Contents
They are one of the cornerstones of industrial peace: collective labor agreements. But in order to be able to declare them mandatory for entire sectors, systematic tricks are used.
In Hochdorf (LU) there is a factory where hundreds of employees assemble windows every day: the window construction company 4B. “We are fighting for Switzerland as a place to work and want to defend this location, but we are in competition with foreign suppliers,” says CEO Jean-Marc Devaud.
The company is particularly concerned that it has to adhere to the carpenters’ collective labor agreement (GAV). «We are a company with over 700 employees and a turnover of CHF 200 million. This collective employment contract, on the other hand, is made for small businesses with five to ten people.»
Wage increases with the watering can
The minimum wage stipulated in the GAV is not a problem for the company. “In the case of a shortage of skilled workers, we would be ill-advised if we didn’t offer attractive conditions.”
A problem, however, are the wage increases according to the watering can principle, which the company is regularly forced to do because of the CLA. With the “already high wages, this eventually leads to a cost problem.”
The company, together with others, has therefore resisted the collective employment contract becoming generally binding – i.e. mandatory for the entire industry. Vain.
Unprotected by the law
The company was particularly struck by the fact that the law does not protect them. Because it states that the Federal Council can only declare collective labor agreements to be mandatory for an entire industry if at least half of the employers are in an association and half of the employees are in a union. The idea behind it: No minority should dictate working rules for an entire industry.
But that is exactly the case with carpenters. Not even a quarter (23.3 percent, see table) are members of a trade union.
Federal Council makes use of exemption
Although the law also states that “exceptionally” in “special circumstances” the 50 percent can be deviated from, but this exception has long since become the rule.
In three quarters of all industries with a generally binding CLA, a minority of employees dictate the working conditions, research by SRF shows. And the Federal Council turns a blind eye.
The State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (Seco), which processes the applications for the Federal Council, does not answer any questions, but writes: “The Federal Council bases the applications on the legal provisions, and these allow exceptional cases in practice.”
“Parliament demanded”
The unions emphasize that the law is 70 years old. “The world of work has changed massively. If you were driving around today in a car that was registered in 1950, you probably wouldn’t be driving as well. Rigidly interpreting the provisions today makes no sense, »says Nico Lutz, a member of the management of the Unia trade union. Because it is in the public interest to conclude CLA with minimum working conditions.
It is unpleasant when this provision is in the law, but in practice it is not fulfilled in three quarters of all cases.
For Kurt Pärli, professor of labor law at the University of Basel, the parliament is now called upon. “It is unpleasant when this provision is in the law, but in practice it is not fulfilled in three quarters of all cases – and to a considerable extent.”
Parliament would therefore either have to make clearer specifications as to when these exceptions may apply, or dispense with this condition altogether.