1) AGREEMENT ON NATIONAL AND PURCHASING POWER
The common platform of CGIL, CISL and UIL of May 2008 stated:
"national contract: its basic tasks - in a 'Optical
universal law - are the support and enhancement of purchasing power for all workers in each category
of a company and in all parts of the country (...). On the
economic need to recover the trust nature of inflation to refer to and secure the support of the salary of
credible criteria defined and shared in the field of real incomes policy.
It uses a concept of "realistically expected inflation", supported by officers
parameters of reference, at the level of Negotiable. Compared to the realization of any
inflation differentials are defined certain recovery mechanisms. "
The Agreement of April 15, signed by CISL, UIL, UGL and Confindustria says the other hand, compared to the calculation of inflation
:
"For the dynamics of the economic effects of national collective agreements
working class, the parties have identified a marker of growth of consumer prices for
three years - instead of the target inflation rate - in a new index
forecast made by the CPI (the consumer price index consumption within the European harmonized
Italy), ignoring the dynamics of energy prices
imported. index forecast will be processed by a third party
of recognized authority and reliability on the basis of a letter of appointment. The same subject
verify or check for possible differences between expected inflation
real and that actually observed, whereas the two indices also net
the dynamics of prices of goods imported energy. The assessment about the significance of any deviations
registratisi will be made by the Joint Committee established in
interconfederal.
Translated: If inflation (HICP is the only way to measure it) in 2010 will be 2% to 0.5%
which, however, tied to oil, gas, plastics, etc.. ( increases that workers will pay
obviously with the increase of petrol, heating, etc.. )
wage increases will be more than 1, 5%.
Also what is meant by "significance" of the deviations? What will be higher
0.3% / 0.4% as Confindustria says? That is, if the difference is only 0.1%
not retrieve it?
To keep the example above: inflation increases by 2% in 2010, but the increases of wages
can be a maximum of 1, 5% (because of the purification). Then a year later
(2011) we find that real inflation has been purified of '1.6%, but the difference is not significant
and then you can not recover anything (eventually loses 0.6%
its power of purchase).
wages with these mechanisms are still structurally lower inflation
real!
We would also like to recall that for an oil-importing countries (which is Italy
) any increase in crude oil, compared to a previous period (for example
2010 to 2009), generates imported inflation!
Someone has yet to explain, than the common platform where he
never spoke of "purification" of imported inflation for energy
Finally: the third person of recognized authority who will? It is proposed ISAE. But what is it?
ISAE is the Institute of Studies and Economic Analyses, established by Presidential Decree No. 374/98
been operating since January 1999 under the direction and supervision of the Ministry of Economy (ie the Government, the same as in
Document Economic and Financial Planning since 1993 indicates the index of "inflation
expected").
Moreover, the Agreement of April 15, signed by CISL, UIL, UGL and Confindustria
still reads: "In order to rule directly on the territory of crisis or business
to promote economic development and employment of ' area, national collective agreements
working class may allow within the territorial Associations between
industrial and regional structures and regional trade unions
the contract stipulating that are reached agreements to amend, in whole or in part, on a
experimental and temporary, single economic or regulatory institutions covered by national collective contract
working class ".
Translated: Every company under the pretext of preventing reductions in employment or with the excuse
to promote development, can apply for exemptions on both the salary (economic institutions) that
relation to working time rules, professional sull'inquadramento etc.. (
regulatory institutions).
will the jungle, with a rush to pay fewer workers (or reducing the protection
) from territory to territory, from company to company. Blackmailing workers (or agree to this waiver or
always find someone willing to do your job without ") and made
eliminating the function of the Collective Bargaining Agreement that is precisely to ensure minimum protection
same for everyone.
What does the exemption to the minimum contract (which is the minimum hourly wage) with the Fund
integration, solidarity contracts, etc.. just do not understand. As in the first
case we are talking about unemployment benefits, paid by the INPS, compared with less
amount of work in the second to work as before but with less money and less rights. Also
blackmail that would generate would be obvious and permanent, and if you accept a
time not to have more rights, then it will be difficult to win them back. Finally: we are not talking only
employment crisis, but also to promote the economic development of an area. There will be
race, in every province, to make arrangements increasingly bearish, with the excuse to create
work. Too bad that the risk is that when you create work dumped in an area of \u200b\u200b
country, another territory the work is lost!
If you think about it is what happens today with the relocation in Romania,
Tunisia, Albania. Instead of bringing there, in those countries, more rights and more salary approaching
our standards will never be the way to get us to their level?
Again we stress that the agreement provides
exactly the opposite of what the proposed unified platform in May 2008.
2) BILATERAL AGENCIES
Cgil As we are in favor of any type of joint bodies? NO, but this is not a
news.
For nearly 30 years the CGIL distinguishes between institutions that promote the bilateral negotiations and bilateral institutions
instead transform the union into a kind of public body. For
matter of justice and transparency.
We support a CRALT that works better and is closer to the members. It
defend the autonomy of the aims of the company that wants to make a sort of "armed wing" of
its suppliers. The defending because it is the fruit of Law 300 of 1970 (Statute of Workers' Rights
). We support
dell'Assilt and bilateral bodies for Integrative Health, because they ensure
(as opposed to private insurance) democracy, efficiency and because they meet the
workers and retirees. We defended ASSILT often alone, while others were silent.
And we will continue to defend it, trying to improve its services.
We are in favor of bilateral bodies for training, because training can
accompany the great transformations of the companies that try to agree with
agreements. We are not today. The ancestors of the Public for bilateral training are
old training centers for workers, invented by a "certain" Giuseppe Di Vittorio
... We do not support, however, bilateral bodies of that should handle the layoffs
or unemployment benefits. And this is nothing new.
We believe that if a worker loses his job or the company in crisis, must be accessed
to unemployment or layoff, regardless of whether it is writing to
a bilateral body (ie union) . It 'so far been a universal right,
must remain so. We are also opposed to the fact that both the mayor to directly manage the money
workers' layoffs: You arrive at the end of a paradox.
The more corporate crises, and redundancies are, the more gain in money and power
the Syndicate. The risks are obvious.
We are worried about all this insistence on bilateral bodies to manage the cash
integration: today we would not want anyone thinking that we would need much
more than in the past.
3) tax exoneration of the tax exemption on
PDR PDR finally. We thus agree that the PDR should
tax-free in July of 2007, all together - CGIL, CISL, UIL, Confindustria is
Government (the one at the time, who was the first to introduce the tax exemption of the Award of
Result) - signed an agreement interconfederal. The Prodi government made a mistake, however
(so much so that we threatened a general strike against yourself and always): EUR
few resources and many companies were left out.
If this government will find money and increase the audience of potential beneficiaries we will be happy
too. We have said and we repeat it. But not for lack of confidence, before
is better to see this money aside and then make any comment.
4) DEMOCRACY AND PARTICIPATION
A final thought: you may have different ideas, but you can not turn a blind eye
about what happened and what is written and signed ("singing card").
also should have compared the 3 and a half million workers who participated in the referendum called by the CGIL
.
A referendum - and nobody ever has the courage to answer - that we had proposed to
CISL and UIL to hold together, so as to give the last word for workers who are directly affected
.
CISL and UIL said no.
too easy to make agreements without feeling workers. Too easy to say but
of 20 million workers have not expressed ... It 's a bit the argument of the companies, when they say that the events of
CGIL, CISL and UIL, there are perhaps 10 000 Telecom workers
against the reorganization and then - because it showed the other 40 000 -
the company is right ...
Probably the difference between the trade unions CGIL and the other lies in this:
despite the divisions and tensions, we have sought
and always seek the maximum unity of the entire Union and all employees
people meditate, meditate
0 comments:
Post a Comment