Protests over fuel price rises

Download article in original language : FR0010197FFR.DOC

In September 2000, in the wake of major increases in fuel prices, a series of protest actions and demonstrations disrupted activity in a number of French industries, such as fishing, agriculture, road transport (goods haulage, coach operations and taxi services) and health (ambulance crews).

By September 2000, petrol prices had reached USD 30 a barrel, a level not witnessed since the early 1990s and the Gulf War. The price of a litre of fuel, which in France is raised by 70%-80% excise duties, rocketed over the same period. According to the Le Monde newspaper, a litre of "super 95" cost FRF 2.23 before taxes in mid-September, making it the third cheapest price in the EU. However, the consumer had to pay FRF 7.28 at the pump, making French fuel the fourth most expensive in the EU, with only Finland, the Netherlands and the UK having higher prices.

While this serious increase in "pump" prices for consumers was taking place, oil companies were amassing large profits. Total announced its mid-term figures at this time and its profits of FRF 22 billion represented a 165% increase compared with the previous year.

As in other EU countries (BE0010329F, ES0010217F and UK0010192N), the fuel price increases sparked protests in sectors such as fishing, agriculture, road transport (goods haulage, coach operations and taxi services) and health (ambulance crews). The many forms taken by the French protests and their durability can be explained by a number of factors. These include the incessant rise in fuel prices, combined with a heightened awareness of the proportion of the price accounted for by taxes, and aggravated in September by the announcements of the profits made by the big companies, including Total, a company that public opinion held responsible for the pollution of the Brittany coast in early 2000.

Sector-specific protests

As early as the end of August, fishing workers from various parts of the French coast were blockading the entrances to the major ports, thus disrupting all trade.

The fishing workers were joined in their anti-fuel price rise protests by farmers mobilised by their organisations - especially the National Federation of Farmers' Unions (Fédération nationale des syndicats d'exploitants agricoles, FNSEA) - and by employers in the road transport industry. In addition to the numerous road blocks on the main road networks, the protests were characterised by the blockading of the main fuel distribution centres.

Other occupational groups joined these protests and actions, including employers in coach companies and in the taxi trade, boat operators and ambulance crews.

The demands made by these various groups were mainly aimed at the reduction of taxes on different types of fuel, particularly the domestic tax on oil products (Taxe intérieure sur les produits pétroliers, TIPP), and in some cases, the reduction of social security contributions.

Although the protesters disrupted the country's economic activity and the lives of its inhabitants by causing a growing shortage of fuel in petrol stations, their actions, according to the various opinion polls carried out at the time, enjoyed a high degree of popularity.

The government response

Faced with this large-scale set of protests that were bringing the country to a standstill and spreading into neighbouring countries, yet remaining very popular with the public, the government adopted the strategy of giving each occupational group involved individual treatment. This exercise was made problematic by the differences in perception of the protests held by the various components of the governing coalition, split between parties concerned to remain in touch with public opinion (especially the Communist Party) and others more sensitive to the necessity for government stringency in order to remain on track to meet environmental objectives (the Greens).

At the end of August, the fishing workers obtained reductions in, and in some cases the removal of, social security contributions, as well as state subsidies to cover harbour charges.

Road haulage contractors and coach operators saw their TIPP reduced. Farmers will benefit from further tax exemptions on the fuel used in farming. Taxi companies and self-employed drivers were given permission to raise their prices by 4.5% from 15 October. Lastly, ambulance crews will have their "occupation tax" lowered from 2001.

All these measures, combined with other pressures, allowed a steady normalisation of the situation, despite the attempt by some road hauliers not satisfied with the deal struck in their industry to continue the protests and road blocks.

However, the results of the negotiations with the various occupational groups were read as signs of Prime Ministerial weakness by a number of commentators.

Union reactions

All the trade unions recognised the unhappy mood of public opinion on the issue of fuel price rises. By the use of various methods such as press releases, statements, and letters to the Prime Minister, they each put on the record that they felt fuel price rises were penalising those on the lowest incomes, especially employees.

Beyond this, the unions in each industry concerned made a point of making public their disagreement with the employers' calls for further action. The taxi drivers' unions affiliated to CFTC, CGT and CGT-FO stated that they would have nothing to do with the demonstrations planned by the employers in that sector.

However, it was in the road transport industry that the unions distanced themselves the most clearly from the actions organised by the industry's employers. In a press release dated 7 September 2000, the transport industry unions affiliated to CFDT, CFTC, CGT and CGT-FO and the independent National Federation of Long-Distance Drivers (Fédération nationale des chauffeurs routiers, FNCR) called on their members "not to take part in the protests of the industry's bosses". The road haulage trade unions then referred to their demands over working conditions, wages and welfare provision, demands which they maintained were mostly ignored by the industry's employers' associations. The transport industry section of the National Federation of Independent Unions (Union nationale des syndicats autonomes, UNSA) called for overdue constructive talks between employers and unions.

Tension within the employers' associations

Negotiations by the government with each industry's employers' associations highlighted the distinctive nature of the road transport sector. Three employers' associations in this industry took part in negotiations: the National Road Transport Federation (Fédération nationale du transport routier, FNTR); the National Federation of Automobile Road Haulage Operators' Unions (Union nationale des organisations syndicales des transporteurs routiers automobiles, UNOSTRA); and the Federation of French Transport and Logistics Companies (Fédération des entreprises de transport et logistique de France, TLF).

FNTR - a member of the Transport and Logistics Industry Liaison Committee (Comité de liaison des organisations professionnelles du transport et de la logistique) the transport sector body affiliated to the Movement of French Enterprises (Mouvement des entreprises de France, MEDEF) - claims to have 15,000 member companies of all sizes, accounting for around 225,000 employees. UNOSTRA states that it has 37,000 member companies, 95% of which are small and medium-sized firms with fewer than 50 staff, covering approximately 470,000 employees. TLF says that it has 4,500 member companies, mainly bigger firms, and covers 300,000 employees.

An agreement was reached by these three employers' associations and the Ministry of Transport on 6 September. The leaders of TLF called for an immediate return to work, while FNTR and UNOSTRA sought to make certain that their respective memberships were behind them. In fact, their members wanted to continue the protests. On 7 September, the MEDEF president, Ernest-Antoine Seillière, criticised those "sectors that want to take the law into their own hands by the use of illegal means," thus directly criticising MEDEF's member organisation, FNTR, and giving de facto backing to TLF.

Facing a government resolved to remain firm, and with no support from the other employers' associations, UNOSTRA and FNTR demonstrators decided to lift the blockades, and the situation was back to normal by 11 September.

FNTR has since expelled 16 département-level associations and at its 55th congress (held on 11-12 October 2000), voted unanimously to suspend payment of its 2001 membership contributions to MEDEF. However, there is soon to be a meeting between FNTR and MEDEF leaders.

Commentary

September's protests highlighted the unpopularity of excise duties on fuel, even as the government was pushing ahead with an overall package of tax reductions. Moreover, the protests were another manifestation of the absence of genuine dialogue between employers and unions in the road haulage industry, this time especially relevant to the sector's employers. (Maurice Braud, IRES)