The details of negotiation (enterprise, sector, or national and implementation should be left to the national level, given the significant, legitimate differences between the member states. But the directive should fix the general principles of job creation, measuring work time on a weekly basis [rather than annual averages], and limiting exceptions to the strictly necessary. e labour market its absence. At the EU's Luxembourg Employment Summit, ETUC once again bowed to the neoliberal policies of the European Commission and the EU Council of Ministers. In exchange, it received a little carrot - the promise of "social dialogue" with the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe, and the European Commission.
ETUC protests that it cannot go further than the national trade union leaders. Who have tried their best to block any spread of the French 35-hour "disease. National trade union leaders are frightened that this would undermine what is left of their "social co-ordination" with the employers and the government.
The 35 hour week will only be achieved in conditions favourable to workers, if there is a real struggle. The more active and combative sectors of the European trade unions are beginning to realise this opportunity. These could be the first signs of the development of a new alternative line for the labour movement
There have been demonstrations, congresses, declarations and even strikes in favour of the 35 hour week. But only touching a minority of workers, and without much contact between the various local initiatives.
What we need is a broad movement demanding a radical and generalised reduction in labour time, without loss of pay, with new jobs to absorb the hours "saved " and the conversion of part-time contracts into full-time for those who wish This would mean much less overtime, and legal guarantees on maximum overtime, and double pay for extra hours. There should be no "annualisation" of working time and no more "flexibility." Workers should be able to supervise the application of these reforms in their workplaces
The goal would be a "levelling up" of national norms, in a dynamic of progress.
German, French, or Italian advances on the 35-hour week should be generalised.
And so should Dutch and Swedish social security benefits for part-time workers.
Of course, raising these Europe-wide demands does not mean spreading the illusion that the European Commission and European Council, in their present form, and within the Maastricht straightjacket, could concede easily.
But without common demands, and mobilisation of the labour and social movements around themes like the reduction in work time, advances by the labour movement in each country will be partial and fragile. The single market will make it easier for employers and the state to oppose, and roll back gains at the national level. *
In the absence of this kind of movement, many workers have serious reservations about cuts in labour time. Most of the reduction in working hours since the early '80s has meant smaller salaries, and a terrible increase in the intensity of work. Men have been pushed to early retirement, and women obliged to accept part-time contracts. Productivity has increased dramatically, but the extra benefits have gone to shareholders, not workers.
With the balance of forces in their favour, and with generous state subsidies, many employers are imposing their own version of "labour market reform." The dramatic decline in social security contributions is threatening the whole social security system.
The violent opposition of French employers to the Jospin government's plan for a 35 hour week may provide the spark which inflames the workers' movement in that country.
While the left was warning that Jospin would try to back down from his promises, the employers launched a verbal war against the principle of Jospin's proposal, and sabotage against the timing of the reforms. The result was to unify different layers of workers, with different contractual status. The balance of forces has swung towards the
Neo-liberal economists say the solution to unemployment is to reduce budget deficits, interest rates and labour costs, so as to increase investments. We say the best solution is a rapid, sharp decline in working hours, without loss of pay. This would make it possible to re-absorb the mass of unemployed workers into the economy.
The bourgeoisie has always resented the "laziness" of the common folk. For them, our free time is a lost opportunity to exploit our labour power. For 150 years the length of the working week has been defined through class struggle. The same is true in 1998. *
Italy *