Page1 WOMEN S REPRESENTATION IN EPSU and AFFILIATES 2014 Introduction This report aims to identify areas of progress and remaining gaps in EPSU and its affiliates towards achieving gender parity since the last Congress. In 2009 EPSU, with the support of its Swedish affiliate Vision (then SKTF), carried out a survey of women s representation in affiliates decision-making bodies and other structures. This compared data from 2008 and 2000 to see to what extent the position of women had changed over that period. The survey findings were published in a report that was presented to the EPSU Executive Committee in November 2009, Women s representation in EPSU and affiliates, which can be found: www.epsu.org/a/6463 with detailed statistics here: www.epsu.org/a/9735. The report to the Executive Committee said: The survey shows there is still a lot of work to do for women and men to take part equally in trade union work at all levels. There are some good practices available but the general picture can be much improved. This report updates the survey to see whether there have been any improvements in the position of women since 2009. Main findings Traditionally, women tend to be under-represented in the decision making structures of trade unions, even in sectors where the workforce and union membership is predominantly female. Our aim is to see what improvements there have been and also collect information on what our affiliates might be doing to encourage better female representation and to evaluate the representation of women in EPSU s statutory bodies. 55 unions in 31 countries replied to the survey, covering a total of 10.6 million workers. 67% of all the membership of the surveyed affiliates are women. The proportions range widely between 80%-90% in the health and social services sector, for some unions, to only 10-20% in public utilities. When we compare the percentage of women as union members with the percentage of women at congress or in the highest decision making bodies we see that there is still a gap. The averages mentioned here also mask a varied picture with greater improvement in some areas than in others. But on the whole some progress has been made and we are moving very much in the right direction in EPSU affiliates structures. On the whole women s representation has improved. Women made up on average 52% of affiliates congress delegates this time round, compared to 49% in 2009. There is a similar rise in the percentage of women in the highest decision making bodies: now 53% up from 50% in 2009.
Page2 Overall 28 affiliates reported an increase in the percentage of women congress delegates while only six reported a decrease. The percentage was unchanged in 10 unions while 11 were unable to provide comparable data. The NTL (Norway) and CFDT (France) both said that they had taken specific measures to encourage women s participation while the GdG-KMSfB (Austria) reported that it had changed its rules to require a proportional representation. Twenty-three affiliates reported that the proportion of women in their highest decision-making bodies had increased while there had been a fall in 10 unions. There was no change in a further 10 while 12 were unable to provide comparable figures. The proportion of women involved in collective bargaining varied considerably with several unions indicating that women made up either all or none of the officials mainly responsible for negotiations. Breaking it down into broad categories shows six affiliates where women made up less than a third of the collective bargaining team, eight where they were between a third and a half, 15 where they were between half and two-thirds and 10 where they made up over twothirds of the team. Affiliates were asked whether there were particular obstacles that made it difficult to achieve a gender balance in representation in their organisation. The most common response was to say that the structure of the relevant sector or occupation meant their membership was by its nature male (or female) dominated and so women (or men) tended to be in the minority in the trade union structure. Some affiliates also noted a problem with a male culture within their organisations that made it more difficult to progress while it was also acknowledged that as women continue to be the main carers in a domestic relationship then it was often more difficult for them to find the time to take on trade union duties. EPSU Committees In addition to the survey evidence there is also data on representation in EPSU bodies between 2010 and 2013. Women s representation on the EPSU Executive Committee has stayed more or less constant during this period at around 40%. In contrast, the Local and Regional Government and National and European Administration Committees have seen a dip in women s representation although in both cases this was reversed in 2013 with both also achieving around 40% representation. The highest levels of representation are in the Women and Gender Equality Committee varying between 70% and 90% and the Heath and Social Services Committee with no so much variation in the range of 65% and 70%. The lowest level of women s representation is on the Public Utilities Committee which has seen a fall from a peak of 20% down to 10%. EPSU Congress Women delegates made up 46% of the total at the 2014 Congress with the figures varying by constituency from 32% in South-East Europe to 58% in the Nordic constituency. In terms of participation women made up 49% of delegates who moved or spoke on the resolutions. However, women were less represented among the heads of delegations making up only 32% of the 186 total.
Page3 The ETUC 8th of March Survey The ETUC has been monitoring women s representation in its affiliates for a number of years now and published its seventh 8th of March survey in 2013. This provides some interesting data against which to compare developments in EPSU, with some of the main findings including: - the 47 confederations providing information have a total of 44.4 million members, of which 19.6 million are women (44.2%). - te national confederations with the highest rates of female membership are STTK in Finland (75%), followed by LBAS (65%) in Latvia and EAKL (62%) in Estonia. - The lowest percentage of female members is reported by the two Turkish confederations: TURK-IS (13%) and HAK-IS (11%) and DEOK-Cyprus (13,7%). - 12 confederations reported more female than male members: EAKL (Estonia), AKAVA and STTK (Finland), ICTU (Ireland), LBAS (Latvia), LPSK (Lithuania), LO and YS (Norway), CGT (Portugal), SACO and TCO (Sweden) and TUC (UK). - 27 confederations (out of 47) have a female membership rate equal to or higher than the average of 44.2%. The survey noted that In the majority of countries in Europe, the growth in female membership has partly compensated for the loss of male membership and so helped to slow the overall decline in union membership. The ETUC survey revealed that women are in minority in all senior positions in national confederations making up only: - 4 out of 39 presidents - 18 out of 69 vice-presidents - 9 out of 36 general secretaries - 7 out of 20 deputy general secretaries - 9 out of 25 treasurers - Only 7 women have a leadership position in their national confederation (47 are men). Most of national confederations have implemented actions and/or policies ensuring the follow-up of ETUC Recommendations for improving gender balance. http://www.etuc.org/sites/www.etuc.org/files/other/files/etuc_8th_march_survey_2014_en_eh.pdf
Page4 ETUC Toolkit to promote initiatives on gender equality A toolkit of initiatives to promote gender equality was launched in Madrid in May 2014 in a joint initiative by European employers and trade union organisations. EPSU contributed a collection of examples to the toolkit. The European social partners ETUC, Businesseurope, UEAPME and CEEP signed a Framework of Actions on Gender Equality in 2005 to promote gender equality on the labour market and in the workplace. The toolkit outlines some of the successful initiatives of member organisations. The toolkit shows the added value of the social dialogue between employers and trade unions, and highlights their commitment and key role in enhancing gender equality throughout the EU. About 100 initiatives from 25 European countries are contained in the online toolkit accessible at: www.resourcecentre.etuc.org/gendertoolkit or www.erc-online.eu/gendertoolkit
Page5 EPSU affiliates responding to survey total membership (10.8 million) Union Country Membership 1 HWUA Armenia 7652 2 GdG-KMSfB Austria 155000 3 TULIPSW Azerbaijan 22430 4 TUPHWB Belarus 320246 5 ACOD/CGSP Belgium 15943 6 FTU-HS CITUB Bulgaria 9000 7 HSSMS-MT Croatia 10500 8 Pasydy Cyprus 26383 9 TUSBI Czech Republic 19000 10 Transgas OSTG Czech Republic 652 11 TUHSS Czech Republic 32000 12 HKKF Denmark 4558 13 HK Denmark 60000 14 3F Denmark 32989 15 FOA Denmark 192670 16 Rotal Estonia 2400 17 Tehy Finland 157000 18 Pardia Finland 50023 19 JHL Finland 230264 20 FNME CGT France 60000 21 Interco-CFDT France 60506 22 PSSAWTUG Georgia 5289 23 HSMCTU Georgia 8370 24 Ver.di Germany 2060000 25 BSRB Iceland 20998 26 PSEU Ireland 9500 27 TUHWK Kazakhstan 290131 28 KHWU Kirghistan 2500 29 LVSADA Latvia 11977 30 Sindincomservice Moldova 18600 31 USSCG / Health Union Montenegro 2350 32 Abvakabo Netherlands 349105 33 NUMGE Norway 336355 34 NITO Norway 53100 35 AVYO (YS) Norway 22000 36 NNO Norway 74704 37 NTL Norway 50239 38 Delta Norway 65500 39 SANITAS Romania 10200 40 ALSWU Russia 897942 41 HWURF Russia 2327328 42 SOZZaSS Slovakia 5250 43 FSP-UGT Spain 56000 44 FSC CCOO Spain 230270 45 FEP-USO Spain 12820 46 ST Sweden 64308 47 VISION Sweden 122077 48 Kommunal Sweden 506912 49 SEKO Sweden 81609 50 Vårdförbundet Sweden 110015 51 VPOD SSP Switzerland 36000 52 THWU Tajikistan 3000 53 FBU UK 41916 54 UNISON UK 1370000 55 PROSPECT UK 115636
Page6 Percentage of women Congress delegates 2008 and 2012-2013 Union Country 2012-13 2008 HWUA Armenia 58 53 GdG-KMSfB Austria 50 30 TULIPSW Azerbaijan 39 36 TUPHWB Belarus 54 51 ACOD CGSP Belgium 36 15 FTU-HS_CITUB Bulgaria 73 70 HSSMS-MT Croatia 70 60 PASYDY Cyprus 31 25 Transgas OSTG Czech Republic 20 20 TUHSS Czech Republic 70 75 TUSBI Czech Republic 39 54 FOA Denmark 71 69 3F Denmark 38 40 HK Denmark - - HKKF Denmark - - ROTAL Estonia - 50 PARDIA Finland 35 58 THEY Finland 50 - JHL Finland 50 - FNME CGT France 18 20 CFDT Interco France 50 46 HPSCTU / HSMCTU Georgia 90 86 PSSAWTUG Georgia 45 32 Verdi Germany 50 50 BSRB Iceland 65 62 PSEU Ireland 43 38 TUHWK Kazakhstan 56 56 KHWU Kyrgyzstan 65 60 LVSADA Latvia - - Sindindcomservice Moldova 63 60 USSCG / Health Union Montenegro 80 80 Abvakabo Netherlands 36 38 AVYO Norway 50 50 NITO Norway 40 35 DELTA Norway 80 79 NTL Norway 47 33 NNO Norway 100 - NUMGE Norway 60 58 SANITAS Romania 60 - HWURF Russia 62 59 ALSWU Russia 55 54 SOZZaSS Slovakia 70 71 FEP USO Spain 25 15 CCOO Spain 41 40 FSP UGT Spain 50 46 Kommunal Sweden 69 65 Vision Sweden 56 63 ST Sweden 54 - SEKO Sweden 35 39 Vårdförbundet Sweden VPOD Switzerland 37 31 THWU Tajikistan 72 82 UNISON UK 64 60 FBU UK PROSPECT UK 14 22
Page7 Percentage of women in highest decision-making bodies 2008 and 2012-2013 Women in highest decision making bodies (%) Union Country 2012-13 2008 HWUA Armenia 45 48 GdG-KMSfB Austria 50 30 TULIPSW Azerbaijan 40 35 TUPHWB Belarus 58 59 ACOD CGSP Belgium FTU-HS-CITUB Bulgaria 66 48 HSSMS-MT Croatia 90 90 PASYDY Cyprus 22 17 Transgas OSTG Czech Republic 20 20 TUHSS Czech Republic 60 50 TUSBI Czech Republic 36 48 FOA Denmark 63 64 3F Denmark 55 46 HK Denmark 65 HKKF Denmark ROTAL Estonia 70 70 PARDIA Finland 48 43 THEY Finland 75 JHL Finland 60 FNME CGT France 30 26 CFDT Interco France 50 50 HSMCTU Georgia 60 71 PSSAWTUG Georgia 47 46 Verdi Germany 64 50 BSRB Iceland 41 67 PSEU Ireland 33 33 TUHWK Kazakhstan 46 44 KHWU Kyrgyzstan 64 63 LVSADA Latvia 82 Sindindcomservice Moldova 55 60 USSCG Montenegro 70 70 Abvakabo Netherlands 33 AVYO Norway 40 40 NITO Norway 46 36 DELTA Norway 70 57 NTL Norway 47 47 NNO Norway 89 NUMGE Norway 55 62 SANITAS Romania 21 HWURF Russia 65 60 ALSWU Russia 62 58 SOZZASS Slovakia 70 60 FEP USO Spain 35 20 CCOO Spain 44 44 FSP UGT Spain 45 50 Kommunal Sweden 71 85 Vision Sweden 62 50 ST Sweden 50 SEKO Sweden 44 30 Vårdförbundet Sweden 80 VPOD Switzerland 63 50 THWU Tajikistan 72 82 UNISON UK 68 64 FBU UK 13 11 PROSPECT UK 22
Page8 Comparison of Women in highest decision-making bodies between 2008 and 2012-2013 by constituency 2012-13 2008 Nordic 59 52 Ireland and UK 34 36 German-speaking 59 43 Benelux 38 38 Mediterranean 36 33 Central Europe 55 54 North East Europe 60 59 South East Europe 50 52 Russia and Central Asia 62 61
Page9 Percentage of women involved in collective bargaining % of women in collective bargaining/social dialogue unit, or among union officials responsible for collective bargaining France CFDT 40% France CGT FNME 41.60% (5 out of 12) Armenia TUHW 51% Austria - GdG-KMSfB 0 out of 2 but varies between sectors (20%-80%) Azerbaijan TULIPSW 50% Bulgaria FTU-HS Headquarters: 100% (1 woman), Regionally: 65% Belarus UPHWB 100% (1 Woman) Croatia - HSSMS-MT 100% Cyprus PASYDY 0% Czech Republic OS Transgas 100% (1 woman) Czech Republic TUHSS 70% Germany Ver.di 50% Denmark - 3F 40% Denmark FOA 61% Denmark - HK/Kommunal 40% Denmark HKKF 0% Estonia ROTAL 75% Spain - FSC CC.OO 44% Spain - FEP-USO 50% Spain -FSP-UGT 63% - 5 out of 8 including technical support Filand Pardia 25% Finland They 73% (11 out of 15) Georgia - (HSMCTU 30% Georgia PSSAWTUG 90% Iceland BSRB 54% Ireland PSEU 25% - 2 out of 8 Finland JHL 57% Kazakhstan TUHWK 50% Kyrgyztan KHWU 72% Moldova - Sindindcomservice 40% Netherlands - AbvaKabo FNV 56% Norway DELTA 50% Norway NITO 33.3% Norway NSF 55% Norway NTL 57% Norway NUMGE 50% Romania SANITAS 2-3% Russia ALSWU About 60% Russia - HWURF 60% Slovakia SOZZASS 60% (3 women, 2 men) Sweden Kommunal 50% Sweden - Fackförbundet ST 53% Sweden Vision 38% Sweden SAHP 73% - 8 out of 11 Switzerland - VPÖD/SSP No distinct service. Women make up half of the regional secretaries who are involved in negotiations. Tajikistan - THWU 70% United Kingdom FBU 12.5% - 1 out of 8 United Kingdom - PROSPECT We do not have these statistics. United Kingdom - UNISON 51%
Page10 Main obstacles in achieving a better balance between women and men members in the trade union France CFDT Austria GdG-KMSfB Bulgaria FTU-HS Croatia HSSMS-MT Cyprus PASYDY Czech Republic OS Transgas Czech Republic TUHSS Germany Ver.di Denmark 3F Denmark FOA Denmark HK/Kommunal Denmark HKKF Estonia ROTAL Spain FSC CC.OO Spain FSP-UGT Finland Tehy Georgia HSMCTU Georgia PSSAWTUG Iceland BSRB Ireland PSEU Main obstacles in achieving a better balance between women and men members in your union Trade union culture, masculine trade union practice but progresswomen are reluctant to engage and privilege family life the mining sector is very masculine Rules of the union No obstacles Members of TU are mostly women Late entry of women in public services and slow ascent in the union decision making bodies High percentage of men in our sector resort - mostly women Women are often passed over being seen as not being adequately qualified. However, this is just a justification for not relinquishing positions of power and influence. Sometimes it is difficult to get women involved as they don t have the confidence to think they can cope with the job and its related responsibilities. 3F (creation: 2005) was formed with an agreement of Fair Representation. 2010: agreement on equality and diversity, focusing on fair representation according to sex, age and ethnicity. The number of male and female members of FOA reflects the low percentage of male employees in most of the jobs covered by collective agreements negotiated by FOA. FOA has financed research/a PhD scholarship concerning men in caring occupations and how to overcome obstacles for a higher number and percentage of men in these occupations. FOA is mainstreaming gender as far as different actions are concerned, for example collective bargaining, and strive to appeal to both sexes when communicating to members and employees in the caring occupations. Majority of our members: women. In other smaller professions: most of the employees are men. The main obstacle is that the Danish Labour Market is very gender split. Most women in public sector. Most men in the private sector Recruitment of the armed forces We did not have so much female dominated workers members of TU. The lack of women, lack of willing to candidate in Trade Union election, and the work organisation in the Trade Union. Responsibility in Trade-Union take time. Spanish Women do the housework, so they don t have time + cut in childcare and there is a high level of male membership in the federation More than 90% of members are female so that reflects in the balance. For the first time Tehy has a male president after 4 female presidents Mostly women in health sector The existence of low wages The labour market is highly gender segregated. The health care and social services sectors are in majority occupied by women while the police force mainly constitutes of men. Many members of BSRB do work on those sectors. There are no institutional obstacles. There is a reluctance to become involved which we try to address through a continuous programme of encouragement and education. We have conducted a seminar on the issue of women s participation recently with our Branch representatives. Hopefully, the output from those workshops will produce some actions for us to try and improve the level of participation. (Report of the seminar: www.pseu.ie/pdf/diversity13.pdf)
Page11 Finland JHL Kazakhstan TUHWK Kyrgyztan KHWU Montenegro TUHM Netherlands AbvaKabo FNV Norway NITO Norway NSF Norway NTL Norway NUMGE Romania SANITAS Russia ALSWU Slovakia SOZZASS Sweden SEKO Switzerland VPÖD/SSP Tajikistan THWU UK FBU UK UNISON Many of the sectors we represent are predominantly female No obstacles No obstacles More women than men in T.U of Health. Although there is a majority of female members, there is a majority of male members active for the union interests. In general female members take more interest in individual protection of interest rather than collective protection of interest. Therefore they are less active female members compared to the number of active male members. It is difficult to change this situation because the majority of male union activists rule the culture and structure of the union. We have not identified any specific obstacles. Actually the balance is acceptable compared to the balance between women and men among the members. Most of our members are female and this is reflected in the whole organization Keeping a steady focus on gender equality, gender pay gap and recruitment of female elected representatives According to our rules it shall be at least 40% representation of the underrepresented gender in all elected organs. Our principle and action program, which has a separate chapter on gender equality and women s rights. Women are more dedicated to family life + Women are not promoted gender balance has been rather even so far due to nature of jobs organized Predominance of women in health and social services area Some branches dominates by men (energy ). None of our branches dominated by women Rules on quotas means that there more or less a balance both in relation to membership and in the committees. The rules have required proportional representation on committees since the 1990s. In some committees this is difficult to implement because of well-known problems but basically the policy has been successful. No obstacles The fire service is perceived as being a male dominated industry Women s caring responsibilities impacting on the time available for trade union activity. Potential for employer discrimination against trade union activists, and refusal to grant paid facility time for trade union duties. Cuts in staffing due to government austerity measures have increased pressure on employees
Page12 Women s representation in EPSU Statutory meetings 2010-2013 (based on participation in the EPSU Statutory Meetings (GEC, NEA, LRG, HSS, PUT, EC) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 GEC NEA LRG HSS PUT EC 10 0 2010 2011 2012 2013
Page13 Evaluation of EPSU s 2014 Congress The composition of delegates by Constituency Constituency Delegates Women Nordic (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden) 78 58% UK & Ireland 34 56% German-speaking (Austria, Germany, Switzerland) 23 48% France and BENELUX (France, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg) Central Europe (Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, FYR of Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo) South-Eastern Europe (Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Moldova, Romania, Turkey) North-Eastern Europe (Armenia, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine) Mediterranean (Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain) Russia and Central Asia (Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) 39 41% 38 37% 37 32% 20 45% 33 36% 14 50% Overview of Speakers and Speaking Requests (number of women) Number of women Speaking requests: 42, actually speaking: 41 Movers of resolutions and speakers on podium: 18 EPSU + 2 others = 20 Total: 61 Number of men: Speaking requests: 46, actually speaking: 43 Movers of resolutions and speakers on podium: 13 EPSU + 7 others = 20 Total: 63
Page14 Women heads delegations Country Women Heads of Delegation out of total for each country Albania 1/2 Armenia 2/2 Austria 0/5 Azerbaijan ¼ Belarus 0/1 Belgium 1/8 Bosnia-Herzegovina 0/4 Bulgaria 4/7 Croatia 1/2 Cyprus 0/4 Czech Republic 5/10 Denmark 5/13 Estonia 1/2 Finland 3/5 France 4/9 FYR of Macedonia 1/4 Georgia 1/3 Germany 1/1 Hungary 1/3 Iceland 0/1 Ireland 0/4 Israel 0/2 Italy 1/2 Kazakhstan 1/1 Kosovo 0/1 Kyrgyzstan 0/1 Latvia 1/2 Lithuania 1/2 Moldova 1/3 Montenegro 0/3 Netherlands 2/3 Norway 2/10 Poland 1/1 Portugal 0/2 Romania 2/9 Russia 0/3 Serbia 0/6 Slovakia 1/4 Slovenia 0/1 Spain 2/5 Sweden 5/6 Switzerland 1/1 Tajikistan 1/2 Turkey 0/6 Ukraine 2/6 United Kingdom 4/8 TOTAL 60/186
Page15 Membership breakdown by union and sector (2008 and 2012-2013) Trade union Country Constituency Sector Members 2012/2013 Members 2008 Total Women Women as % total Total Women Women as % total FOA Denmark Nordic HSS 183114 166988 91 192087 177920 93 PUT 9556 1066 11 11873 1313 11 Total 192670 168054 87 203960 179233 88 KOMMUNAL Sweden Nordic HSS 375000 360000 96 380000 365000 96 LRG 50000 25000 50 50000 25000 50 PUT 82000 20000 24 85000 25000 29 Total 506912 404917 80 514983 415511 81 FTU-HS-CITUB Bulgaria South Eastern Europe HSS 9000 79 9300 70 Total 9000 79 3F Denmark Nordic LRG 26391 12404 28360 13329 NEA 6598 3101 7090 3332 Total 32989 15505 47 35450 16661 HK Denmark Nordic LRG 50000 70 HSS 10000 99 Total 60000 75 65000 Verdi Germany German-speaking HSS 350000 263000 342000 256000 LRG 236000 131000 261000 138000 Total 2060000 1040000 51 2200000 1100000 50
Page16 Transgas OSTG Czech Republic Central Europe PUT 652 193 700 157 Total 652 193 24 700 157 TUHSS Czech Republic Central Europe HSS 32000 26000 80 38000 33000 87 Total 32000 38000 ROTAL Estonia North Eastern Europe HSS 300 300 600 600 LRG 300 200 200 200 NEA 1800 500 1600 800 Total 2400 1000 42 2400 1600 72 LVSADA Latvia North Eastern Europe HSS 11977 10439 16442 14370 Total 11977 87 16442 Abvakabo Netherlands Benelux France HSS 142417 115454 145424 108696 LRG 49124 19117 52858 18155 NEA 21116 7715 21903 7337 PUT 9525 1365 10474 1373 Total 349105 190965 55 348615 179628 51 AVYO Norway Nordic NEA 22000 60 23000 60 Total 22000 60 23000 60 Vision Sweden Nordic HSS LRG PUT Total 122077 88481 75 118761 87233 UNISON UK Ireland UK HSS 457116 370000 461000 368800 LRG 726184 558000 779500 585000
Page17 NEA 41742 26750 PUT 34891 17000 45500 Total 1370000 1050000 77 1354000 1098000 72 Sindindcomservice Moldova South Eastern Europe PUT 5615 1552 5809 1614 Total 18600 7003 38 25696 11744 44 HPSCTU Georgia North Eastern Europe HSS 8370 4603 20000 15403 Total 8370 4603 80 20000 15403 62 TUPHWB Belarus North Eastern Europe Total 320246 248879 77 299186 FNME CGT France Benelux France PUT 22000 4000 19 Total 60000 9100 TUSBI Czech Republic Central Europe LRG 9858 6719 11511 7870 NEA 9142 5441 10489 6034 Total 19000 12160 64 22000 13904 63 NITO Norway Nordic HSS 5280 4070 LRG 5780 1200 NEA 5350 1570 PUT 2750 200 Total 53100 12500 24 47900 DELTA Norway Nordic HSS LRG NEA Total 65500 51600 62000 49000
Page18 PARDIA Finland Nordic NEA 37436 23176 55000 32800 PUT 12587 8474 5000 2000 Total 50023 31650 63 60000 34800 57 HWURF Russia Russia and Central Asia HSS 2327328 1944642 2605090 2117893 Total 2327328 1944642 84 2605090 2117893 Health Union Montenegro South Eastern Europe HSS 2350 1570 67 2430 1620 67 Total 2350 2430 PSEU Ireland Ireland UK NEA 8700 5356 9250 5365 PUT 800 488 1250 725 Total 9500 5795 61 10500 6090 53 PASYDY Cyprus Mediterranean HSS 4719 3436 3990 2928 NEA 16099 8363 14777 7210 PUT 5565 1354 1195 397 Total 26383 13153 50 19962 10535 46 CFDT Interco France Benelux France LRG 50440 41551 NEA 5506 5591 PUT 3762 3213 Total 60506 39460 59 53078 31109 54 THEY Finland Nordic HSS 100 Total 157000 144148 92 NTL Norway Nordic Total 50239 30619 61 47396 28574 58 NNO Norway Nordic HSS 73210 61834 66020 56715
Page19 NEA 1494 1360 1347 1256 Total 74704 68400 92 67367 61865 SANITAS Romania South Eastern Europe HSS 10200 8200 85 10200 8200 85 Total 10200 8200 85 10200 8200 85 VPOD Switzerland German-speaking HSS 14824 11310 7511 5809 LRG 3149 1779 3110 1622 PUT 3363 3523 Total 36000 18800 53 35500 16100 43 THWU Tajikistan Russia and Central Asia HSS 3000 2100 72 2500 2250 82 Total 3000 2100 3000 2250 KHWU Kirghistan Russia and Central Asia HSS 2500 2100 2300 1930 Total 2500 2100 84 2300 1930 84 FEP USO Spain Mediterranean Total 12820 7150 56 15460 8503 55 CCOO Spain Mediterranean LRG-PUT 28189 15578 32044 17970 LRG 52959 20151 59972 20916 NEA 13504 5574 17434 7566 Total 230270 82034 36 260363 91954 33 ALSWU Russia Russia and Central Asia PUT 852049 Total 897942 461542 51 1078183 542326 50 GdG-KMSfB Austria German-speaking LRG 80000 40000 90000 40000 PUT 30000 10000 30000 10000 HSS 35000 23000 35000 23000
Page20 Total 155000 77000 49 146000 73000 49 SOZZaSS Slovakia Central Europe HSS 5250 3712 7320 5344 Total 5250 3712 71 7320 5344 73 PSSAWTUG Georgia North Eastern Europe NEA 4934 1837 6516 2014 Total 5289 2112 40 6516 2014 47 TULIPSW Azerbaijan South Eastern Europe PUT 20850 6570 20300 6500 Total 22430 6740 31 22500 6270 30 HSSMS-MT Croatia Central Europe HSS 10500 12000 Total 10500 8400 80 12000 9600 80 BSRB Iceland Nordic Total 20998 15201 69 20877 14856 70 ACOD-CGSP Belgium Benelux France NEA Total 15943 7896 50 10244 5025 49 FBU UK Ireland UK LRG Total 41016 2759 7 45410 2470 5 TUHWK Kazakhstan Russia and central Asia HSS Total 290131 223902 79 244842 192114 78 HKKF Denmark Nordic NEA 4458 5003 Total 4558 260 6 5003 301 6 FSP UGT Spain Mediterranean HSS 12562 10000 5100 LRG 32000 29100 14841 NEA 9500 9000 3610
Page21 PUT 1938 7900 3318 Total 56000 31920 57 56000 27542 51 HWUA Armenia North eastern Europe HSS 7652 7500 Total 7652 6152 82 7500 6000 80 NUMGE Norway Nordic HSS 154684 138656 LRG 51277 39779 PUT 130404 89558 Total 336355 267993 80 ST Sweden Nordic NEA PUT Total 64308 40994 64 66809 43859 67 JHL Finland Nordic Total 230264 160388 70 216868 156323 Prospect U.K. Ireland UK Total 115636 27146 24 21 SEKO Sweden Nordic NEA 14378 4667 16965 5073 PUT 4171 279 Total 81609 21623 26 91473 25513 30 Vårdförbundet Sweden Nordic HSS 110015 91 110453 92 Total 110015 91 110453 92