The European Union's austerity measures and the dismantling of collective bargaining in a number of countries is unlawful, according to a professor at the University of Bremen.
The European Union’s austerity measures and the dismantling of collective bargaining in a number of countries is unlawful, according to a report by professor Andreas Fischer-Lescano of the University of Bremen in Germany.
The report, drawn up for the Austrian Trade Union Federation (ÖGB), the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), claims that the European Commission and the European Central Bank (because of their involvement in the troika) are breaching the primary law of the EU because the Treaty Of Lisbon (which provides the constitutional basis of the European Union) also includes the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
EU countries which approve of the Memoranda Of Understanding in the Governing Council of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) are bound to Fundamental and Human Rights, argues Professor Fischer-Lescano, who also says the crisis does not render EU law inoperative.
On a national level this approach was objected to by constitutional courts, Fischer-Lescano says, citing Portugal as an example. The European Parliament has to take action.
“Across Europe, trade unions have fought long and hard against austerity, and demand a fundamental political change of course,” says Bernhard Achitz, general secretary of the Austrian Trade Union Federation:
“From drastic cuts in social spending, restrictions on basic trade union rights, such as the actual abolishment of collective agreements, intervention in minimum wages and much more than that, we have enough.”
In order to substantiate the trade union’s argument, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), ÖGB, and the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour (AK) commissioned the legal opinion:
“The results are very clear. The socially unjust and economic unreasonably austerity of the EU must come to an immediate termination. It is bad for the people, bad for Europe and it is also unlawful,” said Achitz.
The report strengthens the claim of European trade unions for a fundamental change of course and a European investment plan, such as the one recently proposed by the ETUC, says Achitz:
“Investment in the welfare state and social services must take the place of short-sighted austerity policies, as well as the Charter of Fundamental Rights must no longer remain a paper tiger, it has to eventually be observed by the EU policy.
“Since the financial crisis started in 2008, member states have taken a number of measures to cut public spending and reduce budget deficits. These austerity measures have also targeted social rights and have led to a deregulation of national labour laws as well as the dismantling of collective bargaining systems”, says Veronica Nilson, Confederal Secretary of the ETUC.
“The situation is the worst in the programme countries where the troika has imposed far-reaching measures. They have imposed cuts in minimum wage, interfered with collective bargaining forcing collective bargaining to take place at company level.
“Professor Fischer-Lescano’s study strengthens our argument that we have to legally challenge the austerity measures. Trade unions have already had some success through the collective complaints procedure at the Council of Europe.”
45 Responses to “EU austerity and dismantling of collective bargaining ‘unlawful’”
LB
You haven’t. You can’t quote a figure from some time ago, 2010, and not include 3 1/2 years of the growth.
What’s a private pension got to do with the government’s pensions?
blarg1987
So everyone who goes on strike does so because they do not want to work?
I think you find people go on strike as a last resort when changes are imposed without negotiation not because they “don’t want to work”.
blarg1987
The flaming article was written in May 2012 and if you read it properly it refers to information released in April that year not in 2010!
So the article is 1 1/2 years old. Not 3 1/2 year old data.
Private pensions have nothing to do with goverment pensions, but it looks as though you include them in the 7000 billion but the article mentions that the 7000 billion is all pension obligations.
LB
This figure for the total liability includes private sector liabilities, which are less onerous on future generations because they are all funded. Private sector workplace pension schemes have total liabilities of £1.7 trillion, and this total is likely to decrease over time as so many private sector pension schemes have been closed to new entrants and stopped allowing further accrual by existing members. There is an additional £0.4 trillion worth of liabilities for individual private pensions, but these are also fully funded.
==============
Try reading the article. These are funded. ie. Liabilities = Assets. No issue.
The state’s pensions (CS and SP) are unfunded. No assets.
In calculating these figures, the ONS used a discount rate of 3% as mandated by Eurostat, the European statistics body.
==============
Ho hum. 3% growth rate on assets is the assumptions. Assets are zero. The usual bollox I’m afraid. It’s called basis risk, and its a clear sign of a fraud. They could assume they invested in Google stock, its got a higher return. With assets of zero, it still doesn’t affect the answer.
What they are doing is applying an asset rate to the liabilities. They are saying, look its a large answer but we made is smaller by assuming that the payouts shrink by 3% per year.
Given the payouts are the max of (inflation, 2.5%, wage inflation), the rate is positive not negative. They are under estimating by 5.5% per year.
=========
When is a liability not really a liability?
======
When they can’t pay it. That’s what they can’t quite bring themselves to say. They are going to f*ck the poor.
LB
Yep. And the solution is to get another job and screw the company that way.