Elements of response with the researcher in labor law at UClouvain, François-Xavier Lievens, specialized in social consultation law.
François-Xavier Lievens, what do we celebrate just May 1? Work or unions?
Historically, it is the International Day of Workers’ Rights. But it is above all a moment of gathering, when workers make society, and which is celebrated by workers’ defense associations, various communist movements, but also political parties, for which May 1 is a symbolic moment when they come together. This is the case of course of the PS, the PTB, but also of the MR since 1985.
All three claim to be today as being all “the work party”. Are they really?
Let us say that the left will rather defend the rights of workers, while the right more defends the putting to work, flexibility in work.
We are talking about work here. However, we are just out of a general strike day. Social tension is particularly strong at the moment …
Certainly. In Belgium, we had not known such tension since 2014 and 2015 (and the beginnings of the Michel, editor’s note). What is happening today is a bit historical. Because it is not often that a government marked at this point on the right at the socio-economic level directs the country. The tension is very strong because the measures announced are particularly strong. The budgetary balance is supposed is only carried out by cuts in expenses and not by an increase in tax revenue. The cuts are therefore very strong. Socially, it’s quite impressive.
That’s to say?
Take the example of the limitation in the time of unemployment benefits, or the very clear will to individualize the responsibility of long -term patients when we do not ask the question of why these people are sick. There are also Flexi-Jobs, the extension of the working time of student jobs, volunteer overtime, the end of the end-of-career plans … We will preclude work.
This is precisely one of the arguments denounced by the unions, which demonstrate and organize strike movements regularly for months. They denounce in particular the lack of consultation of political power. What about?
It is clear that the principle of social consultation is not very present in the government agreement. It often appears there by delegation. For example, for the reintroduction of the trial period (rapid dismissal of new commitments for six months), the government requests that social interlocutors decide but already announces that it will take place at the end of 2025. The autonomy of the consultation is really undermined.
What is legally room for the government’s maneuver?
It has been understood that the government planned to make reforms without necessarily really concerting. In any case at the national level. For example, they want to review wage indexing. However, these are negotiations that are taken at the sectoral level. This is what explains that the situation and the rules may differ strongly from one sector to another. In the hierarchy of standards, a law is above collective work agreements. Legifer would therefore allow us to do without social consultation.
But does social concertation not be used above all to guarantee a form of social peace?
Of course. Especially since unions retain a significant weight in Belgium. To the point that we can talk to us about the neocorporatist system. This tradition is strongly established in Belgium. But the link that once unified political parties to a union tends to fade. Take the example of committed, the link with the CSC has been broken. And the MR and the CGSLB do not really have any links. Suddenly, we see that the parties of Arizona no longer have much regard for the intermediate bodies.
Is the survival of unions in danger?
Let’s say that their role is decreasing. The politician announces consulting, but ultimately does not really take into account the results of the consultation. In the text of the Government Agreement, there are also attacks against the right to strike, in particular via the desire to suppress spontaneous strikes, but also that manifestly of requisitioning certain workers for the establishment of a minimum service in the railways. Nothing is really clear.
“Unions must wonder about the best way to convince workers to mobilize”
So far, and despite their higher frequency than usual, unions have seem relatively well supported by the population. They therefore keep a significant weight within our society.
“Yes, it is true that polls seem to show that the population supports actions for the moment“, observes François-Xavier Lievens. But the nurse researcher:”We also note that the unions are struggling to convince new members“.
That said, “both at the CSC and at the FGTB, the two most powerful unions, there are still 1.5 million affiliates (The CGSLB, the third union, would have around 300,000, editor’s note). These unions remain important but are losing speed“. And add:”Between the unions and the government, it is also a struggle of stories. What company do we want? Unions must question the best way to convince workers to mobilize“.