Disputes over trade union recognition are getting out of hand. The most logical way to find out which trade union represents the majority of workers at a place of employment is simply to verify the paid-up union membership.
However, such logic does not appear to matter much in industrial relations as union rivalry is often preventing common sense from prevailing over union self-preservation.
Since this is not the first time union recognition issues have cropped up, it is high time the problem is resolved once and for all, not just to put industrial relations on sounder foundations but for the sake of the workers themselves.
To disputes involving route bus drivers and child carers, another arose last week, at the Freeport, where one of the unions involved, the General Workers’ Union, called industrial action.
The other unions involved in the disputes are the Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin and the Malta Union of Teachers. The Malta Employers’ Association said the escalating rivalry among trade unions is threatening the country’s economic stability.
“Companies are being made to suffer the consequences even when no dispute exist between them and the unions,” the MEA said.
When the economy is doing so well, it will be a pity if such disputes start to upset the applecart. The MEA has gone into the problem and proposed very pertinent amendments to the Employment and Industrial Relations Act to cover, among many other issues, union recognition.
It is suggesting a clear definition of a trade union member and of an employers’ association member; clearer obligations on unions and employer associations to maintain up-to-date records on paid-up memberships; and that greater power be given to, and obligations placed upon, the registrar of trade unions to inspect and verify records.
The association believes these amendments to the law would go a long way towards the settlement of issues over union recognition.
There is an urgent need to incorporate these amendments in the law to put a stop to the charades that characterise union recognition disputes.
The industrial action at the Freeport came in the wake of new contracts with two major shipping lines. According to the employers, the industrial action threatened to disrupt operations at the terminal during the initial and critical phase of the relationship between these companies and Malta Freeport.
Unless order is brought to this sphere of industrial relations, complications will make the rivalry among trade unions fiercer . There is no harm in having a keen union environment, but it is of no benefit to anyone when, in the words of the MEA such rivalry begins to destabilise industrial relations.
If, as the association is saying, rivalry over recognition is now harming competitiveness, and even threatening the country’s economic stability, then the minister responsible for industrial relations ought to stand up and take notice.
A claim that unions are ending up negotiating according to what competitor trade unions offer is most worrying.
Describing as alarming the fact that unions were today admitting that collective bargaining had become a matter of self–preservation, MEA president Arthur Muscat warned that the implication was that collective bargaining within the context of intense union rivalry could drive companies out of business.
Since this will be in no one’s interest, the government ought to lose no further time to step in and amend the industrial relations law accordingly. A reform of the law is long overdue.