique newspaper (on 19 February), Mr Vinck stated that the deal was a 'soft solution' which takes advantage of demographic trends at the company. Whilst hoping that the planned results will be achieved, he insisted, however, that the situation will be reviewed at the end of 2005.
Despite this protocol agreement, there are still some stumbling blocks. Geographical mobility, increased flexibility of staff (particularly those working for the B-Cargo freight service) and the retraining and redeployment of some employees continue to be a problem. These three points were referred to the railways joint committee, which should come up with proposals by 1 June 2004.
New structure
Apart from the problem of workforce reduction, workers’ representatives at SNCB/NMBS feared that the Move 2007 plan might, in the light of EU market liberalisation measures, lead to the company being divided into two 'poles' (one to manage the infrastructure and the other the train operations) with the risk of introducing different employment conditions for the two. They wanted guarantees concerning the continued unified nature of bargaining/dialogue and of workers' employment status.
Some days after the protocol of social agreement was concluded, the minister with responsibility for SNCB/NMBS, Johan Vande Lanotte, announced that the future Belgian Railways would be composed of a holding company with two subsidiaries: a company to manage the infrastructure; and a train operating company responsible for transporting passengers and freight. According to journalistic sources, the holding company would have 1,500-2,000 staff and the rest of the personnel would be split between the infrastructure company (40% of the remaining staff) and the train operator (60%). The details of this new structure were attached to the social agreement and the minister confirmed that 'the agreement guarantees the unified nature of [workers'] status and the social dialogue and confirms that the state will assume the debt of EUR 7.4 billion in 2005'.
This structural reorganisation is linked to the Belgian state taking over 80% of the debt of SNCB/NMBS, with the latter retaining responsibility for the other 20% (EUR 2.5 billion). According to Professor Gathon, a lecturer in transport economics at the University of Liège, the state has made 'a political decision, in the proper sense of the term, by assuming the Belgian Railways debt'. On their side, the trade unions feel their claims have been met, both in terms of the unified nature of the rail workers’ employment status and that of bargaining and dialogue.
Final agreement by June 2004?
The union members' verdicts on the social agreement and the structural reforms are awaited at the time of writing. According to Jean-Louis Brasseur, general secretary of CGSP/ACOD, these two issues are 'inseparable for approval'. Furthermore, the joint committee has been assigned the task of putting forward a solution, by the beginning of June 2004, to the unresolved problems of mobility, flexibility and retraining. These three difficulties (major ones, according to the unions) appear to be the last obstacles on the way to a final 'global' agreement between the social partners on the Move 2007 plan by the end of June.
Commentary
The bargaining process at SNCB/NMBS confirms the strength of trade union representatives in the national railway company. The unions are continuing successfully to defend rail employment and its quality. For example, in the context of the future structure of SNCB/NMBS, they have obtained guarantees of the unified nature of the company, of bargaining/dialogue and above all of the employment status of staff.
The negotiation process also underlines the sensitivity which surrounds the communication of key figures. When the Move 2007 was announced, the unions feared the loss of 5,828 jobs. The company's chief executive set the record straight immediately, stating that 4,544 staff would be leaving, through natural wastage rather than forced redundancy. Some months later (in mid-February 2004), a deal was reached between the parties on 3,000 workers leaving through natural wastage between now and 31 December 2005.
The issues of mobility, flexibility and retraining have been referred to the joint committee. Officially aimed at the modernisation of public services, these critical points seem particularly sensitive, since they are likely to influence the quality of jobs available at SNCB/NMBS. Sending the problems back to the joint committee could be interpreted as perpetuating an incompatibility between two contradictory points of view. For the employers, modernisation implies the retraining and redeployment of employees as a function of the needs of the business within the European market, and assumes that geographical mobility and workers achieving the required standards are accepted. For the unions, modernisation should not entail flexibility in working conditions.
If negotiation implies concessions on the part of all participants, it would seem that the ball is now in the court of the unions and that they should carefully consider their position. How will their membership interpret the advances made in terms of securing the unified nature of employment status in the restructured SNCB/NMBS when concrete and sensitive points have not been settled? Behind these difficulties lies the necessity to answer the vexed question of 'surplus' personnel (estimated at 1,000 according to the La Libre Belgique newspaper on 26 February 2004) which is implied in this latest agreement. (Thibauld Moulaert, Institut des Sciences du Travail)