Non-harmonised working conditions between different groups of workers resulted in industrial conflict at two large companies in Belgium – the energy supplier Eandis and the supermarket chain Carrefour – both of which have a strong trade union presence. The resulting court action renewed the debate about the rules of picketing in Belgium and has underlined the difference of opinion among the social partners in relation to the legal form and procedures of strike activity.
Background
The energy supplier Eandis and the supermarket chain Carrefour both have a strong trade union presence and long tradition of company bargaining. This has allowed the trade unions in both companies to bargain for additional company wage settlements alongside the sectoral minimum wage agreements. Although both companies are known for their favourable working conditions, the representative trade unions have been confronted with managerial initiatives seeking to circumvent these conditions.
In October 2008, matters came to a head in an open industrial conflict in both companies. Trade unions at Eandis sought to reverse a two-tier system of working conditions, agreed in 2002, when the electricity market was liberalised. At Carrefour, the unions rallied against an attempt by the management to open a new shop on the basis of the rules of another sectoral joint committee, which provided for far less favourable wages and working conditions. The strike action in these two companies also renewed the public debate on the rules of picketing.
Eandis dispute
Reversing a two-tier system
In the liberalised Belgian electricity and gas market, Eandis is responsible for managing the country’s energy supply network. At present, the company employs a total of 3,700 people.
On 25 October 2008, the trade unions at Eandis staged a strike in protest against the existing and persistently different working conditions and benefits available to workers – under the so-called two-tier labour relations regime.
In preparation for the liberalisation of the electricity and gas supply market, the social partners in the electricity sector agreed in 2002 to adopt a so-called two-tier system of labour conditions. Under this system, people already working in the sector would keep their wages and other provisions, which are considered as being among the most favourable in the Belgian economy. However, the workers hired after this time would start work on the basis of a different labour regime. The trade unions have always insisted that the new regime incorporates a 20% to 30% loss in earnings for the newly hired workers.
The sectoral bargaining round for 2007–2008 provided a new impetus for the trade unions to combat this two-tier system, as energy companies were generating high profits during this period. In particular, the socialist trade union Gazelco, which represents gas workers and electricians, campaigned against the existing two-tier system. However, no agreement could be reached, which resulted in a long process of negotiations with individual companies. Since this time – the spring of 2007 – the sector has witnessed regular industrial conflicts and strike actions. The Eandis strike marks the latest in this series of protests.
Significant wage gap
According to the trade unions, a third of Eandis’ workers are employed under the new labour conditions, while two thirds are still entitled to the previous regime of working conditions. This has caused a difference of up to 30% between the wages of workers recruited before 2002 and those of workers hired after 2002. Furthermore, the most recent collective agreement was perceived as unsatisfactory, as ‘old’ remuneration conditions were frozen in spite of a general sense of a decrease in purchasing power. Moreover, the evaluation and remuneration mechanisms were strongly criticised. As a spokesperson of the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (Confédération des Syndicats Chrétiens/Algemeen Christelijk Vakverbond, CSC/ACV) remarked: ‘The evaluation depends on the appreciation of your superior and its appraisal can be fatal. A small banal dispute with your superior can be sufficient for a negative assessment.’
Strike action ends in agreement
According to the trade unions, the strike was a major success. Staff at the Eandis branches in eastern Flanders, which includes the Melle headquarters, blocked access to its three company sites. The company’s management reacted to these measures by resorting to court action. Based on the right to work, the judge stipulated a penalty of €1,000 per hour of work and for each non-striker who would not be let through. Eandis management claimed its right to this judicial intervention because, according to them, less than 10% of the employees supported the trade union action.
After two weeks of action – which consisted of regular one-day strikes in consecutive establishments – a provisional agreement was reached between the unions and the employer. The press officer at Eandis referred to it as a ‘positive’ agreement, which included considerable efforts to improve purchasing power and to safeguard employment. The workers voted on the agreement in a referendum which was scheduled for 20 November.
Carrefour dispute on preventing a two-tier system
On 25 October – on the same day as the Eandis strike – industrial conflict at Carrefour escalated, as the trade unions intensified their protest action. The French international hypermarket chain employs about 16,500 people in Belgium. In total, six out of eight of its Belgian hypermarkets took part in the strike.
Variable working conditions
The reason for the social unrest was the establishment of a new Carrefour outlet in Bruges, where it is claimed that the employees will earn between 25% and 30% less compared with salaries paid in other Carrefour outlets. This is due to the fact that the workers in the Bruges outlet will have to work according to the labour regulations and wage settlement of another sectoral joint committee different to that of the other Carrefour personnel. Management insists that the outlet can be classified as belonging to the retail trade sector and that it is not a supermarket. The Bruges outlet is a small shop with Sunday opening hours and located in a tourist area. Traditionally, working conditions in small retail shops and supermarkets have been settled through bargaining in different sectoral joint committees. However, as supermarket chains like Carrefour are facing growing competition from large retail shops and are also losing customers and profits in Belgium, the management has been eager to circumvent this ‘cost’ problem.
Trade unions perceive this development as a threat to working conditions in the other Carrefour hypermarket establishments and announced that they would resist such a ‘dangerous precedent’. In the weeks following the announcement, some of Carrefour’s outlets were blocked and closed in protest each weekend throughout the whole country; the move was supported by both the Christian and socialist trade union confederation.
Company response to strike action
In response to the protest action, the executive board of the Carrefour group stated that the measures concerned only an isolated branch in Bruges and referred to the blocking of other hypermarkets with pickets as ‘unacceptable’. Furthermore, Carrefour highlighted that the majority of employees working at the new outlet in Bruges, about whom the conflict arose in the first place, rejected the strike action. In an attempt to thwart the strike, the executive board assured that it would do everything in its legal power to ensure access to customers and non-strikers to all hypermarkets. Police officers were also posted at the pickets to ensure that non-strikers were granted entrance.
Public debate on picketing rules
Trade unions at Eandis and at Carrefour in particular strongly criticised the moves to thwart their strike action. On each occasion, the management went to the courts, applying for temporary injunction procedures to curtail the picketing. In the Carrefour case, this action resulted in some disturbances and clashes when the police tried to prevent the blocking of shop entrances by the picketing strikers and trade union supporters. After a police officer outlined to the striking workers what restrictions they would have to abide by, some of the picketing strikers were taken away by the police in several locations when they refused to show their identification (ID) card.
For their part, the protesters claim that their fundamental right to organise a strike has been violated. The trade unions complained that, once again, the gentlemen’s agreement between the unions and employer organisations on the rules of striking, dating back to 2002, had been broken (BE0204301N). The employer side responded that, while they respected the right to strike, they would not condone organised blockades that prevent non-strikers from going to work. However, the trade unions argued that these kind of strong picketing methods are necessary; otherwise, employees could be threatened and punished individually, particularly in sectors such as retail trade, where a significant amount of precarious work exists.
Commentary
It seems that, in this period of deteriorating purchasing power, Belgian trade union rank-and-file members are also re-establishing or re-enforcing their solidarity in their wage demands. In the case of both Eandis and Carrefour, workers who had previously agreed on a two-tier system of working conditions – before and after 2002 in the case of Eandis and in relation to small and large outlets at Carrefour – are now organising strike action against such a system.
These strikes are part of a larger mobilisation wave in Belgian industrial relations at present, which has continuously underlined the difference of opinion among the social partners in relation to the legal form and procedures of strike activity. It remains to be seen how long it will take before the government is forced to intervene through appropriate legislation. Such intervention is likely to cause a significant difference of opinion on this matter in the current government coalition, which comprises christian-democratic, liberal and socialist factions.
Guy Van Gyes, Higher Institute for Labour Studies (HIVA), Catholic University of Leuven (KUL)