The salary increase of 10-15% that a director can negotiate at any time – even with quite mediocre leadership – is, usually, impossible to achieve for others. The timing for increases is never right; either we are heading into worse times, deep in a slump, or we haven’t quite recovered, which doesn’t really allow for any more extravagant ventures. Unfortunately.
If they propose 7.8, the employers say no, and if they make an offer below the general line, the employees say no.
What does it look like at the negotiation tables in Finland right now? There is no respect at all unless you are a director. Employers get the legislation they asked for, and we have an opening offer where the export industry approves a 3-year agreement totaling 7.8%, quite modest for a director. What happens next? At least not what should happen, i.e., do as in Sweden – instead, EK pulls the strings behind the scenes, and the salary framework is ultimately quite meaningless. Grrr!
For several years, we have looked westward, towards Sweden. There, central unions negotiate the so-called salary framework, i.e., the export industry’s salary increase. In Sweden, there is no guiding legislation for this, but the situation is respected from both sides. After this, other unions continue to negotiate agreements. It is unusual to have strikes in Sweden, and it is not necessary either because fair salary adjustments are relatively easy to reach. The framework is respected even from the employer’s perspective, and agreements are reached at the negotiation table. Help.
However, what happens in Finland is the following: despite having received a so-called salary framework, the negotiations become ridiculously tough. EK pulls the strings in the background, interferes in the negotiations without negotiating. This leads to strike warnings and then a round to the national conciliator’s office. If they propose 7.8, the employers say no, and if they make an offer below the general line, the employees say no. Then there is a strike. After that, new negotiations that lead nowhere, and new conciliation. The offer will probably land at the famous mark of 7.8%. After this, we get a new agreement, and we have peace and 7.8% joy in the country for three years. Sigh.
What is the lesson in this case? Much bad blood is spilled unnecessarily, and instead of goodwill, suspicion spreads. Do as in Sweden, where the salary framework has been established: work so that others, in the name of fairness, get what they deserve in good agreement – without strikes. Use the peace to address constructive issues instead of licking the wounds from a tough negotiation round. Then you also create room to develop other central issues together. Yes!
Åke Finne
Long-term head shop steward at Hanken
