A controversy over precarious work, a term generally used to describe non-standard employment, appears to be hotting up, with employers and unions trading charges and, at times, even challenges.

In the opinion of the director general of the Malta Employers’ Association, Joe Farrugia, “many public statements about employment conditions in Malta are being based on anecdotal evidence, rather than facts, and are generating an overreaction that is leading to unwarranted legislative measures”.

Are the unions overreacting in their fight against precarious work?

The General Workers’ Union, which has been very strong in its campaign to stamp out abuse in employment conditions, felt “disgusted” that the employers’ representative was, in its view, trying to play down the problem.

The Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin, too, has spoken against precarious work and Forum Unions Maltin goes even further, saying that precarious work is growing at an alarming rate and workers are afraid to speak up because they feared they would lose their jobs

Unions are specifically mentioning care workers as being among those being exploited by their employers. Forum, which is still being denied – unwisely and unjustifiably – a seat on the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development, brings up the case of ETC employees and, also, of security officers who, it claims, are being paid peanuts and whose dignity is being destroyed.

Also making a very strong impact is the case of workers who, according to the GWU, are paid the correct wage but are then asked to refund part of it when they cash the cheque. That would be shameful and disgraceful.

Before the controversy builds up even further, it would seem that the first logical step is for the unions to establish the size of the problem. Forum, for instance, would need to substantiate its claim that precarious work is growing at an alarming rate. It is understandable that it may be unable to divulge details of particular cases, for fear of doing harm to the employees concerned, but it could at least draw up a full report showing how and in which sectors workers were being mostly exploited.

Employers have criticised a legal notice regulating the use of self-employment. They believe that this has been issued at the insistence of the unions, which claim that a number of people are being taken on as self-employed even though they are working full time.

The trade unions are well within their competence to defend workers whom they believe are being exploited by their employers. They are, of course, also right in bringing the problem to the fore and to campaign for any irregularities to be checked.

However, times change and they have also to be mindful of the importance of flexible forms of employment in use today, as remarked so well by the MEA president, Joshua Zammit, in this newspaper.

This is how he put it: “In today’s society, different forms of employment relationships need to exist as the requirements of employers and employees are different to what existed in the past. The fact that things change and society develops seems to be a point the unions fail to understand”.

The International Labour Organisation itself admits that, although the term precarious work is coming into more common use at the international level, its definition remains vague and multi-faceted.

A rational approach has therefore to be taken in tackling the problem, allowing new forms of employment and, at the same time, ensuring that abuse and illegal practices are rigorously checked.