Download
1 / 17
180 likes | 343 Views
International Trade – What’s in it for the Trade Union ? The Case of Denmark and the European Union. What to tell – The case of Denmark and the European Union. LO – yes or no to EU-membership Capitalist or Social Europe ? The Trade union in Europe How did it go ?
E N D
International Trade – What’s in it for the Trade Union ? The Case of Denmark and the European Union
What to tell – The case of Denmark and the European Union • LO – yes or no to EU-membership • Capitalist or Social Europe ? • The Trade union in Europe • How did it go ? • New poor member states – Increasing poverty or more wealth ? • Greece, Portugal and Spain • The Eastern Europe • What can Central America learn
LO – yes or no to EU-membership • Investigation and decision • The Congress votes yes – but not with at big majority – Yes 524 – No 406 • What says the congress resolution: • That Denmark is a small Country and are fundamentally depended on foreign trade. • The raise in welfare is a result of international trade and the removal of trade barriers • Our aim is full employment and better work
LO – yes or no to EU-membership • The European Union will have major impact in Denmark wetter we are a member or not – therefore we shall seek influence and move Europe in our direction. • The struggle for better wages and working condition can not be secured in one country alone. It takes at close trade union cooperation across borders • That’s especially the case in multinational companies.
Capitalist or Social Europe ? • 99 percent capitalist • The Rome Treaty contained only a few articles about Social Policy. • The declaration of intend to improve working and living condition • The social Fond • The ones who wanted social policy did it only because they feared unfair competition. • It was only for the sake of the companies not the workers.
The Trade union in Europe • One of the demands in Denmark was to set up an European trade union, that could seek influence and represent the workers in the European Union. • The ETUC was founded in 1973. • Today it represent 60 billion workers in the EU. • The ETUC is today an integrated part of the social dimension in the EU
How did it go ? • Rights for cross boarder workers, so they don’t loose their rights when they work in another country (1960) • Equal work – equal pay (1970) • Working environment (1970 – 1980) • Help to poor countries (1980) • The Social Charter (1989) • Working time (1990)
How did it go ? • Influence in multinational companies (1990) • Charter on fundamental rights (2000) • Right to collective negotiation and agreements. • Small steps ahead –but no social union • The primary is economic integration the secondary is social harmonization • But we don’t want social harmonization
How did it go ? • Social harmonization is not always to the benefit of workers • Fear of the limbo effect – how low can you go • But harmonization on a top level will lead to lack of competitiveness in poor countries and high unemployment. • What we need is fundamental rights that can be developed in at national contest and that economic growth leads to a fair distribution of income and welfare.
New poor member states – Increasing poverty or more wealth ? • In the 1980’th tree new countries became member states in the EU. It was poor countries • The rich member states could fear unfair competition. And the new poor member states could fear for deregulation in social law and welfare rights. • How did it go ?
The Case of Greece, Portugal and Spain • GDP growth from 1985 to 1995 in the tree countries and Denmark. • Denmark: 39 percent • Greece: 56 percent • Portugal: 65 percent • Spain: 81 percent
The Case of Greece, Portugal and Spain • In 1986/2005 • Greece/Denmark 62/72 percent • Spain/Denmark 65/87 percent • Portugal/Denmark 50/61 percent • The tree countries are still less rich than Denmark. But they catch up.
The Eastern Europe • In 2004 10 new eastern European countries became members of the EU. • It’s to early to say how the will develop. But the have made a good start with rising GDP. • They seem to be at the same road as Greece, Portugal and Spain.
What can Central America learn ? • The Theory of international trade say that all will benefit from liberalization of international trade. • There is still no fundamental prove, that it always will be the case. • But one the other hand, there is no prove either that poor countries will always loose. • On the contrary - The case of Europe Shows that poor countries will benefit more than rich countries.
What can Central America learn ? • Liberalization is no guaranty for welfare but it is necessarily no threat either. • The bottom line is, that in most cases more free trade leads to more growth. More growth leads to more wealth. • But the distribution of income and the development of a welfare society is still a political struggle. And only strong unions win that struggle.
What can Central America learn ? • But one thing is true - with no growth, there is not any higher wealth and therefore nothing more to distribute among the workers • Free trade has come to stay – so the best the union can do is to make a strategy how to get the best out of it for the workers.
Conclusion • Free Trade agreements have come to stay • EU, WTO, NAFTA, Mercosur, DR-CAFTA, • ”To be or not to be” influenced by international trade is not the question. • The answer is – how do we get the most out of it !
