23.12.2013 Views

CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AGREEMENTS: An ...

CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AGREEMENTS: An ...

CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AGREEMENTS: An ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Transnational collective bargaining at company level – da Costa and Rehfeldt<br />

the ambit of the WFTU a “European coordination committee” with<br />

union representatives from Michelin’s European subsidiaries. Despite the<br />

ICF’s refusal to join that initiative, several Italian and United Kingdom<br />

(UK) unions of the same tendency took part. The ICF created its own<br />

world council for Michelin only in 1971, after the affiliation of the<br />

CFDT’s chemical federation. Force Ouvrière, a minority union in the<br />

company, only joined it in 1976 (Sinclair, 1978, pp. 80f). At Dunlop-<br />

Pirelli, the ICF created a council in 1972, which excluded the Confederazione<br />

Italiana Sindacati dei Lavoratori (CGIL), the majority union in<br />

the firm. The council was boycotted by UK shop stewards who preferred<br />

to establish bilateral contacts with their Italian CGIL colleagues. 5<br />

Despite a few important successes, international trade union action<br />

did not reach Levinson’s third stage — integrated negotiations — during<br />

his time in office. Reaching stage one — the organization of international<br />

solidarity during industrial conflicts — was difficult enough. The examples<br />

used by Levinson are proof of strong union activism and successful<br />

workers’ efforts for international solidarity in the 1970s.<br />

For stage two, Levinson gives only four examples, three of which<br />

come from France: Saint-Gobain, Michelin and Rhone-Poulenc, as well<br />

as Royal Dutch-Shell. He also mentions “the case of winning wage parity<br />

between Canadian and US workers in the same company” (Levinson,<br />

1972, p. 132). But this was an exceptional example due to the fact that<br />

workers on both sides of the border were members of the same union.<br />

The coordination of their transnational action entailed having strong<br />

strike funds and ensuring that contracts ended at the same time. There<br />

was no language barrier and the historical traditions and industrial relations<br />

structures were quite similar (da Costa, 1999). Yet even in this<br />

example, internal coordination problems existed and, since the 1970s,<br />

there has been a tendency towards union autonomy in Canada; the Canadian<br />

branch of the UAW, for instance, broke away in 1985, becoming the<br />

Canadian Auto Workers. Though this North American model was the<br />

one Levinson had in mind, the complexities of the European situation<br />

added their own difficulties, compounded when other continents were<br />

included.<br />

As for integrated bargaining with the management of an MNE —<br />

Levinson’s stage three — the only example in the 1970s was Philips,<br />

5<br />

These contacts led to what some authors (Moore, 1978; Piehl, 1974) have considered as the first<br />

transnational European strike in 1972.<br />

47

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!