The domestic mission to save the bilaterals is in full swing. The first smoke signals can now be seen and those involved are relatively confident. The Federal Council will soon decide.
The protection of wages and working conditions remains one of the major construction sites in the relationship between Switzerland and the EU.
The Federal Council follows two tracks. At the same time, he is sounding out domestic and foreign policy on how the relationship crisis with the EU can be ended. The diplomats in Brussels are trying to find out whether there is enough scope for new negotiations. In Switzerland, several top-level talks with business, trade unions and the cantons have taken place behind closed doors.
There are first indications from the foreign policy front. The EU is currently showing toughness and insisting on old maximum demands. While she was occasionally willing to make permanent concessions in the negotiations about the failed framework agreement, she explains today that exceptions are only possible for a limited period of time. The rhetorical intransigence may, however, be justified by negotiation tactics.
Without exceptions to wage protection, it does not work
So far, hardly anything has leaked out of the domestic political talks. Only behind closed doors do those involved make assessments that show in which direction things could go. First finding: Your feedback is less pessimistic than you might expect. Nobody says there will definitely be a solution. But several participants describe the chances as at least intact.
Second insight: The trade unions continue to play a role that is as central as it is difficult. There is not even a hint of a willingness to compromise. They are open to responding to the concerns of foreign businesses in the implementation of wage protection. But they are fundamentally opposed to introducing institutional rules of the game in this area, as required by the EU. They neither want to accept a dynamic transfer of rights nor a settlement of disputes in which the European Court of Justice would play any role whatsoever.
With this attitude, there will be no solution with the EU: not only representatives of the economy see it that way, but also experts from the federal administration. In these circles, people are therefore working towards finding a solution that, if necessary, has a chance even against the resistance of the trade unions. This includes two elements: The EU should grant binding exception clauses for parts of today’s wage protection, for example for a shortened registration period. That should be possible, with the framework agreement the EU was willing to make such concessions to a very limited extent.
No more «pre-gifts»
The second part would be new: According to this plan, there needs to be a broad and clear commitment to wage protection in Germany, which employers in particular would also have to follow. The goal is a debate under new auspices. They want to make it clear that Switzerland could always expand the accompanying measures in the event of negative developments on the labor market – and would be willing to do so. According to experts, this is legally possible within the framework of EU rules; Apparently, higher sanctions or stricter requirements for subcontracting would be conceivable.
Politically, however, resistance is to be expected, at least from the SVP. The position of the trade associations is likely to be decisive. These are said to be ready to talk. What they oppose, however, are further “upfront gifts” to unions, having already supported the introduction of bridging benefits for older unemployed people in 2020.
The intention is clear: if wage protection can be secured in a credible manner, there is at least a chance that a new negotiation package could come through, even in the face of resistance from the trade unions. Whether a majority of the Federal Council would actually be willing to make such an attempt is another question. It would be a departure from the dogma that a contract with the EU has no chance if it is not only opposed by the SVP, which is against it anyway, but also by the left. Here it is very important which current will prevail in the split SP.
Diversionary tactics by the unions?
The union power play has already begun. Last week they accused the Federal Council of “wiping out and ignoring” their proposals. It was about issues such as minimum wages or equal pay. In Bundesbern, the intervention was noted with a mixture of displeasure and amusement.
The alleged suggestions are obvious diversionary tactics to conceal their own blockade. They have nothing to do with the market access agreements that are at stake in the talks with the EU. In addition, the Federal Council has certainly dealt with the concerns, such as answers to advances demonstrate.
More willingness to compromise in Bern
That leaves the second major issue: the Union Citizens’ Directive (UBRL), which Switzerland should adopt from the EU’s point of view. There are some indications here that Bern could make larger concessions than in the framework agreement. However, giving way in the neuralgic points is still categorically ruled out. These include issues of permanent residence, access to social assistance and the deportation of convicted criminals. Bern also wants to prevent wage protection from being undermined via UBRL.
How will Brussels react? If the EU insists that Switzerland, as a non-EU member, must adopt the entire concept of EU citizenship, it is hard to imagine that an agreement can be reached. From the Swiss point of view, the free movement of people should remain primarily limited to the labor market.
Overall, however, there is more willingness to talk in Bern than in the past. This also applies to a point outside of the UBRL: Today, citizens of the “old” EU countries receive the C permit after five years, but nationals of the “new” countries such as Poland or Romania only after ten. Ending this unequal treatment, which the EU finds difficult to accept, could be part of a new deal.
Not just “toads”
One might ask why Switzerland should be more accommodating to the EU on these points than it was in the framework agreement. There is primarily one reason to be heard here: if it succeeds in negotiating a larger package that also includes new agreements on topics such as electricity or health, Switzerland can make major concessions on other issues. The framework agreement has always suffered from the fact that, in the view of a large majority in the Federal Parliament, it only offered Switzerland “toads” and no tangible benefits.
Whether the second attempt to save the bilateral path will succeed remains to be seen. It is planned that the Federal Council will take stock of the two-pronged soundings in a closed session before the summer holidays and decide on how to proceed.