Joe Farrugia: Wants measures to counterbalance leave for weekend public holidays. Photo: Jonathan Borg

The MEA proposed that a worker who calls in sick does not get paid for the first day of sick leave. Abuse was mentioned as the reason behind this idea. What kind of abuse are you talking about? Do you have statistics?

It is not just abuse that prompted the sick leave proposal but also the fact that the government is planning to introduce a range of measures that will result in a reduction in productive days. One of those measures is the introduction of leave to compensate for public holidays falling on weekends.

We are asking for a set of countermeasures to balance the negative impact of these added entitlements.

Regarding abuse, official statistics reveal that the number of sick days per person in the public sector is three times that in the private sector. Assuming that employees in the public sector share the same physiology as those in the private sector, it is not difficult to arrive at a conclusion as to why this is.

Even if this ratio were to be reduced to one is to two, through more efficient management in the public sector, the waiting day being claimed by MEA could be paid by the government without any negative impact on employees or government finances.

In addition, many employers in the private sector report an increase in the incidence of sick leave close to weekends and younger employees in some cases tending to take more sick leave than their older counterparts.

If someone is standing in the rain getting wet, it is pointless asking him about the number of millimetres of rainfall. Wet is wet.

When the economic situation was difficult, workers were asked to make sacrifices (like forfeiting public holidays falling on weekends). Now that the economy and business are doing well, can’t the favour be repaid? There is the perception that employers keep wanting more.

Entitlements are not favours, and any entitlement is only sustainable if does not harm competitiveness. This measure needs to be seen within the context that Maltese employees enjoy among the highest number of public holidays and optional leave days in the world.

Employers have not asked for more, as you say. They just wanted a status quo on this issue. It would be crazy to shift leave entitlements according to the economic trade cycle, assuming that the measure will be reversed in case of an economic downturn. We need fair entitlements and stability.

It is true that overall the economy is doing well, but that does not mean that all companies and all economic sectors are doing equally well. This is just a populist measure without any serious thinking behind it. MEA maintains that a countermeasure needs to be introduced to maintain the competitive equilibrium.

The idea has been floated that Malta needs to ‘import’ around 20,000 workers to keep up with the demand. What is the MEA’s position on this? Are you finding it difficult to employ locals or are have the Maltese become too picky with which jobs they would like to do?

There is certainly a labour market shortage which is being felt across all sectors and skill levels. The importation of 20,000 workers is more than an idea, it is a projection that reflects current economic realities.

On the other hand, there is a section of the Maltese labour force, particularly the low and semi-skilled, who would much rather take up a job in the public sector – even at lower wages – than to have a productive job in the private sector.

The wage structure of the public sector, which is compressed at a wage differential of four is to one between the highest and lowest paid categories, is resulting in an exodus and shortage of skilled jobs, such as teaching, and populist pressure to engage more unskilled people. Everyone knows what happened in Gozo.

The MEA has always said that precarious work was just a perception. But we hear stories of precarious work, verging on exploitation of workers. Do you see any of this?

Precarious work is a broad umbrella term that cannot generate meaningful discussion. There are atypical employment contracts, unethical work practices and illegal work practices. Exploitation generally consists of illegal practices and the MEA has always condemned this wherever it happens, and will continue to do so. We have always believed in law enforcement and that employees should receive their just entitlement for a productive day’s work. In cases where there are legal loopholes which may lead to unethical employment practices, we have the necessary social dialogue and legal structures that allow us to take corrective measures where required.

Atypical employment consists mostly of part-time and definite contract employment which by definition cannot be termed as precarious and are a necessary feature of a flexible labour market. Employment conditions for part time and definite period contracts are regulated by legislation.

What are your expectations for the upcoming budget?

The government should take measures to increase resources – human and capital – to enable the private sector to continue to grow. This growth should not be haphazard but channelled into areas of economic activity with a higher value added and which cause minimum damage to the environment and the quality of life. It should think beyond a situation of a booming economy and plan for eventual slowdown in the rate of economic growth.