International issues - Opinions

Here you find the approved, by the LO Executive Board, opinions and answers to the motions on international issues presented to the LO Congress 2008.


International issues - Opinions
Global

Motion 14:1

to urge members of the Swedish Riksdag, active in trade union issues, to submit a motion to the Riksdag that the National Swedish Pension Funds (AP-fonderna) (which in 2005 managed shares to a value of more than SEK 800,000 million) should expressly in their regulations be obliged to strive to secure that companies, in which they are shareholders, follow the eight ILO core labour standards;

to - jointly with other trade union organisations in Sweden - try to get employers’ organisations to agree that companies, in which AMF Pension, AFA and Alecta (joint companies for workers and employers) have shares (totally about SEK 850,000 million in 2005), should be urged to follow the eight ILO core labour standards;

to - through contacts with trade union organisations all over the world - take the initiative that the capital owned by wage earners should be used internationally to induce companies to follow the ILO core labour standards, indicated above.
____________________________________________________________

At the LO Congress in 2004, it was decided that LO should work for a broad debate to take place within the trade union movement concerning power over pension fund capital. In 2005 and in 2006 LO, together with its affiliates had a joint project (LO Ownership Power Project), which treated matters of the ownership responsibility of trade union organisations and how their ownership power should be used. The overall purpose with the project was to create a more coordinated trade union, social and ethical profile as regards the view on how joint investment capital should be controlled.

The project resulted in a final report “Responsibility and power of ownership”. This report was approved by the LO Executive Council on May 15, 2006. It was suggested in the report that the policy issues that the work resulted in should constitute the ethical investment guidelines of the LO and that these guidelines should be treated in a joint investment committee together with the national trade unions. The eight core labour standards concerning human rights in working life are the basis for the LO investment guidelines, which was once again established in this work.

As a result of the work, the president of the LO sent an open letter to the Minister of Finance in June 2007 with a demand that the Riksdag should decide on a framework for the ethical guidelines and ownership policy of the National Swedish Pension Funds. In November 2007, the Finance Department issued terms of reference to start an investigation on the guidelines of the National Swedish Pension Funds concerning environment and ethics, with the purpose of proposing changes in the present regulations. The terms of reference also contained the assignment to revise the LO proposal, under which the Riksdag should determine investment targeting as regards the environment and ethics, as a way to enhance public confidence in The National Swedish Pension Funds. The commission should present the result on November 28, 2008.

The LO has since earlier contributed to AMF Pension’s and AFA’s adoption of ethical investments rules demanding that companies, in which investments are being made, should respect the principles and rights of the eight core labour standards of the ILO. However, adopting investment rules is not enough, it is also necessary to pursue continuous active work to guarantee that these rules are applied in relevant cases. In Alecta LO has no representation, but there are trade unions affiliated to PTK (the Council for Negotiations and Co-operation) represented there. In this connection, it is worth reminding that LO, TCO and SACO, in accordance with an agreement on co-operation, signed earlier, concerning international trade union work, strive for joint approach and a similar way of acting in global trade union issues.

It was further suggested in the report that the work with a strengthened ethical policy should not only be a claim regarding own investments, but LO and its affiliates should also call for the Swedish trustees to follow this policy – especially when there is a trade union representation on the board.

In connection with its 100th anniversary in 1998, LO introduced the proposition that the wage-earners’ pension capital, not only in Sweden, but also globally, should be used as a means to press companies to respect universal human rights in working life, as they are stipulated by ILO. A joint committee was formed between ITUC, The International Trade Union Confederation, GUFs, the Global Union Federations and TUAC, the trade union advisory committee of OECD (home page: www. workerscapital.org).

This committee had two tasks: to secure that the democratic international trade union movement should within itself provide knowledge of the situation concerning workers’ capital, and to create an information flow on the web between trade unions in the world. The first task is realised in most parts.

The purpose of putting information on a trade union web site is to provide trade unions in the world with information on violation of human rights in working life. The aim is that the home page is used in an active way, both for giving information when violations take place and using the information, through a joint dialogue, in order to get the companies to improve, and if this does not work, last of all threatening to withdraw investments.

In 2008, it is 10 years since this work started. LO has, in the committee, proposed that this work should be evaluated and the meeting of the committee in 2008, hosted by the LO, should be dedicated to finding methods to make work more efficient, and by that produce a better result.

The LO Executive Council proposes that the LO Congress decides

to adopt motion 14.1, clauses 2 and 3, and

to consider that a response has been made to motion 14.1, clause 1.

Opinion

International issues
Europe
Referendum

Motion 14.2

that LO Sweden, on a broad scale, together with the Social Democrats, shall work for a referendum in Sweden concerning the Union Treaty.
____________________________________________________________

The proposal for a referendum concerning the new EU treaty was already dealt with at the LO Congress in 2004. The Congress decided to reject the proposal.

The discussion in 2004 concerned “the Constitutional Treaty” which had been drawn by the so-called EU Convent. As regards the contents, it is mainly the same proposal that the Heads of State and Government in the European Council have now given their support to. Some principal changes are that the EU Treaty will not be replaced by a new one but the changes will be incorporated into the existing treaties. The article regarding the flag, the hymn etc. disappeared. It is not written in the Treaty that the EU legislation is superior to national law. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, supported by the EU countries in the year 2000 as a solemn declaration, will even in the new treaty be binding, but it will not be incorporated in the Treaty in full.

The discussion within the Convent was by and large entirely open to a European debate. A special Convent with participants from the national parliaments had earlier only taken place when working on the Charter of Fundamental Rights. As the Heads of State and of Government in 2006, after the “no“ in France and in the Netherlands, again took up the discussion on the Treaty, it was done behind closed doors – there was no European debate concerning the issues discussed. The method is, to say the least, doubtful, but might have been necessary in order to produce political compromises. Hardly any of the issues discussed and resolved within the Convent was changed during these secret negotiations. This means that the issues have nevertheless been discussed publicly during the treatment within the Convent.

The LO gave a statement of opinion concerning the Convent proposal. One of the shortcomings that LO noticed was the fact that the demand for introducing the right to take international sympathy action into the Charter of Fundamental Rights had not been met. Furthermore, LO Sweden was of the opinion that the practice of the ILO should apply when interpreting core labour standards in working life. Among the advantages LO pointed out, inter alia, that EU is to be a social market economy, which provides the possibility of limiting the scope of the market forces in different contexts, that a new goal is introduced concerning full employment and that the position of the European social partners is reinforced.

The result of the proposal - that more decisions can be made with qualified majority - is necessary in an EU with 27 or more members. This is a crucial reason why European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), supported by LO Sweden, has since long demanded that more decisions, for instance on issues concerning environment and labour legislation should as a rule be made by qualified majority voting.

The greatest success was that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights shall be entered in the new Treaty. If this charter becomes binding, this means that in every activity the EU must consider the issue concerning fundamental rights, such as the right to take industrial action. The fly in the ointment is that this charter of rights does not expressly include the right to take international sympathy action. In the new proposal, instead of entering the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Treaty, a phrase has been included, that the Charter is binding for EU and for the member states when introducing EU rules. Legally speaking, this has the same effect. As ETUC at its Congress in Sevilla in 2007 discussed the change of the Treaty, the claim was raised that this charter of fundamental rights should be binding as a condition to accept a new Treaty. The European trade union movement supports the new proposal for a new Treaty, but at the same time strong criticism has been expressed towards Great Britain and Poland, allowed to make exceptions from the rule concerning a binding charter of rights. In the new proposal, there is an obvious improvement compared to the Constitutional Treaty, namely that the wordings on energy and climate, in the light of the discussions in recent years, are more far-reaching now.

The points of view of LO concerning the Constitutional Treaty are also applicable to the present proposal for a new EU Treaty. Nor the standpoint regarding the procedure, a decision of the Riksdag or a referendum, has been changed by the differences which exist between the two proposals for a Treaty. On the contrary, the formal, constitutional parts having decreased, the arguments for a referendum have become weaker. In a discussion concerning a referendum, it is also necessary to elucidate which alternatives exist. With an ever so large spreading of information you can hardly show the meaning of all the hundreds of changes in order for all voters to make their own assessment between the positive and negative before voting. Perhaps the most important remark still is that a “no” means a “yes” to everything in the existing Treaties.

Since the matter concerning a referendum or not is fundamentally the same as the one considered at the last LO Congress, we would like to quote what the then LO Executive Council wrote: “ Sweden is a parliamentary democracy in which citizens decide in general elections which political direction will be in charge of the country. The system is based on the fact that elected representatives in the Riksdag make crucial decisions and that they assume their responsibility face to face with the electors. In a few fundamental issues it is considered appropriate to consult the citizens in a referendum. This possibility has rarely been used up to now and during recent referendums the parties represented in the Riksdag have committed themselves to respect the outcome. The referendums have thereby in practice been decision-making.

In 1994 a referendum was organised on whether Sweden was to be member of the EU or not. The result was positive and Sweden is member since 1995. In the opinion of the Executive Council, there is nothing in the proposal for a new Treaty that differs fundamentally from what the referendum in 1994 was about.

The Executive Council therefore proposes to the Congress to decide to

reject motion 14.2.


International issues
Europe
Elections to the European Parliament

LO – Affiliates in cooperation, Section Trade union in society and politics - an
ideological trade union

pages 94-95

Motion 14.3

to diffuse explicit information regarding the election to the EU Parliament in 2009.
____________________________________________________________

Motion 14.3 states the very important proposal regarding explicit information to the members before the election to the European Parliament in 2009. In the three elections we have had up till now, participation rate has been 42, 38 and 37 per cent. Sweden, which normally has among the highest figures in the general elections, ends up in the group with the lowest participation in the election to the European Parliament. Insufficient and wrong information are two natural explanations to the low figures concerning participation rate in these elections. The interest from mass media is much lower and the election workers from the political parties are not as committed as in the general elections. The best way to increase interest and the participation in the elections must be to change contents of the information in order for the electors to understand what these elections are really about. What questions are decided on within the EU? Which political dividing lines are there between politicians in Brussels and those in Strasbourg?

During the election campaign before the election to the European Parliament in 2004,
the issue concerning the Directive on provision of services became an important election issue. The information concerning the Services Directive was not enough to “wake up” the electors. It turned out later on that the labour movement was successful in turning the threat that this draft Directive would have meant, into a success - a Directive which without side-effects on the situation of workers can be an advantage for service trading. The knowledge about this issue is more wide-spread than the issue was during the election campaign. Having an actual example on the importance of the right sort of members of the European Parliament makes arguing easier.

The Waxholm-Laval case was one more alarm to show the importance of the decisions within EU concerning the whole Swedish system of collective agreements and our trade union rights. It is both a question of implementing EU regulations in a correct way and a matter of making, through our representatives in the European Parliament, the EU regulations more easy to understand. The decisions of politicians must be made so clear that the real decision-making is not transferred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities. In the light of these examples it should be easier to get the sympathy of the workers for the importance of being devoted to EU matters. The election campaign in 2009 must be the first one before an election to the European Parliament where institutional issues are not predominant in the election debate. The election campaign should not be on the different ways of decision-making or on how EU is built up. It should be about the European Parliament and the questions to be settled there during the future term of office. Issues like employment, workers’ rights, working conditions, environment – in other words the social dimension.

The Congress report “LO - Affiliates in cooperation” also deals with trade union-political cooperation in Europe (pages 94-95). It describes, inter alia, trade union-political cooperation within the Nordic countries. This cooperation has existed for more than 120 years. Since the membership in the EU the direct cooperation with the social-democratic European parliamentarians has become more and more intensive. When it comes to the election campaign in 2009, the LO and the Social Democrats in cooperation with our European parliamentarians have launched the information on the election very early. A first issue of a common bulletin – Europe of Today - was published in the beginning of 2007 and the second issue in the beginning of 2008. This issue was linked to the consultation which European Social Democrats (ESP) had realized in order to obtain a social democratic program for the whole EU. The third issue is to be published in the beginning of 2009 and is planned to focus on an election manifesto.

The conditions to give information on the subject matters on the EU agenda are better now for the coming elections than before. The planning has started earlier and the material is already being produced. What still determines the result of the election campaign is how we succeed in engaging a sufficient number of election workers. It is important to make party and LO members understand that, faced with the coming election to the European Parliament, you work for our political ideas for exactly the same reasons as you work for our party before the general election. This is necessary in order to have more members in the European Parliament fighting for those issues, vital for workers.

The Executive Council therefore proposes to Congress to decide

to adopt pages 94-95 in the pamphlet “LO - Affiliates in cooperation”,

to adopt the clause on page 95 and

to adopt motion 14.3.



Opinion

International issues
Europe
Social charter

Motion 14.4

to carry through a European trade union appeal for a social charter, protected politically by a democracy based on trade union-political understanding and commitment.
____________________________________________________________

The wish of the submitter of the motion - that the trade union movement should launch an appeal for a social charter politically protected by a democracy based on a trade union-political understanding - has a very good purpose. To always fight for a Europe which is socially sustainable, is and must be our main task. LO has no problem in supporting an appeal for a social Europe. However, it is more difficult concerning an appeal for a social charter, since our opinion is that this does already exist, on one hand the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers from 1989, on the other - the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the proposed Lisbon Treaty, which (if the Treaty is adopted) will be binding. The fundamental social rights of workers are furthermore treated in the social chapter in the EU Treaty.

The struggle for full employment as well as advancing workers’ interests are the main tasks of the LO even in the European cooperation. The aim is to strengthen workers’ position on a labour market where we have the free movement of capital, labour, goods and services. Development of the European cooperation creates opportunities for peace, prosperity, a more equitable distribution and an equal society. The decreasing importance of borders confronts us with new challenges. In working life there exists an imbalance between capital and work, which contributes to unsafe employment and puts pressure on the wages and on the conditions of work. Investments, establishments, fusions and transfers of companies are often motivated by striving for attain competitive advantages by means of bad wage and working conditions. Sometimes this degenerates into dumping according to the labour law as well as socially. EU has a unique possibility of regulating the labour market through minimum labour standards, binding for all Member States.

It is therefore important that the trade union organisations have a strong commitment.
Effective European work can contribute to a Europe with more solidarity. Work must be based on the trade union task, but a wider perspective, that of society, is also important and the participation must increase at every level, on the central, regional and local levels.

The trade union issues have since long gained more scope in the work of the EU. The first time that the social partners are mentioned in the EU Treaty is in the so-called Standard Agreement from 1986. The demands for social rights grew stronger during the 1980s and at the ETUC Congress in Stockholm in 1988, the President of the European Commission, Jaques Delors promised to meet these demands.
The Commission formulated a special programme of action, the aim of which was to promote the social dimension. In 1989 the European Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers was adopted. In Maastricht a social protocol was annexed to the Treaty. Great Britain had no part in it. Not until the next revision of the Treaty in Amsterdam in 1996, as Great Britain had a Labour government, could this be introduced in the Treaty and thus become legally binding. In the Treaty you can now read that EU shall promote employment, improve living and working conditions, produce social protection, a dialogue between social partners and development of human resources in order to make possible a sustainable high rate of employment and to fight social exclusion.

The Treaty of Amsterdam maintains that the Commission is to consult the social
partners before presenting a proposal which concerns the labour market. The social partners have also been given the right to regulate different issues on the European level. This gives us important possibilities to influence decisions within the EU and the social partners have since then made use of this possibility to negotiate agreements. Up to now three agreements have been given the force of law by the EU and others have been negotiated as independent agreements between the parties.

If the new Lisbon Treaty is ratified, the Charter of Fundamental Rights will be binding, which is a great success that the LO has struggled for during many years.

To guarantee that the social dimension within EU will always be the main task of
the ETUC.

At the ETUC Congress in 2007 in Sevilla, it was decided that the ETUC should become more offensive, inter alia owing to the fact that many governments today question the social dimension in Europe. That was why the ETUC decided to launch an offensive on a wide front in certain areas. ETUC will work for a social European labour market with, inter alia, more and better jobs, full employment, European basic standards concerning working conditions, trade union rights, health and security, fight and reverse the increasing trend of insecure employments, have a campaign for increased minimum wages and real wages for the European workers, abolish the wage gap between women and men, create a stronger framework directive for information and consultation and co-decision, always promote equality, always fight racism, discrimination and xenophobia, launch a campaign for trade union rights and for the right to take cross-border sympathy action, win the debate concerning flexicurity, demand improvements of existing directives, such as the Directive on working time, the Directive on EWC (European Works Councils) and the Directive on Temporary Agency Work.

Whether the social dimension is to be fulfilled in a way which is acceptable for us depends also on the majority on the European governments, since it reflects which representatives have the majority in the Council of Ministers and who is chosen to the Commission. It is, besides, of extreme importance that the LO mobilizes in the run-up to the European Parliament elections in 2009 to ensure a European Parliament fighting for the issues of the workers.




In these circumstances, the LO Executive Council considers that another charter is not necessary. It is our own commitment that determines what the existing rules are to result in. The LO Executive Council therefore considers that a response has already been made to this part of the motion. To promote a policy for a social Europe is in line with the LO activities, especially in connection with the election to the European Parliament in 2009.

The LO Executive Council proposes that the Congress decides

to consider that a response has been made to motion 14.4.

Opinion


International issues
Europe
Turkey

Motion 14.5

to influence – through the ETUC, the European Commission and EU negotiators -
to explicitly call for the respect of fundamental human and trade union rights in the membership negotiations with Turkey;

to call on the Swedish government to demand that trade union rights should be a field of priority in all membership negotiations and that the legislation of candidate countries should be adapted to the Conventions and agreements on human and trade union rights, adopted at international level.
____________________________________________________________

In order to become member of the European Union, a candidate country must comply with the so-called Copenhagen criteria. These specify that a new member country must have a well-functioning market economy, be able to observe EU rules and legislation and, not the least, respect the democratic principles of the European Union implying stable institutions which guarantee democracy, law and order, human rights as well as the respect and protection of minorities.

The Commission negotiates with the candidate country, writes progress reports and monitors that the candidate country gradually fulfils all the Copenhagen criteria.

Turkey began its membership negotiations in October 2005. According to the reports from the Commission, the implementation work has been too irregular to be able to reach the status of member and has now ceased. Inter alia the Commission critisizes Turkey for shortcomings regarding the right to organise, the right to industrial action and the right to collective bargaining.

Turkey has ratified the eight ILO core labour standards concerning respect of freedom of association, the right to negotiate as well as combating child labour, slave labour and discrimination. However, in spite of the ratification of the conventions, there are - according to the ITUC’s report, written in 2007 before WTO’s examination of Turkey - deficiencies in the legislation concerning the right to organise, limitations of the right to take industrial action and the right to collective bargaining. Recurrent reports tell us about violation of trade union and human rights, which confirms the need of proactive work to see to it that these rights are obeyed.

Turkey must observe human and trade union rights in order to become member of the European Union. This is also underlined by the ETUC in its resolution, adopted by the ETUC Executive Committee in October 2004, and thereby adopted by the Turkish trade union central organisations as well as the LO. ETUC also emphasizes equality, working environment, discrimination and the role of the social partners in the labour market as issues which Turkey has to work further on.

At the ETUC Executive Committee meetings, the General Secretary gives ongoing reports on the current state of the membership negotiations between the EU and Turkey.

LO and TCO carry out jointly a trade union assistance project in Turkey to strengthen the Turkish trade union confederations, members of ETUC, so that they can work more efficiently for the respect of trade union rights on the national level. The ETUC has also planned a project in Turkey to strengthen the development of a Turkish tripartite social dialogue.

There is pressure on Turkey - from the EU as well as nationally within the country - to fulfil the requirements necessary for a membership in the EU, which include the demand for the respect of human and trade union rights.

The submitter of this motion distinctly points out in the second clause how important it is to call on the Swedish government to require that trade union rights should be an area of priority in all membership negotiations and that the legislation in the candidate countries should be adapted to conventions and agreements on human and trade union rights which are internationally adopted.

The LO Executive Council agrees to this proposal and LO has the intention to continue to work for trade union and human rights in the candidate countries and in the potential candidate countries. As LO takes part in consultations with the Ministries, a recurrent matter is the demand for trade union and human rights in the membership negotiations.

It is obvious that the most politically complicated part of the negotiations with future EU countries often consists of lack of respect for human and trade union rights. A coordinated and joint action by trade unions in the EU states is important, on a national level as well as on the European level, to maintain the Swedish government’s as well as other EU governments’ focus and demand for the respect of human and trade union rights in the future EU Member States.

LO will continue to call on the Swedish government to press for the priority of trade union rights in all membership negotiations and for the adaptation of the candidate countries’ legislation to the conventions and agreements on human and trade union rights, internationally adopted.

The LO Executive Council proposes that the Congress decides to

adopt motion 14.5.



Opinion

International issues
Europe
European recycling

Motion 14.6

that LO pushes for integrated European recycling systems
____________________________________________________________

Within EU there is a comprehensive strategy for counteracting waste products and recycling. The strategy is evaluated by different directives, inter alia by a framework directive on introducing the producer responsibility in different areas. This means that manufacturers and importers are responsible for collecting and handling waste products. A special directive regulates the recycling of electric and electronic products. The aim is to produce concrete goals for recycling for different groups of products, but collection and handling are, for practical reasons, based on national recycling systems.

Sweden has gradually developed the producer responsibility for different groups of products, which today means that producers and importers of electric equipment, cars, tyres, packages and paper have formed special material companies in order to manage the collection and recycling within their field of products. Sweden also acts for the development of systems, as uniform as possible, within EU to achieve a high degree of recycling. Even if, in technical sense, it is not yet a question of identical systems, the aim is that the requirements should facilitate cross-border recycling of products and packages. Handling requirements are to apply to all products within a field, no matter where they are manufactured. This is the current procedure e.g. as regards all electric and electronic products. It should be possible to continue this process within other areas. The National Board of Trade has for instance formulated a proposal for a co-ordinated deposit system of drink packages within EU.

LO has at several occasions emphasized a positive view concerning enhanced producer responsibility, but has at the same time expressed that working environment aspects have to be considered when giving final outline to the systems. Especially in Europe, the recycling systems have involved increased manual handling, where low-paid, often immigrant workers, have sorted waste products in extremely precarious environment. Such sorting procedure has to a certain extent occurred also in Sweden. According to what LO has learnt, some of the deficiencies have been rectified, but it is still important that the environmental issues are monitored in order to develop a widened and more uniform recycling in Sweden as well as in the rest of EU. Considering future priorities for LO activities, no new initiatives concerning EU activities in this issue are proposed.

The Executive Council proposes that Congress decides

to consider that a response has been made to motion 14.6.