Five years after the ill-fated social pact discussion in 2004, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi has resuscitated the proposal while addressing the first annual general meeting of the FOR.U.M trade union grouping on 12 October 2009. CHARLOT ZAHRA interviewed CMTU President William Portelli, FOR.U.M. President John Bencini, MCCEI President Helga Ellul, GRTU Director-General Vince Farrugia and the MHRA about their assessment of the PM’s proposals and the lessons learnt from the previous social pact discussions, among other things
William Portelli, CMTU President: “MCESD should make this framework agreement as its own template for present and future debate driven by a dynamic and an effective social dialogue process”
Do you agree with the Prime Minister’s suggestion of a new social pact or not?
The Confederation of Malta Trade Unions (CMTU) is in a position to confirm that all Social Partners have already been engaged in the setting up of an economic and social framework of a ‘pact’ upon which all social partners have already reached consensus.
The Prime Minister’s “call” may have just come in time to sort out the details.
The report, which in my opinion has been ably compiled by Gordon Cordina with the guidance of MCESD chairman Sonny Portelli together with invaluable feedback from all stakeholders will definitely serve its very good purpose – that is for MCESD to make this framework agreement as its own template for present and future debate driven by a dynamic and an effective social dialogue process.
If yes, under which conditions would you accept a social pact?
CMTU is of the opinion that the MCESD should be the owner of this economic and social pact which should see equal and active participation by all stakeholders involved.
One of the main conditions to be set is that all discussions should be conducted within the context of sustainability.
Unless all stakeholders agree that sustainability is key to our present and future economic and social livelihood it will definitely not be worth the effort.
Another perspective that all stakeholders should acknowledge is that productivity and competitiveness should form the basis of any framework agreed to since this is the only way that we can enhance economic growth with the ultimate intention of creating new jobs.
This can be achieved by threading carefully on areas which are already productive and competitive while discuss measures as to how to incentivise and stimulate those areas which are lacking.
However, room for manoeuvre and a mature approach are expected so as to ensure good constructive and effective dialogue.
What lessons have been learnt from the last unsuccessful social pact?
In our national interest, all stakeholders should think more than twice and dig deep before anybody says no.
Long-term solutions are to be explored and not just seek short term results for the sake of an agreement. The only short–term solutions which we should expect are to immediately address vulnerable areas whether they bare economic or social.
What effective measures should be taken this time around to prevent another failure?
While a lot of work has already been done, all stakeholders are to commit themselves further to a consistent and a mature approach especially when debating the details of the measures themselves in the interests of the country.
Do you agree with those who say that the Government and the Opposition should be included in the social pact discussions to serve as guarantors of the agreement or not? Why?
Government has to be part of the discussion since it is the State which has to manage the business and it would be even better if the Opposition endorsed the pact. How this is done is something which politicians have to obviously agree upon.
Has the Government effectively made any specific proposals to the social partners following this announcement to push forward the social pact?
Forthcoming discussions at MCESD could reveal some ideas which the State is considering.
If yes, could you kindly state what type of proposals has the Government made in this respect?
Not applicable.
Should the MCESD used as the place where the discussions for the social pact, especially in view of the fact that the Forum Trade Unions’ grouping is not represented?
Do you agree with the inclusion of the FORUM trade unions in the MCESD or not? Why?
The CMTU has always insisted that any discussions on a framework agreement should be dealt with and owned by MCESD.
CMTU is not against the FORUM’s participation but has always made it clear even before FORUM was ever set up that prior to any inclusion, a review of the MCESD is to be conducted to ensure an effective modus operandi, especially when other organisations are also on the “waiting” and “wanting” list.
John Bencini, FOR.U.M. President: “You cannot have the GWU and CMTU taking an active part and participating in MCESD while the third confederation FOR.U.M representing 11 Unions is completely ignored”
Do you agree with the Prime Minister’s suggestion of a new social pact or not?
The Forum of Maltese Trade Unions (FOR.U.M) has already officially declared that it was backing calls for a fresh attempt to reach a social pact between the Government, Employers and Trade Unions.
Ironically this appeal was made by the Prime Minister during his address at the General Conference of the Forum of Unions held at the MUT premises on 28 October 2009, when for unknown reasons this third Confederation has absolutely no voice in the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development.
It will be almost impossible to reach an agreement if this situation continues to prevail.
You cannot have the GWU and CMTU taking an active part and participating in MCESD while the third confederation FOR.U.M representing 11 Unions is completely ignored.
This is not what Social Dialogue is all about. If the Opposition can be brought into this discussion and brought “on boat”, this, of course would be the ideal situation.
FOR.U.M has no idea whether Government has effectively made any specific proposals to the social partners following this announcement to push forward the social pact.
The FOR.U.M. of Maltese Trade Unions has, in fact, recently written a second letter to the MCESD Chairman and copied to the Prime Minister again requesting to be immediately admitted to form part of MCESD.
Five years ago, we very close to agreeing to a Social Pact. However at the end it looked like Government and employers were to carry a “kilo” while the brunt of the burden described as “two kilos” were to be carried by the workers. There was no level playing field.
The GWU strongly objected to the agreement while the MUMN and the MUT were rather skeptical.
Vince Farrugia, GRTU Director-General: “Another exercise will be as futile as the last one. What MCESD is doing now is following an alternative route which is less cumbersome”
Do you agree with the Prime Minister’s suggestion of a new social pact or not?
The social pact concept is taken from the experience of countries with traditional tri-partite national bargaining experience.
Malta does not have this experience and trade unions and employers have been found wonting when it comes to committing themselves over a span of years on important issues.
Another exercise will be as futile as the last one. What MCESD is doing now is following an alternative route which is less cumbersome.
If no, what alternative means of tri-partite discussions should be used instead?
What is currently going on makes a lot of sense as it gives the social partners the necessary experience and feedback.
What lessons have been learnt from the last unsuccessful social pact?
That we do not have what it takes to reach a successful social pact conclusion.
That some individual members of MCESD are perhaps still too politically committed to accept a contractual obligation irrespective of which Party is in Government.
What effective measures should be taken this time around to prevent another failure?
We should not waste our time on too ambitious targets.
Do you agree with those who say that the Government and the Opposition should be included in the social pact discussions to serve as guarantors of the agreement or not? Why?
Politicians have nothing to do with a social pact. A social pact or a diluted form of it is an agreement amongst social partners.
Political parties have Parliament and other fora where they dominate. Indeed I would say: “A la larga”
Has the Government effectively made any specific proposals to the social partners following this announcement to push forward the social pact?
No
Should the MCESD be used as the place where the discussions for the social pact, especially in view of the fact that the Forum Trade Unions’ grouping is not represented?
MCESD is at law the forum for all national tri-partite negotiations. No one should invent anything else. We already have too many institutions in Malta.
We should at all cost avoid inventing others simply to suite individuals who prefer to go in alone or go it their way.
Do you agree with the inclusion of the FORUM trade unions in the MCESD or not? Why?
MCESD is the Forum of Government, employers and trade unions. Employers associations and trade unions are equally represented.
If the trade union partners are now 4 and not 3, it is up to the trade union side to make way and offer a seat to the new family member and recognise him as family.
The issue would really be something that needs to be settled within the trade union ranks.
Helga Ellul, MCCEI President: “If we are clear on the goal and agree that each one of us, including Government, has to give up something, then we believe that this would be a worthwhile exercise”
Do you agree with the Prime Minister’s suggestion of a new social pact or not?
In principle, the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry (MCCEI) agrees with reviving the social pact discussions, in fact, we feel that through the discussions currently taking place at MCESD, in which we are participating fully, we have already made an effort towards this aim.
If yes, under which conditions would you accept a social pact?
In trying to achieve a Social Pact it is important that we are all aware of what the ultimate goal is – that the country continues to prosper and move forward.
If we are clear on the goal and agree that each one of us, including Government, has to give up something, then we believe that this would be a worthwhile exercise.
Surely, if this condition is respected could a Social Pact be sustainable and to the socio-economic benefit of the country, hence acceptable to the Malta Chamber.
What lessons have been learnt from the last unsuccessful social pact?
The Malta Chamber firmly believes that social pact discussions should be carried out in an exhaustive manner, and should be managed by an objective time-line.
It is important that whoever is managing the process, be it Government or be it MCESD, creates the right conditions for such sensitive discussions to take place.
Having said that, at the end of the day it all depends on the collective will to achieve a successful conclusion.
What effective measures should be taken this time around to prevent another failure?
Adding to that said previously, the Malta Chamber believes that the most important factor to avoid failure is to arrive at a result that is balanced for all parties, and sustainable for the country to carry forward into the foreseeable future.
There should be no winners or losers. We either all win or else we all fail.
Do you agree with those who say that the Government and the Opposition should be included in the social pact discussions to serve as guarantors of the agreement or not? Why?
The Malta Chamber feels that Government must be involved, as one of the Social Partners. It would be beneficial from the political sustainability point of view for the Opposition declare its position, in the interest of political sustainability, without running the risk of politicising the talks.
Has the Government effectively made any specific proposals to the social partners following this announcement to push forward the social pact?
An MCESD meeting has been scheduled for this week.
Should the MCESD used as the place where the discussions for the social pact, especially in view of the fact that the Forum Trade Unions’ grouping is not represented?
MCESD is established by law and has served well in the past, with a lot of good work coming out from its efforts, despite opposing arguments on various issues.
The aim of MCESD is to bring these various arguments together, and through constructive discussion, reach a balanced position. Thus, the Malta Chamber feels that MCESD is the best place for such discussions.
MHRA Council: “The current MCESD set up does not allow for proper decision making and even the consultative function of the body has been questioned”
Do you agree with the Prime Minister’s suggestion of a new social pact or not?
Yes the MHRA believes that a social pact would be beneficial for the island.
If yes, under which conditions would you accept a social pact?
The conditions would have to be discussed and agreed to by all parties concerned. They cannot be dictated by any one of the participating bodies.
MHRA would however make recommendations that are sustainable for all concerned over the long run.
If no, what alternative means of tri-partite discussions should be used instead?
The MHRA believes that a social pact between the parties concerned would be the best way forward.
The current MCESD set up does not allow for proper decision making and even the consultative function of the body has been questioned.
What lessons have been learnt from the last unsuccessful social pact?
The main lesson learned was that there should be an agreement on the principles before a great deal of time is wasted on the finite negotiations.
Last time around the concept was thrown out at the eleventh hour after a great deal of time was invested by all concerned.
What effective measures should be taken this time around to prevent another failure?
An agreement on the principles needs to be signed beforehand by all parties concerned.
If there isn’t the real goodwill to get a social pact agreed to then it is pointless wasting a great deal of time working on it.
Do you agree with those who say that the Government and the Opposition should be included in the social pact discussions to serve as guarantors of the agreement or not? Why?
The government, whoever holds office, have to be part of the agreement as one of the three parties involved.
Has the Government effectively made any specific proposals to the social partners following this announcement to push forward the social pact?
Not that we are aware of.
If yes, could you kindly state what type of proposals has the Government made in this respect?
Not applicable.
Should the MCESD used as the place where the discussions for the social pact, especially in view of the fact that the Forum Trade Unions’ grouping is not represented?
Yes. Anyone not represented at the MCESD can be involved through the publication of a white paper once the main structure of a pact is formulated.
Do you agree with the inclusion of the FORUM trade unions in the MCESD or not? Why?
No. The MCESD is already large to the extent that it doesn’t function. Including more bodies for the sake of it will render it even less effective than it is today, if that is at all possible.
