is having many reactions to the ongoing strike in Madrid Metro, especially in the wake of the failure of the minimum service by striking the first days of the week, which led to a rush hour chaos in the city.
Most reactions have been very critical of the position of unions and strikers. Therefore José RodrÃguez has written a post , I recommend reading, trying to clarify some important points.
I would make two comments:
1) The bottom line: what has caused the strike is the intention of applying Madrid subway workers a pay cut in line with the declared by the government for all public officials, since it violates the Convention agreed reduction and running until 2012.
must be said that the reduction does not apply to government workers, not public officials, such as Metro and Renfe, for example. It could be considered fair, from this point of view, the workers' protest, as the claim of the CAM would violate the Convention agreed.
However, for me it load only reason to think (think) that the current mechanism of collective bargaining and the rigidity of the Conventions is a drag when adjusting the salary conditions in a company to fluctuations in the economy due to procyclical. is inconceivable that in a situation of widespread cutbacks and rising unemployment, a group of workers cling to a text, however it is agreed (at a time when that was not anticipated the current situation) to be excluded from the general environment and maintaining a situation now could be considered privileged over other employees, as well their jobs are guaranteed. Although the decision on this point rests with the employees concerned, it is very difficult for the rest of the workers gives them an understanding that call, especially if we consider the point 2)
2) Failure minimum services. By law, minimum services of competent authority orders the service is considered essential (although it is recommended covenants). And here's the problem: for the Metro de Madrid CAM is an essential service for trade union representatives from Metro, no.
For me it is clear that meter is an essential service in rush hours a big city, not just to "reduce the convenience of citizens at the time of going to work": the number of problems, economic and all types, which generates the total suspension of the subway in a city like Madrid is incalculable. The Metro may not be an essential service in Rome, where only three lines with a greater or less marginal, but in Madrid, London, Paris, etc., is an essential service, again, at rush hour.
minimum services are acceptable, if I remember correctly, 50% at peak times and 0% the rest. They are not abusive. Halve the rush-hour service means very painful conditions for travelers in many lines of the Madrid underground, already strained in normal times, and delays to get to work for most people. If the minimum services intended CAM (70% at peak and 30% for the rest, quotes Joseph in his post), the problem is that the law gives this power, and who defaulting, exposed to sanctions. And in any case, I think workers might well have decided to comply with 50-0, then knowing that a judge would give them reason. The decision by defaulting I think it's completely unjustifiable, and that does not respond, as opposed to what he believes Jose, to protest against alleged abusive services by the CAM, but purely and simply the desire to inflict as much damage as possible, they know perfectly well that the city suffers, not Esperanza Aguirre. And they do, let's be clear, because they can. As they have done on other occasions. As they have done before Renfe train drivers. And SEPLA pilots. It is a typical performance of "union Privileged: they know they have the power to collapse Madrid and do so, the rest is excuses.
ave A lawyer, also a public official, he even questioned the right to strike of public workers, with good reason , (basically the biggest loser is not the company against which the protest, but the city, and also has secured the job). I'm not going that far. But I do think that when a group of workers has that power so important, you must apply a great responsibility to exercise it. And well explain to the public the reasons for its position. That's all I can do than other citizens who are suffering from the strike, are comprehensive: they understand well what the situation and motivations, and to see that act responsibly. None of these things has occurred in this case: no more than to hear the statements of some union representatives especially halters ("we will paralyze Madrid", "this lady is going to know who we are", etc.), To doubt very much of their responsibility and that injury to the citizen really care a whit.
So, the disciplinary measures that can make the CAM against Metro workers I'm afraid that will be applauded by everyone. Victoria Aguirre policy, unions lost opportunity to demonstrate responsibility in my previous post I gave them.
0 comments:
Post a Comment