Download article in original language : NL0102125FNL.DOC
Despite repeated wildcat strikes, management and the largest trade unions at Dutch Railways (NS) reached an agreement on the company's reorganisation plan in late January 2001. The agreement has done little to quell labour unrest, while customers and the largest shareholder, the Dutch government, are widely dissatisfied with NS's policies and service. The problems are linked to the company's independent but not fully privatised position, a matter about which the Minister of Transport and the Lower House of parliament are growing increasingly sceptical. The privatisation procedure has been halted for the time being and the Minister is drawing up legislation to increase the government's power to ensure that NS realises its public objectives.
At the end of January 2001, an agreement was reached at Dutch Railways (Nederlandse Spoorwegen, NS) on the management's Destination Customer (Bestemming Klant) reorganisation plan (NL0010110N). The deal involved the three largest trade unions at NS - the transport unions affiliated to the Dutch Trade Union Federation (Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging, FNV) and the Christian Trade Union Federation (Christelijk Nationaal Vakverbond, CNV) and the independent railway workers' union (Federatieve Spoorweg Vakvereniging, FSV) - despite repeated wildcat strikes by rank-and-file groups known as personnel collectives (personeelskollectieven).
Following the deal, NS management may proceed with efforts to streamline the organisation. The controversial plan to assign many personnel to a fixed route has been slightly altered to offer employees at smaller stations more variety in work and routes. Given that the main trade unions had already agreed to the Destination Customer reorganisation plan in 1999, it was obvious from the start that the leeway in this latest round of negotiations would be slight. Destination Customer seeks to address the numerous complaints about NS, ranging from overcrowded trains during peak hours to delays (dissatisfaction with rail travel has spread across the entire national network) with fixed routes for staff seen as part of the solution. However, management has also readily admitted that the plan would also serve to suppress employee unrest by fettering activists to fixed routes and regions. Management has also emphasised its intention to bid for those unprofitable routes that are to be put up for sale (as already agreed on in Destination Customer), while the new agreement also provides that superfluous personnel will be offered different positions in the company.
Disgruntled customers and personnel
Minor and major grievances with the NS have arisen from all sides, and in December 2000, the Consumers' Association (Consumentenbond) circulated a petition of complaint among passengers. The major problems are delays and overcrowded trains, closely followed by lack of investment in new equipment and the role of the government. Critics argue that, as the sole shareholder, the state should ensure that NS continues to invest.
Grievances are also still being voiced by NS staff. For example, traffic controllers in the north-east of the country accuse the company of not adequately compensating them for longer travelling times and relocation costs (demands which the unions had included in the recent negotiations). Furthermore, wildcat strikes have continued to break out among personnel collectives, whose background lies in the history of disagreement between the three unions now acting in concert at the bargaining table - FNV, CNV and FSV. Conductors and engine drivers comprise the inner circle of these collectives, and their grievances are well known. In December 2000 they directed their objections at the NS management Christmas party, which was heralded as an occasion to toast the success of privatisation, but was widely deemed as grossly inappropriate at a time when employee and customer complaints were reaching epidemic levels.
Political displeasure
Although high levels of labour unrest among Dutch rail personnel has a long history (NL9712150F), circumstances have changed since the NS privatisation operation commenced in 1994 (TN0003402S). The plan was that a state-owned company was to become a private enterprise and that a monopoly was to give way to a competitive market situation. The NS is in the midst of this transition, but it is becoming increasing unclear whether its plans will stay on track or become derailed. In addition to customers and personnel, the Lower House of parliament is also disgruntled with NS and has ordered the Minister of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Tineke Netelenbos, to make demands on the company and provide a legal framework for its activities. As an expression of its dissatisfaction with NS, the Lower House has recently rejected a 10-year performance contract containing agreements on annual growth targets for passenger volume and punctuality - the NS must instead make do with a provisional extension of the current contract. The Lower House has also deferred the plan to privatise NS operational units such as Railnet, Railinfrabeheer and traffic control operations. A new contract for NS will go into effect only once the Lower House approves the new rail legislation it has called for. Finally, the Lower House is calling for an investigation into the reasons behind inadequate NS service provision.
The contracting-out of the high speed Amsterdam-Paris line in spring 2000 highlighted the fact that perceptions vary widely as to the boundaries between the authority of the Minister of Transport and that of NS management. Whereas the Minister stated that the NS was allowed only to bid for the Dutch part of the line, NS management submitted a bid for the entire line. The Minister said at the time that it should be determined quickly whether government regulations or the market should bind NS. The forthcoming new legislation will provide much needed transparency.
The Minister has indicated that, for her part, she wants once again to increase the state's role in NS operations. As the controlling shareholder, she wants to subject important strategic decisions, the annual accounts and the level of dividends to the Minister's approval. Ms Netelenbos believes that in its articles of association, NS Reizigers (NS's passenger transport arm) should explicitly state that the company will contribute towards resolving problems related to mobility. Representing the state as shareholder, she will check to determine whether NS meets external objectives of this nature. In so doing, the Minister will regain the level of control over NS policy relinquished due to privatisation. Since then, the NS has operated as a structured company in which two supervisory board members represent the government. These two members have had little influence, partially due to the fact that they were formally instructed to serve the interests of the company. The Minister hopes to give the general interest more weight by setting objectives, such as a commitment to resolving problems related to mobility, and then testing progress in meeting these objectives. Signing a performance contract - on maintaining unprofitable routes, for example - also fits in with this strategy, in which the government will more clearly assume the role of "commissioner".
The Minister has also guaranteed that no competitors will be granted access to the rail transport market for the time being, and has thus given management the green light to order extra trains. Up until now, the risk of competition had been seen as too great for such purchases to be made. The government has also promised that it will continue to be responsible for furnishing infrastructure, whilst NS will ensure that an adequate number of safe trains are in operation. The NS contribution towards infrastructure requested by the government was rescinded, based on the understanding that the company will invest in new trains.
Commentary
In early 2000, NS management indicated that NS privatisation was just around the corner: the government subsidy had been reduced and losses had given way to a net profit of NLG 250 million. One year later, there is instead widespread dissatisfaction with how the company operates. The question now is whether privatisation will ever come about. Management is floundering in a sea of uncertainty, and confusion prevails over whether the company is now headed towards becoming a private, profit-driven enterprise in a competitive market, or destined to remain a company that serves the public interest using public and private funding. En route to arriving at an answer during the privatisation phase, the Minister has pulled the "emergency brake "and taken the stance that the government will remain the sole commissioner of the NS monopoly. Further definition and consolidation of this approach could lead to results that will bring employees, customers and the government, and in the long run management, more satisfaction than the current state of indecision. (Marianne Grünell, HSI)