At the end of February 2007, towage workers at Smit Internationale resorted to strike action, demanding an 8% wage increase. The company’s management board and trade unions failed to reach agreement in the collective bargaining rounds. The trade unions’ demands are high because they believe that the employees should share in the company’s success. However, the management believes that it is already being sufficiently generous. The towage workers initiated strikes lasting several days at a time. In the third week of March, agreement was reached on a process of arbitration.
In late February 2007, towage workers at Smit Internationale came out on strike, demanding an 8% wage increase. The ultimatum deadline issued to Smit by the trade unions passed without the parties having reached agreement; Smit’s management board did not concede to the demands for a new collective agreement.
The unions proposed a one-year collective agreement allowing an 8% wage increase: two pay increases amounting to a total of 4% and two one-off bonus payments amounting to a further 4% or €2,000. Instead, Smit offered a pay increase of 4% a year over the duration of a two-year collective agreement, coupled with a one-off bonus of 4%.
However, the Allied Unions (FNV Bondgenoten) then stated that its demands were being exaggerated: it contended that the union actually demanded a wage increase of an average of 3%, while the remainder – more than half of the wage demand – was a one-off payment. In any case, the unions rejected Smit’s offer, arguing that it was made to look more generous than it actually was, and insisted that their supplementary demands be met. In response, the management board of Smit withdrew its offer, effectively grounding consultations on the new collective agreement.
Consequently, the towage workers initiated strikes lasting several days at a time; otherwise, the strike would have been ruled unlawful. Finally, in the third week of March, agreement was reached on a process of arbitration and all strikes were postponed.
The main stumbling block in the negotiations is the way in which the one-off bonus is to be paid. Duty rosters constitute a further source of disagreement. FNV Bondgenoten summed up the situation by explaining that the conflict was not so much a question of money, but rather of trust. The employees feel that they are considered troublesome and that cheaper foreign workers will replace them in time, as was the case in the company’s sea operations.
The negotiating trade unions – FNV Bondgenoten and the general trade union De Unie – estimate that their supplementary demands would cost Smit in the region of €300,000. Compared with a 2006 profit of €75 million, they argue that such an amount is negligible.
Disagreement has also arisen with regard to the level of flexibility that Smit wishes to implement in relation to duty rosters. As it is difficult to predict peaks in the workload, Smit would like to have swift access to more staff. To this end, the company wishes to roster everyone for a greater number of hours than they will actually work, and then reserve the right to decide at the last minute if the employees are in fact needed (NL0512101N). However, this would hugely disrupt the personal lives of the workforce.
The pension scheme has also changed, with the retirement age being increased from 61 to 63 years of age. In the absence of a transition scheme, 60-year-old employees were severely affected. For this reason, the trade unions are also calling for extra days off to be granted to older employees; the average age of ‘tug captains’ is 58 years.
Speaking on behalf of the management board at Smit, Ben Vree referred to a power struggle on the part of the unions. In his view, the attitude adopted by the unions is one of ‘ask and thou shall receive’.
In part, the history of Smit Internationale serves as a backdrop to the recent conflict. In contrast to a number of years ago when Smit was operating at a loss, the company has returned to profitability in recent years. While the company’s management is responsible for achieving this turnaround, so too are the employees who have also had to make financial sacrifices. Smit carries out a large proportion of towage services at the Port of Rotterdam. The company holds a market share of 70%, employing a workforce of about 240 people. Tug crews have been reduced from six to two members for each towage service. As a result, the workload has increased significantly, while a yield of 24% has been achieved at the same time. Employees now wish to share in the strong results achieved by Smit in 2006.
Marianne Grünell, Hugo Sinzheimer Institute (HSI)