In order to reach an agreement with the EU, Switzerland should adopt its rules on issues such as social benefits and equal pay: this is what the trade unions are demanding. You feel that the Federal Council does not take you seriously.
From the point of view of the trade unions, Switzerland must continue to be able to freely decide on wage protection in construction and other sectors.
Is that okay? After the scandal surrounding the framework agreement, the Federal Council is preparing a fresh start with the EU. So far, however, much is suspiciously reminiscent of the negotiations that he broke off in 2021 after years of back and forth. Much of the same contention is at the center of the debate – from the role of the European Court of Justice in dispute resolution to wage protection. The EU’s reactions to the new proposals made by Switzerland have been deliberately defensive.
There are now bad signs to be seen domestically as well. One of the main opponents of the failed agreement, the Swiss Trade Union Confederation (SGB), spoke out on Friday. In a new one paper he shows how he imagines a solution. In a nutshell: Switzerland should adopt the rules of the EU on issues such as social benefits, temporary work and equal pay. On the other hand, it should remain tough on wage protection, as the trade unionists have always demanded.
“Wiped away and ignored”
At the same time as the paper was published, SGB chief economist Daniel Lampart sharply criticized the Federal Council in the CH Media newspapers. He quickly “wiped away and ignored” the unionists’ suggestions. According to Lampart, he caused considerable trouble in the ranks of the SGB. The relationship is already strained. The trade unions still think today that the middle-class majority in the Federal Council was willing to sacrifice wage protection.
When asked, Lampart emphasizes that his statements do not relate to the ongoing talks. These are taking place behind closed doors and so far everyone involved, from employers to unions, seems to be keeping to the agreed-upon silence. The discussions are intended to show the Federal Council which disputed issues might have potential for compromises domestically – and where it must demand exception clauses in any negotiations with the EU.
Rush restart?
Even if the trade unionists do not comment on the ongoing talks, their criticism reveals that they are dissatisfied with the practice facility. Lampart confirms this: “The Federal Council has missed an opportunity.” The SGB pointed out early on that a thorough analysis of all the interests of Switzerland and the EU was necessary before starting a new approach that revolved around the previous questions. There may be other issues that would have allowed for a broader negotiation approach. A conceivable topic from Lampart’s point of view would have been the regulation of the digital economy, where the EU is more restrictive than Switzerland.
The Federal Council wanted nothing to do with it. The same applies to the demands summarized in the paper published by the SGB on Friday. Accordingly, the lead justice department should have broadened the project, which examined the current regulatory differences between the EU and Switzerland. The trade unionists wanted EU decrees on social rights and labor market issues to be included.
The list ranges from regulations on health protection in the workplace to equal pay for women and men to the regulation of temporary work. The SGB argues that the adoption of such rules would not only improve the situation of local professionals, but also the integration of Switzerland into the EU internal market.
Switzerland should pay for cross-border commuters
Two questions in particular are explosive in terms of European policy. On the one hand, the SGB believes that in future, after losing a job, cross-border commuters should receive unemployment benefits from the state in which they worked and paid contributions. A reform along these lines is under discussion in the EU. For Switzerland, it would involve high additional costs. From the point of view of the SGB, a commitment in this matter could be politically helpful.
On the other hand, it is about an old bilateral issue: the Union Citizens Directive. Their adoption by Switzerland would mean, among other things, that immigrants from the EU would have easier access to social assistance and a permanent right to stay after losing their job. They would also be better protected from deportation.
In the paper, the SGB advocates adopting this guideline in principle. He only demands exceptions for two issues: it must be prevented that new loopholes for bogus self-employment and wage dumping arise as a result of the easing.
The EU only wants to allow temporary exceptions
When it comes to wage protection, on the other hand, the SGB remains in its previous position: Here it rejects a dynamic adoption of the law as well as a right of co-determination for the European Court of Justice. Due to the high wage level in this country, Switzerland must continue to be able to set its own rules in this area. On the other hand, the implementation is flexible, says Lampart: If there are actually problems in practice, they can be solved.
The EU, in turn, is also sticking to its previous positions. Your ambassador in Switzerland does not categorically rule out exception clauses, as he explained in an interview with the NZZ. However, these would have to be limited to specific problems and limited in time.
In view of the considerable differences and ambiguities, very different forecasts about the further course can be heard in Bern. According to reports, however, the Federal Council has decided to decide on the next steps in the summer. It takes a lot of imagination to come up with a solution that the unions would agree to.