Multinationals and Unions

Transcription

1 Robert Steiert Multinationals and Unions Ford BMW SKF Toyota FIAT Renault Nissan AB Volvo GE Siemens World Company Councils and World Works Councils as Strategies of Union Counter-Force Version 1.01

2 INDEX 1. Introduction Clarification of concepts World Company Councils (WCC) World Works Councils (WWC) World Works Councils as a new concept Assessment criteria for the World Works Councils World Works Councils in the metal industry Daimler Rolls Royce plc SKF Volkswagen The World Works Council bodies in light of the assessment criteria Negotiating process Duration of the agreement Structure/composition of the Global Works Council Frequency of meetings Participants from the company side Involvement of the unions, monitoring and coordination with the IMF Terms of reference Activities and agreements of World Works Councils Setting up of corporate networking structures Setting up of trade union networking structures Brief assessment of the World Works Councils World Company Councils vs. World Works Councils: which concept should be pursued further? Annex 1: Overview Annex 2: Bibliography / Sources... 22

3 1. Introduction The continued globalisation of the world economy has led to an increase in the number of multinational and transnational companies in the corporate world. As a result the national entities for representation of workers interests in these companies have seen their scope constantly undermined. Mainly company, but also national trade union structures and bodies for representation of workers interests (works councils etc), are now confronted with global corporate strategies. This is why promotion of international entities for the representation of workers interests vis-à-vis such companies is nothing new. But the road to the creation of these is proving more difficult than originally expected. For many years, the international trade union organisations (previously known as the International Trade Secretariats ITSs - and now as the Global Union Federations - GUFs) have been trying to establish such entities under a variety of names (global councils, global works councils, World Company Councils etc.), although all have the same aim; to create a position of power for the trade unions to counter that of the multinational and transnational corporations. The GUFs experience with these global councils has varied a lot and has been influenced by a multitude of factors; trade union organising in groups of companies at global level, trade union structures already in place, the international policy of the national unions, the origins or home country of the group and the willingness of the group management to cooperate, to name but a few. For years, though, it was possible to see that the original goal of establishing a counter-position of power was only very inadequately achieved in almost all these global councils, if at all. However, with the adoption of the directive on European Works Councils by the European Union in1994 came a breakthrough which offered an opening for strengthening of the structures designed to provide for representation of worker interests in such companies, albeit first in the then member states of the European Union. Since then with the enlargement of the EU the scope of this legal framework for the setting up of cross-border entities for workers representation has been broadened and with it the number of European Works Councils has increased. It was generally expected that the legal framework established for European Works Councils would give the unions an extra incentive to conclude agreements on global works councils. This has not, however, happened to date. Even the implementation of the EU Directive on European Works Councils has been considerably slower to take effect than generally expected. The European Metalworkers Federation (the EMF) estimated the number of companies in the metal industry qualifying for a European Works Councils at around 500. Up to now agreements on European Works Councils have been reached with 365 companies. This is not just the fault of companies, but also that of the trade unions and company-level entities for the representation of workers rights must be more proactive vis-à-vis group managements given the nature of the EWC Directive. 1

4 The global works councils (GWCs) did not take off as hoped for either. Up to now there are only 4 agreements on global works councils in the metal industry under a variety of names and structures. Agreement has also been reached on a fifth global works council. The conclusion of these agreements is, however, linked to the setting up of a production site of the company in question outside Europe. Literature on the subject often refers to a global works council at Renault. But, in this instance it is not a case of an agreement on such a structure. In Renault s case it is simply a question of a European Works Council extended to include observers from outside of Europe. 2. Clarification of concepts As indicated in the introduction, there are a number of terms for these bodies at the level of multinational/transnational groups which, however, often mean the same thing. This confusion of terminology is found not only in the scholarly literature, but can also be observed in union discussions. And differing terms are encountered not only in German: in English and other languages various terminology is also often used. In German terms such as Welträten (world councils), Weltgewerkschaftsräte (global union councils), Weltausschüsse (world committees), Weltkonzernausschüsse (World Company Councils), Weltkonzernräte (global group councils), Weltgewerkschaftskommittees (global union committees) and finally Weltbetriebsräte (world works councils) are used. English also has a broad range of terms: world council, world union council, world company council, world committee, world union committee and finally, since the concept of the European Works Council has emerged, world or global works councils. In this paper only two terms will be used to indicate the various concepts: World Company Council and World Works Council. World Company Councils are understood as company-specific meetings and bodies which are mostly organized or conducted by Global Union Federations. That means that the relevant GUF is responsible for the entire organization and hence also to a great extent for the financing. How the costs are divided between the GUF as an international union organization and its member organizations is of secondary importance. The main thing is that the organization and invitations are by the unions and that they also determine the size and composition of the relevant delegation in such a body or at a session / conference. World Works Councils are company-specific union bodies whose composition similar to the European Works Councils is concentrated on enterprise worker representatives in accordance with the relevant national structures of interest representation and interest representative bodies in the enterprise. The unions, i.e. full-time union officials, are involved in these bodies in various forms and to varying degrees as monitors or experts. These bodies are set up on the basis of a voluntary agreement between the management of a company and the relevant GUF. Those agreements determine the composition and financing of the body as well as the body s rights (e.g. information, consultation, etc.) and management s obligations. 2

5 Both types of body are today regarded as networks within a company. In addition, the World Works Councils also are able to create a parallel monitor (or coordinator network which brings together primarily the full-time union officials of the individual national unions responsible for the locations of a given multinational corporation in the country. 3. World Company Councils (WCC) The idea of the World Company Councils goes back to the early 1950s and was discussed mainly by the UAW of the US. The US unions saw that strategy as a response to the increasing establishment of production locations abroad by the US auto makers. In 1953 it was proposed to the IMF to establish so-called sub-councils for a number of companies. In 1964 that idea was manifested in a decision of the fifth IMF World Congress to establish global bodies for the US auto makers General Motors and Ford. In 1966 those decisions were implemented. At a conference of the IMF World Auto Councils in Detroit, World Company Councils were set up in working group sessions for General Motors, Ford and Chrysler. In the following years further such bodies were formed for other globally active companies in the metal industry. Annex 1 gives an overview of which companies had World Company Councils formed and when their meetings were held. That overview clearly shows that the heyday of the founding and holding of meetings of the World Company Councils was in the 1980s and early 1990s. Subsequently the intervals between meetings of existing WCCs became longer especially for the first two WCCs, Ford and General Motors. For some companies, no further meetings at all were held. The number of newly founded World Company Councils also declined, although during the same period the number of multinational companies increased substantially. Only in the early years of the 21 st century did the number of WCCs again increase slightly. In addition, companies are emerging whose headquarters are not located in the traditional industrialized countries. It is also clear that in most cases the frequency of meetings was not very high or consistent. Only in one case, SKF, did meetings take place over an extensive period of time at intervals of two or at most three years. In other cases for a relatively short period there were meetings every year, but then often ten years or more passed before the WCC was again convened. Sometimes there were only one or two meetings in a period of more than 30 years. All totalled, in the IMF s area 42 World Company Councils were formed. Three of them (Daimler, SKF and Volkswagen) have since been transformed into World Works Councils. The decisive question is whether in or from these World Company Councils functioning networks have developed which still provide for more or less regular exchange of information among network participants today. For the WCCs that is clearly not the case. Exchange of information as a core component of a network operates for the most part only during meetings, not between them. And when information is exchanged between meetings, it is usually in connection with specific 3

6 events within the company, such as works closures, corporate takeovers, etc. But that type of information exchange is mostly sporadic and returns to hibernation when the event in question has been dealt with. However, as a rule it is not capable of making regularly held meetings superfluous. In the academic literature, and also within many unions, it is assumed that the World Company Councils are not able to achieve their ambition of building a union counterforce to management. There are many reasons for the failure of the WCCs to achieve their goal, only a few of which are given below: From the very beginning the goals were too ambitious. That applies in particular to the case of the US unions, which regarded the World Company Councils as the first step toward international company-specific collective bargaining, completely ignoring or denying the very different union and bargaining structures existing in various countries. The World Company Councils were long open only to the member organizations of the relevant GUFs. Unions which, particularly in the days of the Cold War, were regarded as communist, some of which belonged to the (communist) World Federation of Trade Unions or did not belong to any GUF, were for many years not involved in work even in cases when a the national level they represented the majority in the enterprises. Since it was (and still is) left to the national member organizations of the GUFs to determine the composition of delegations of individual unions to the WCCs, from many countries only full-time union functionaries were sent. This led to a situation where the WCCs often remained apparatuses of functionaries with no feedback from and no involvement of the enterprise worker representatives, and hence of the workers themselves, although the GUFs were constantly stressing that strength in the enterprise was an essential condition for effective functioning of the WCCs. In practice the enterprises were not involved, and there was often no reporting on the WCCs work to the workers. In many WWCs the long intervals between sessions led to a constant turnover in membership, which made consistent work much more difficult. In many industrialized countries starting, at the latest, in the 1980s, the level of union organization began to decline. The loss of membership in those countries could not begin to be compensated for by efforts to organize the enterprises established by a company in developing countries. Many enterprises remained unorganized due to the anti-union policies of neo-liberal and conservative governments. That also weakened the basis for a company-wide union policy in multinational firms. The sinking membership figures of the financially strongest member unions of the GUFs also had a negative effect on the their capacity in terms of finance and personnel to develop and continue work in the World Company Councils. That negative effect was intensified by the failure to establish consistent and effective network structures. 4

7 Over the years most unions were not prepared to give the World Company Councils the authority which would have enabled them to conduct companywide activities. The involvement of the company management (e.g. for reporting and discussion of company policy with participants), where the WCCs tried to achieve it, was often prevented by the negative stance of company. That negative stance was often due in particular to the fact that the membership of WCCs consisted mostly of full-time union officials. The involvement of the companies in financing the events, even only to the extent of paying the expenses of enterprise worker representatives, was also in many cases rejected by the companies. 4. World Works Councils (WWC) 4.1 World Works Councils as a new concept The shortcomings in the effort to build union counterforce positions through the World Company Councils, and problems in creating, or ultimately the inability to create, consistent and effective network structures in multinational companies led to discussions on the possibility of transferring those structures to the international level, particularly in countries with institutionalized enterprise employee representative structures. The promulgation of the European Union directive on the creation of European Works Councils (1992) gave further impetus to such discussions. At first many unions concentrated on implementing the EU directive and on developing the structures of such European Works Councils. But many enterprise worker representatives and unions remained aware of the need to develop such structures world-wide not just in Europe and did not file it away indefinitely. Following the consolidation of the European structures, some European Works Councils with the support of their unions used the European bodies to discuss with management the extension or transposition of the EWC structures to the global level, to negotiate that goal, and ultimately to conclude corresponding agreements on it. To date four such World Works Councils have been founded in the metal industry: in 1995 for the Swedish ball bearing company SKF, 1998 for Volkswagen, 2002 for Daimler (at that time DaimlerChrysler) and in 2005 for the British company Rolls Royce plc. 4.2 Assessment criteria for the World Works Councils Almost fifteen years after the conclusion of a contractual agreement on the setting up of the first global works council it was deemed about time to carry out an evaluation of the global works councils in existence in the metal industry. 5

8 To be able to do this a series of criteria needed to be established: Negotiating process Duration/scope of agreement Structure/composition of the global works council Frequency of meetings Interlocutors on the company side Involvement of the trade unions, monitoring and coordination Terms of reference Joint activities of the global works council Establishment of corporate networking structures Establishment of trade union networking structures Further criteria mainly concerned the range and quality of the information provided by the management cannot be explored here since this would require putting a long list of questions to members of the different global works councils. This will be saved for further studies on this subject. 5. World Works Councils in the metal industry Based on the criteria given above, the various agreements and experience with such world works councils may be assessed as follows. The companies are treated in alphabetical order, not in the chronological order of the agreements concluded. 5.1 Daimler The agreement on setting up a World Employee Committee (WEC) at Daimler dates back to This was preceded by intense cooperation with the American and Canadian colleagues following the merger between Daimler and Chrysler via a working group initiated by IG Metall in The recent sale of Chrysler only affects the agreement on the WEC in so far as it could reduce the number of delegates from the USA. The WEC is composed of representatives of the production centres in Germany, the USA, Canada, Brazil, South Africa and Spain. Here, an upper limit of 15 delegates was agreed and this should not be exceeded, if possible. The members of the WEC are endorsed by the respective bodies for worker representation in existence in accordance with national legislation. So, in this sense they are not representatives of the production centres, but rather of their respective countries. The length of their term of office follows national practice. The WEC has a Select Committee made up of a chairman and a substitute elected for a term of office of 4 years. This select committee acts as the interlocutor for the company management if discussions on international issues become necessary between the regular meetings of the full WEC. Should it be deemed necessary representatives of the divisions of the company concerned may be co-opted to take part in such discussions. 6

9 As a rule, the WEC meets once a year and subjects on the agenda are cross-border issues such as the structure of the group, the economic and financial situation, projected development of the business, production and sales situation plus the position with regard to jobs. The WEC is given a report by the group management on adherence to the principle of corporate social responsibility and the development of criteria in line with the agreement on Principles in respect of corporate social responsibility at DaimlerChrysler (= IFA) of July The agreement is for an indefinite period, but can be terminated with 6 months notice by either side. 5.2 Rolls Royce plc The agreement with Rolls Royce plc, (referred to in the following as RR), manufacturer of engines and propulsion systems for aircraft, ships and so on was concluded in 2005 and led to the establishment of the Rolls Royce Global Council. It was made clear from the beginning that it is a case of a consultative forum. No negotiating rights whatsoever are foreseen for this body. Information and consultation are provided for on a variety of subjects with a groupwide and transnational dimension; these include the company s situation and prospects, trends in the number of employees and in investments, introduction of new working methods or processes, transfers of production, mergers and acquisitions, plant closures, mass redundancies etc. Regarding information on mergers and acquisitions or divestments it is stressed that information on such issues should be provided as early as possible with attention being paid to accounting and financial rules, requirements set out in the company charter and economic sensitivities. At the time when the agreement was concluded the forum was composed of delegates from Great Britain, the USA, Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Brazil, India and Singapore. These are the countries with the highest number of employees and probably those with production centres, too. Rolls Royce is present in a number of other countries, but the employee numbers point clearly to the fact that here it is more a question of purchasing, sales or maintenance operations. According to the agreement, some delegates do not just represent their own country, but also Rolls Royce employees in other countries. For instance, the Norwegian delegate is also responsible for representing Denmark, the Czech Republic, Spain and Italy, while the German representative is also responsible for France and The Netherlands. The Singaporean delegate meanwhile in addition to his own country also represents Australia, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea and The Philippines in addition to his own country. In Europe (i.e. within the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area) the staff representatives are appointed or elected in accordance with the national legislation and traditions in the respective countries. 7

10 In the case of three countries there is a special rule governing the selection of delegates for the WEC. In respect of Great Britain 17 delegates are nominated by the trade unions, while 3 non-union delegates are also appointed; in the USA, 2 union delegates and 4 non-union delegates are nominated, while in Canada the rule is 2 trade union delegates and 1 non-union. The agreement lays down criteria for the election or appointment of trade union or non-trade union delegates from the USA and Canada. In the case of the USA there is also a regional steering group; this consists of representatives of the management and the trade unions and is responsible for coordination of appointments. The intention is to install what are known as Local Select Panels at local level for the purpose of designating trade union and non-trade union representatives. The forum elects a chairman and a vice-chairman. In addition an Executive Committee is elected consisting of 8 representatives of the Global Council. It is the job of the Executive Committee to prepare meetings (agenda/interpretation/reports etc). It also appoints expert advisors and attends extraordinary meetings with the management. Before meetings of the global council the Executive Committee holds a meeting with the management. The global council meets at least twice a year, usually in connection with the drawing up of the half-yearly and yearly financial reports. A preparatory meeting for the employee representatives takes place the day before and a debriefing meeting on the day after the meeting of the council. Both the management and the employee representatives may convene extraordinary meetings, if the requirements set out in the agreement are met. In principle the agreement is valid for an indefinite period of time, although provision is made for a review after 2 years and then after a further 4 years. Both sides may terminate the agreement following a 6-month period of notice. 5.3 SKF The SKF Global Works Council has a longer history. As of 1975 meetings of what was known as the World Group Committee were held at regular intervals within the framework of the IMF. The last of these meetings took place in 1993 in Turin, Italy; this was the seventh meeting of the World Group Committee. The agreement on the World Union Committee of SKF Employees, known as the SKF World Union Committee (WUC) forms the basis for the oldest global works council in the metal industry and was signed in September This was preceded by intense negotiations between the SKF management, the IMF and the Swedish affiliate Svenska Metall (now IF Metall). The agreement on the SKF WUC came into being before the agreement on the setting up of a European Works Council under the terms of the EU EWC Directive. 8

11 Originally the WUC was composed only of representatives of the SKF ball bearings division, although it has since been enlarged over the years to include other SKF divisions. In April 2005 the original key for appointment of delegates was adjusted to take account of changes in the structure of the group and the distribution of the employees across the different countries. Delegates representing the individual countries are nominated by the trade union organizations. However, these delegates should be employees of SKF; the company only defrays the costs of employee delegates attending the annual meeting, although the unions are at liberty to send full-time union officials as observers to meetings at their own expense. According to the agreement the IMF makes a representative available to the global council and its select committee to act as advisor. The Select Committee of the Global Council (originally known as a working party) is composed of one delegate from Sweden and Germany respectively plus a representative of the IMF. The global council meets once a year and since the setting up of the European Works Council in 1996 together with the EWC. This means that SKF was the only one of the 4 companies to set up a global forum before a European Works Council came into being. 5.4 Volkswagen The Volkswagen Global Group Works Council (GGWC) came into being in 1998 with the written agreement being signed by management, the IMF and members of the GGWC at a meeting in Barcelona in May The text of the agreement basically follows that of the agreement on the European Volkswagen Group Works Council. The countries with production centres are represented on the VW GGWC on the basis of a fixed delegate s key, which is regularly adjusted to take account of changes in the structure of the group. The GGWC and the management meet at least once a year. Subjects discussed must be of group-wide significance for the production sites and essentially cover the following areas; structure of sites, the employment situation, securing the continued existence of the centres, trends in the structure of the group, productivity and cost structures, internal relations within the group with suppliers, trends in working conditions and social benefits provided by the company, new production technologies and work organization, occupational health and safety, corporate environmental protection measures, significant effects of political developments and decisions on the VW Group and changes in political and economic conditions in international trade. There is a select committee within the GGWC whose composition takes account of the individual brands and regions within the group. This select committee also meets at least once a year. The GGWC has the right to be consulted; i.e. it and the select committee have to be informed in good time of transfers planned (investment emphasis, volume of production and important aspects of the group). The GGWC and the select 9

12 committee also have the right to submit an opinion within an agreed period of time. They may in addition require an explanation of planned transfers in the context of a round of consultations. These consultations must be held in good time so that the position of the VW GGWC can be taken into account in the decision-making process. A separate set of statutes for the VW GGWC specify a number of other points. They specify, for instance, that members of the GGWC must be chosen through free elections and only from among representatives of the employees who are democratically legitimate and who can properly represent their country. The procedure for sending these delegates to meetings shall be established separately by the individual parts of the VW Group at national level; if need be this may include the setting up of national and regional coordination bodies. The select committee decides whether to call in company or external advisors. 6. The World Works Council bodies in light of the assessment criteria 6.1 Negotiating process It is clear to see that the IMF was most involved in the negotiation of an agreement on a global works council in the case of SKF. The IMF and its Swedish member organization Svenska Metall (now IF Metall) negotiated the details of the agreement jointly with the management. The IMF also signed the agreement together with the Swedish colleagues. In the case of VW the negotiations were mainly conducted by IG Metal and the VW European Works Council. The former president of the IMF, Klaus Zwickel, was however involved in the negotiations in his capacity as vice-chairman of the VW Supervisory Board. At the same time, the IMF secretariat in Geneva was kept informed of progress with the negotiations to enable it to give its opinion on the wording proposed. The President of the IMF signed the agreement together with the European Works Council. At Daimler ( DaimlerChrysler at the time) discussions were first embarked on with the UAW and the CAW via the working party set up within the Central Works Council and were then continued by what was known as the international automobile study group. A report was then submitted to the DaimlerChrysler European Works Council. The IG Metall official responsible for the Group, Central and European Works Councils was directly involved in the negotiations. A written draft of the agreement only reached the IMF for comment relatively late; i.e. not until negotiations on the text had been largely completed and it was in principle ready to be signed. This meant that there was no longer any scope for direct influence on the substance of negotiations. The IMF was clearly least involved in negotiation of the agreement on a global works council with Rolls Royce. As of 2004 the IMF would received drafts from time to time from the international department of its British affiliate UNITE (whose name at that point was Amicus) with requests for comment. These drafts were described by the 10

13 official EWC coordinator (a full-time official of Amicus) as a reflection of the state-ofplay in discussions between the management and the Rolls Royce European Works Council (EWC RR) in which the European Metalworkers Federation s designated EWC coordinator ( a full-time Amicus official) was also involved. The intention was for the IMF to become directly involved once the real negotiations (not just discussions) started. However, this never happened. The final and signed text of the agreement was simply submitted to the IMF in April Prior to this there was no feedback on to what extent the result of negotiations might be acceptable to the IMF and no agreement on who should sign on behalf of the IMF. The European Works Council coordinator signed the agreement on behalf of the unions in his capacity as the expert designated by the IMF ; he also appointed himself coordinator for the Rolls Royce Global Council, also without prior consultation. Also without consultation or agreement with the IMF, the monitoring of the RR Global Council was given to another union official of UNITE. 6.2 Duration of the agreement All four agreements were concluded according to the principle that they should apply for an indefinite period, although they may be terminated subject to varying periods of notice. The Rolls Royce agreement also contains a provision stating that it shall be subject to a review 2 years and 4 years after the setting up of the council and that adjustments shall be made to the agreement if necessary. 6.3 Structure/composition of the Global Works Council At Daimler and Rolls Royce the members of the global forum can be shop-floor representatives of the employees or even full-time trade union officials. In the case of Daimler they also represent their respective countries and not a given production centre. At Rolls Royce the agreement explicitly states that worker representatives from plants in the USA, Great Britain and Canada who are not members of a union can be elected (see explanation under 3.2). In the case of Europe the rule is that delegates are to be appointed via the company entities for representation of worker interests (e.g. works councils etc.). This means that they are always staff representatives from the company and may or may not be union members depending on the situation in the workplace. The Daimler agreement stipulates that members shall be chosen according to existing worker representation rights in each individual case. Should there be no structure for representation of worker interests nomination should take place according to national traditions and in consultation with the parties to the agreement. In practice, this means that full-time trade union officials on the World Employees Committee can be nominated; this is, for example the case for representation of plants in the USA. The Daimler agreement contains a specific provision stating with regard to the composition of the WEC that; the countries represented on the WEC shall be named in the text of the agreement. However, Daimler also has production in other countries 11

14 and production sites, so this means that the composition of the WEC does not cover all countries where there are production activities. This has to do with the fact that individual production plants are either too small or that there are doubts as to the democratic legitimacy of the bodies representing workers interests. The WEC has since been enlarged to include one delegate from Japan. The Daimler WEC also has regional responsibility. Europe is represented by the Chairman and 2 members of the Select Committee of the Daimler European Works Council. The delegate from Brazil represents South America and thus also covers the factory in Argentina. When the agreement was concluded with SKF all the countries with production operations were members of the global council. Since then the situation has changed in that in the meantime SKF now has production sites in China, although they have not yet been integrated into the WUC. However, since 2006 a worker representative of an SKF production centre in China has been attending the meetings as an observer. The members of the SKF WUC are only shop-floor staff representatives; they are, however, nominated by the representative unions. The company only pays the costs of attendance for company worker representatives. Trade union officials may attend as observers, but their respective unions have to foot the bill for their expenses. Note that since nominations are made by the representative unions in the individual countries all of the delegates on the WUC are union members. In the case of the Volkswagen Group Global Works Council all production sites are also represented directly or indirectly on the Global Group Works Council. For the moment delegates are nominated via central works councils already in existence or via equivalent fora. At SEAT, for instance, such a forum has been created (the comité intercentro) to facilitate cooperation between the different SEAT production centres, since this is not otherwise provided for under Spanish labour law. This committee is also responsible for nomination of the representative for the Global Group Council. The representative of Audi Germany also represents the factories in Györ, Hungary which belong to the brand and the Lamborghini plant in Italy. As all the VW and Audi plants are unionised the delegates on the Global Group Works Council are without exception members of a union. 6.4 Frequency of meetings The agreements with SKF, Daimler and Volkswagen provide for one meeting per year plus, as a rule, a further meeting of the select committee. In the case of SKF the meeting of the WUC takes place in conjunction with that of the separate European Works Council, while at Daimler and Volkswagen the European Works Council meets separately with the management. At Rolls Royce meetings are more frequent; the Global Council holds 2 meetings a year and the Executive Committee a further 2 meetings. There is, however, no European Works Council at Rolls Royce. 12

15 6.5 Participants from the company side The text of the agreement is very general and says that meetings of the forum take place with the management, the board or quite simply with the Company. So, it is left to the Board of the group to decide who should fulfil the company s information and consultation obligations vis-à-vis the world forum. In the meantime it has become the rule in all the companies that the Group Board, including its Chairman or CEO, attend the global council meetings. This was not always the case throughout. At SKF the member of the board responsible for public relations was for many years the only representative of group board at the meetings of the SKF-WUC. It has only been since the appointment of the present chairman of the board that other members of the board and of divisional boards have begun to participate in meeting the obligations to provide information. At Volkswagen an international committee of personnel managers has also been set up which operates in parallel with the Global Group Works Council; its meetings take place when the global group works council holds its internal meeting. Following this there is usually a joint meeting of the Global Group Works Council and the Personnel Managers Committee with the group management. The Daimler agreement contains a special feature; the WEC holds an internal meeting without management being present. Information from the group management is provided at a meeting of the worker representatives on the Daimler Supervisory Board together with members of the German economic committee and members of the WEC. 6.6 Involvement of the unions, monitoring and coordination with the IMF A variety of arrangements exist with regard to monitoring of the global works councils by the trade unions and/or the IMF. The SKF agreement provides for the nomination of a permanent IMF representative to act as an advisor to the forum and attend all of the meetings. But, in the view of the trade unions full-time trade union officials should also participate in addition to the IMF s representative. There is no limitation on the participation of trade union officials. However, the unions who send them must pay the costs incurred themselves. In extreme cases this open rule has produced a situation whereby the trade union officials from one or other country have outnumbered the company staff representatives at the meeting with considerable disgruntlement on the part of management as a result. At Daimler the position is that both company staff representatives and full-time trade union officials attend. There is, however, a rule whereby delegates are nominated on the basis of a predetermined key. In cases where company staff representatives are nominated no further full-time trade union officials can take part not even as observers. 13

16 After consultations with the IMF a person was appointed to be responsible for the WEC and was made available by IG Metall. This person acts as advisor to the forum and takes part in meetings. He is also the European Works Council coordinator designated by the EMF. A mixed composition is possible in the case of Rolls Royce. This, however, only applies for the delegations from Great Britain, Canada and the USA since there are no company-based bodies for worker representation in those countries as is the case in Europe. In addition, a full-time trade union official was designated as IMF representative and expert. But, it should be remembered that this appointment took place without first consulting the IMF; i.e. The IMF was confronted with a fait accompli as in the case of the signing of the agreement, which this expert signed as the IMF representative. The Volkswagen agreement stipulates that the Select Committee may make decisions on the involvement of outside advisors. Following consultations with the IMF a representative of IG Metall was designated as an expert attached to the Global Group Works Council. He is the only full-time official associated with the forum and takes part in all meetings, including those with the group management. In the case of SKF and Volkswagen direct consultation of the IMF is a given as the coordinator comes from the IMF secretariat. Such coordination is more difficult in the case of Daimler and in particular of Rolls Royce. In the latter instance there have up to now been no direct contacts either before or after meetings and as a rule information was only forthcoming at best from the Rolls Royce coordinator when he was approached directly. The Rolls Royce coordinator In particular did not seem to see any need for such consultations. Enlargement of the RR Global Council to include an official delegate from China only became apparent through contact with a member of the Global Council. Despite the fact that China is a sensitive subject the coordinator saw no need to be in touch with the IMF. 6.7 Terms of reference Only two out of the four agreements contain any mention of the terms of reference of the forum or its members. The Rolls Royce agreement contains provisions concerning the nature and scope of contacts between the Executive Committee and the company, its individual members and the forum as a whole. There is a heading in the statutes of the VW GGWC entitled Infrastructure ; i.e. the companies in the group shall make an adequate infrastructure available to enable the proper workings of the VW GGWC. The same applies for the necessary terms of reference. Here in practice it has emerged that alongside individual terms of reference there should also be specification of the tasks of the forum as a whole. Specialised and themed seminars have been organized at regional level, sometimes with participation by the management. No mention is to be found of this either in the SKF or Daimler agreement. 14

17 6.8 Activities and agreements of World Works Councils The question may be asked as to what extent cooperation within the individual world works councils has resulted in further activities and even in agreements at world level. At Daimler, SKF and Volkswagen the Global Works Council, the IMF and the individual national unions from the group s home country were involved in the drafting, negotiation and conclusion of an international framework agreement (IFA) with the companies. There is no IFA with Rolls Royce as yet. At Volkswagen there is also an agreement on occupational safety in the Volkswagen Group, which was concluded with the group in September 2004 and where the IMF was involved. This agreement sets out the principles of occupational safety policy throughout the group; concepts are to be developed for ongoing improvement of occupational safety and for creation of synergies world-wide. At the level of the European Group Works Council activities were agreed on the basis of the VW Act and most recently on decisions on reductions in emissions of exhaust gases. The Global Works Council has agreed to take part in joint action to support the call by the European global works council for renegotiation of the Porsche Works Council agreement on the setting up of a European Works Council at Porsche Holding SE after a possible takeover by Volkswagen. The Daimler WEC agreed Guidelines on Work and Health with the company management in Setting up of corporate networking structures Reference to the setting up of corporate networking structures actually means regular exchange of information by members of the Global Works Council. The prerequisites for this exist at least among the members of the forum; the participants know each other and should have extensive means of communicating with each other, be it via private addresses or via an address within the company network. This begs the question to what extent these possibilities will be utilised. At Rolls Royce, SKF and Volkswagen all production plants are represented on the Global Works Council (although sometimes at SKF and VW the seat for Argentina is temporarily not filled); this means that the conditions are in place for an extensive exchange of information. It is only at Daimler that there is a problem; namely, that not all the factories are represented on the WEC. This means that at least at meetings exchange of information only takes place among members of the WEC. A further problem at Daimler and above all at Rolls Royce could be that regional representatives provide information to representatives of the employees in the countries which are represented by a delegate from another country. Neither of these agreements states that contact with represented units (e.g. Rolls Royce Japan and Hong Kong being represented by the delegate from Singapore) shall be ensured. Having talked to a member of the RR Global Council one may suspect that this delegate does not even know who the employee representative is, meaning that it is not for sure that this country is linked into a network. 15

18 Experience at SKF has shown that the existence of structures does not mean that they will be used. Members of the SKF World Union Council only make use of the opportunities for mutual exchange of information to a very limited extent and, if they do, the information only goes to the chairman and not to all the members. At Volkswagen the network for the full-time trade union coordinators is connected to the corporate network. This means that information is sent via this network not just to the trade union coordinators, but also to the company delegates on the Global Group Works Council. A lot of information is thus available, but experience has shown that these facilities are not widely used by all members of the network. In addition to the IMF coordinator of the Global Group Works Council it is mainly the corporate members of the council who make use of the network for exchanging information, while the national full-time coordinators use it to a lesser extent Setting up of trade union networking structures Three out of four of the existing global works councils are either overwhelmingly or exclusively composed of company worker representatives. The trade unions have a monitor or coordinator who is the connecting link between the unions and the company staff representatives. This structure largely coincides with that of the European Works Councils. In respect of the European Works Councils there has been criticism by the trade unions for some time; the complaint is that the monitors or coordinators at national and local levels have not been receiving information on what has gone on at meetings of the European Works Councils and of the Global Works Councils. Firstly, this certainly has to do with the shortcomings in communication between Global Works Council and European Works Council members and their unions or coordinators. Secondly, it may be due to the fact that in the case of the larger groups not all of the companies have delegates representing them on the Global Works Councils/European Works Councils and that forwarding of information to members of these fora and to the other enterprises existing in the country does not always work as it should. In the case of Rolls Royce and to an extent Daimler there is also the provision that individual delegates represent a number of countries. In the case of SKF it is possible for the unions to send observers to meetings at their own expense. In addition, the minutes of the meetings are made available to all the representative unions organising employees in companies within the group. This system makes sure that the unions are kept informed. At Volkswagen, where the designated IMF coordinator is the only full-time trade union representative on the Global Works Council a trade union network has been set up, first at European level and later at global level. The national unions from the countries where VW has production centres and which are represented on the Global Works Council were urged to nominate a national coordinator as a member of this network. In 2002 the network was resurrected from the ashes at a seminar for these national coordinators. In 2007 the national coordinators were brought together for a refresher seminar. Members of the network are also members of the Global Group Works council thus creating an additional link to the company staff representatives. 16

19 The national coordinators are sent minutes of meetings, reports and other information which is circulated within the Global Group Works Council by the IMF coordinator via this network. The network is used by its members for forwarding information on national and corporate procedures at VW. Thus the structure is in place for extensive dissemination of information to the trade unions. All they have to do is use it. It is not, however, possible to say to what extent this information is passed on to local trade union coordinators in some of the companies in the VW group in the different countries. In addition, IG Metall s administrative centre in Wolfsburg has in the meantime set up a network for the trade unions represented at VW in Spain, Portugal, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina: this is designed for exchange of general information on trade union activities, projects and so on. A similar network is being developed for the unions in Central and Eastern Europe. These activities are followed and supported by a working party for international solidarity founded in 1982 at the IG Metall administrative centre in Wolfsburg. This working party is open to all IG Metall members who are interested, ranging from rank-and-file members, via shop stewards to members of works councils. Sub-groups set up at regional level keep in touch with the unions in the different countries in the respective regions and provide information on the situation to VW employees available to the staff of the German factories through a variety of channels. We are not aware of any such structures at Daimler or Rolls Royce via which the trade unions can be informed of discussions taking place at meetings of the Daimler WEC and the RR Global Council or receive information on developments within the two groups. 7. Brief assessment of the World Works Councils As we have tried to illustrate the 4 global works councils in place each have their own history and different structures, ways of working and levels of cooperation. All 4 were the result of agreement by European companies and are therefore based on the predominant structure for representation of workers interests in individual workplaces and in the companies as a whole in the home country or in Europe. Only where there are no company structures in place for employees, as in the case of Rolls Royce and Daimler, has a possibility been created for full-time trade union officials to be associated with the global fora. All four agreements have their advantages and disadvantages, beginning with the negotiating process, via the composition and ending with working methods, joint activities and networking structures in place. All in all there should be no disagreement as to the fact that the Volkswagen Global Group Works Council has achieved most in terms of developing a working cooperation between the workplace staff representatives involved and the different trade unions. This is particularly true regarding the networking structures which have evolved at company and trade union level, even though they do not yet always function as ideally as had been hoped. 17