Proposition 50K1435

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 19 décembre 1974 organisant les relations entre les autorités publiques et les syndicats des agents relevant de ces autorités et la loi du 1er septembre 1980 relative à l'octroi et au paiement d'une prime syndicale à certains membres du personnel du secteur public.

General information ¶

Submitted by

Groen Open Vld Vooruit PS | SP Ecolo MR Verhofstadt Ⅰ

Submission date

Oct. 9, 2001

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

civil service trade union trade union rights

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen Ecolo PS | SP Open Vld MR

Voted to reject

FN VB

Abstained from voting

CD&V LE

Party dissidents ¶

• Alfons Borginon (Open Vld) abstained from voting.
• Richard Fournaux (MR) abstained from voting.
• Karel Pinxten (Open Vld) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Nov. 22, 2001 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I refer to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, the PRL-FDF-MCC group is very pleased with the government’s proposal to amend the 1974 Law on Trade Unions in order to extend the conditions and criteria of representation in sector committees and special committees. In the current state of legislation, trade union organisations shall sit in these committees only if they reach 10% of the staff of all departments within the general committee concerned. by

The government’s will is to remove this threshold so that all organizations that sit in the general committees will now also sit in the sector committees and special committees. We fully support this initiative which, in our view, presents a double merit.

First, the proposed changes allow, even more than in the past, to take the interprofessional character of trade union organizations as a starting point for representation in sector committees and special committees. It is not about returning to the limitation of access to the negotiation and concertation committees, but rather to ensure that trade union organizations that negotiate certain measures with the authority in a general committee can also negotiate later when these measures must be executed for the staff of a ministry, a parastat or a municipality.

Secondly — why hide from it — this reform mainly concerns the free trade union of public service. Especially its affiliates will feel the change. They will finally see their claims defended under the same conditions and with the same privileges as those that have long been returned to their colleagues. It is healthy that the aspirations of the whole of the workers, all philosophical tendencies confused, can be relayed by the trade union organizations, in the same way and regardless of the place where a social debate is engaged, regardless of the theme or regardless of the importance of the theme that is treated there.

In this same logic, we welcome that the project also aims to treat trade union organisations equally in terms of granting a trade union premium. I insist in this regard on one question I raised in the committee: it is necessary to ensure that the 2001 trade union premiums are paid as early as 2002 and not in 2003 as announced. I think the 2002 budget can still be adjusted accordingly. In fact, it seems to me abnormal to force beneficiaries to wait two years to be reimbursed for a part of their contribution paid for this year.

The draft proposal is very technical. The draft aims not only to allow the liberal trade union to establish a number of consultative bodies within the public sector, but also to suspend funding through social premiums. Their

It is strange to hear from a liberal angle proclaiming how well it is that a trade union organization is recognised as an interlocutor without elections. I assumed that the liberal friends were out of the elections. Elections in the public sector for the consultative bodies have only taken place once. That was in 1955. Since then, this has never happened again. The consultative bodies are composed on the basis of the power ratio of the large interprofessional groups, in short, a kind of wet-fingerwork. Their

The liberal family could have taken an initiative in this area. It could have distinguished itself by bringing a little more democracy into the consultative bodies so that they can function efficiently instead of trying to obtain a fair equality for the related trade organization and thus pursue the self-interest. I find it strange that the PRL and the VLD, at the moment they are part of the majority, no longer question the trade union representation in the public sector and that they have put in question parity bodies composed by election.

I assume that the other trade union-linked parties of the majority but also of a certain opposition will support this draft. I regret that at a time when we are more than ever in need of a solid social consultation in the public sector, the trade union events are reserved only for those who have the power in this Parliament to have the appropriate laws passed. I also regret that the bodies are never composed through elections — directly or indirectly. I suspect that some liberal voters for this course of affairs will someday demand accountability from their party.

Mr. Pieters has pointed out that certain opposition parties will be pleased with this draft. This is not the case for the CD&Vfraction.

I would like to add to Mr. Pieters that this draft provided an opportunity to organize representativity in a more modern, more democratic and transparent way. This opportunity was not seized. The opportunity was missed. I had expected that the liberals, the great advocates when they were in the opposition of direct democracy, of civil democracy, of openness and transparency, would have seized this opportunity. However, I must state that once they are in power they want to obtain this representativity without having to prove any representation. If this design already has some merit, it has to do with rendering a number of administrative duties unnecessary such as meaningless counts that cost time, money and energy. Therefore, it is even more regrettable that these duties are replaced by a representativity that in some sectors and local governments will result in the liberal trade union, although it has no members, still being represented in the consultation. How this decision fits into the liberal program, in the former opposition language and in the 1999 election program, which emphasized that politics was too much under the curate of pressure groups, is a mystery to me. Their

I can only comment on the remarks of colleague Danny Pieters.

Mr. Speaker, did I correctly understand colleague Verherstraeten and is the CD&V prepared to end the system? This will also prevent large trade union organisations that do not have a representative at a certain level from participating in the consultation at the higher level.

Mr. Peterson, you take the words out of my mouth. It is evident that in this century, which has just begun, the representativity on the ground must be tested. This can only be done through social elections, as is the case in the private sector.