For your information here is a short report from the recently completed collective bargaining between the public employees and their employers.

In Denmark the public employees are divided into three main groups depending on who their direct employer is:

The state employs particularly people in the central administration, high school teachers and university personnel, police, military and courts of law.

The regions employ doctors, nurses and other hospital staff.

The municipalities employ particularly teachers of public primary and secondary schools, teachers of public daycare facilities, home help, workers in maintenance of roads and parks, employees in the public bus transportation, etc.

At the end of March 2018 the current collective agreement between the public employees and the public employers expired. As the negotiations between the parties initially did not lead to anything, the trade unions of the employees gave a notice of strikes for 100.000 members. The public employers headed by the state – the ministry of finance - struck back hard with a notice of a lockout including all of 440.000 employees – far more than the notice of strikes. Should the lockout become effective, Denmark would largely come to a standstill: there would be no collective traffic, schools would be closed and daycare facilities for children would close. Other public services would close entirely or would only work on emergency terms, for instance surgery would only be performed in life threatening cases.

Lockout by the public employers is in an international context a Danish speciality, we think. Compared to a lockout in the private labour market the employers in the public sector have the big advantage that, in the face of it, they save the wages of the employees without at the same time losing the earnings of missing trade. A very comprehensive lockout can therefore only have the purpose as quickly as possible to empty the trade unions’ fighting funds. At the same time it is not a question of two equal parties when we talk about the wage earners on one hand and the public employers on the other. The state as the most powerful public employer has – if the parliamentary majority is there – the possibility to lay down terms of wages and working conditions by law, and this possibility has been used frequently in the past.

The trade unions of the employees had emphasised three areas to be secured through this future agreement:

1. Significantly increased wages as a response to the improved economy of the country and the increasing wages in the private labour market. Part of the increasing wages should go to special groups, among others the low payee in typical women’s trades.
2. A negotiated working hour agreement for the public school teachers who have since 2013 had to live with a settlement of their working hours, not negotiated but laid down by law as a result of the industrial conflict i 2013. This industrial conflict which the teachers lost included a comprehensive lockout of the teachers resulting in closing of schools. The lockout lasted for 25 days after which the parliament passed a law that the teachers had to go back to work and conform to the rules made by the state. These rules considerably reduced the teachers’ time to prepare for the classes and demanded that they normally stay at the school during all working hours instead of being able to prepare at home. At the same time the rules meant that overtime could be paid for far less than before.
3. Securing of paid lunch breaks for especially graduates employed by the state. Since 1921 this group has had the right to a paid lunch break of half an hour a day as a sort of compensation for lower wages in the state than among the privately employed with similar functions. The state wanted to abolish that which would lead to the involved group working two and a half hours extra per week without any compensation!

As a very positive thing the public employees had made the so called musketeer oath. It is named after the well known novel by Alexandre Dumas about the three musketeers who made the oath “one for all – all for one”. That meant, in other words, that before any group could make an agreement with the counterpart, the claims of all the other groups should be solved as well. Hereby a previously unseen solidarity was signalled between the public employees regardless of trade union, level of wages, etc.

The negotiations between the trade unions of the employees and the representatives of the employers continued for a longer time lead by the special conciliation officer of the state. During this long period of negotiations there were continuously big demonstrations in front of the office of the conciliation board – demonstrations where most of the trade unions were represented with banners, chanting, singing, etc. and where also trade unions organising members in the private labour market participated with red banners showing their support for the public employees. These demonstrations were followed up with demonstrations around the country and a mass meeting in Fredericia in the middle of Denmark for more than 10.000 elected shop stewards. In general, the many activities got a broad coverage in the mass media.

This way the musketeer oath between the public employees was to a large degree supplemented by professional support from trade unions and their members in the private labour market. This is sure to mark the development in the future.

After a vast time of negotiations not really leading anywhere separate agreements were made in all three areas: the municipal employees, the employees in the regions and the employees in the state.

The result was:

• A general wage raise of over 6 % over 3 years which most of the trade unions accepted even though 6 % is of course a completely different amount for the low wages in the women’s trades compared to the nice wages which the well educated normally make. On top of this come bonuses for special groups: employees in typical women’s jobs and in other low wage areas such as apprentices.
• As to the special working hours of the teachers there was no solution. They could only agree on forming a commission with the task of presenting a solution at the next collective bargaining in 3 years.
• The paid lunch break for the employees of the state was secured but only through a counter payment which, among other things, means that it shall be possible for the employers to order individual persons to work up to five hours more per week for the normal wages – that is without normal overtime pay. This is especially serious as it could become part of a future more general attack on the collectively bargained work time of 37 hours per week.

Now the collective agreements between the trade unions and the employers will be sent to a ballot among the union members, and before that the trade unions will make their recommendation. It will probably become a yes as many fear the prospect of a longer lasting conflict. But in spite of a possible yes and even though there were some knotty problems in the cooperation between the trade unions along the way, really many have learned that solidarity across trade unions, demarcations and wage levels etc. is necessary when confronting the employers.

Finally, it should be mentioned that The Communist Party in Denmark, KPiD, of course according to capacity and possibilities supported the struggle of the employees for better wages and working conditions.