Because the general strike of December 16 is incomprehensible
All the mistakes of CGIL and UIL with the general strike of 16 December. The analysis of the columnist Giuliano Cazzola
Adapt is a study center too attentive to labor problems not to deal with the proclamation of the general strike of 16 December, moreover by two trade unions (the CGIL and the UIL) with the dissociation of the third (the Cisl ) which expresses a different (and substantially positive) opinion on the results of the discussion with the government; while those same contents have become the reasons supporting an abstention from work of relevant political significance. A general strike always has a political value, the legitimacy of which no one questions since, in a democratic system, the trade unions are recognized the right to demand a profound change in the socio-economic direction of a country in their opinion better suited to their interests. of the world of work. In this case – if it is allowed to note – there are particular elements that reinforce the political character of the general strike, starting from the context in which it takes place: the presence of a government of broad understandings chaired by a personality of international stature such as Mario Draghi; the massive rebound (exceeding all expectations) after a dramatic drop in GDP in the first half of 2020; uncertainty about the development of the health crisis and the effects of any restriction measures; the extraordinary commitments deriving from the historic occasion of the NGUE (and the Pnrr), as well as – si parva licet – the forthcoming election of the Head of State, which on this occasion constitutes, for the personality who will go to the Quirinale, an indication of the political direction national and European in the coming years.
As the balance of power in the country stands, a general strike today cannot be accused of corresponding to the interests of an opposition party, since the transmission belt has been turning in the opposite direction for a long time; and today it is the trade unions, in particular the CGIL, that throw Brenno's sword on the balance of power. The writer has had the opportunity – thanks to the courtesy of Adapt – to express his evaluations – even critical ones – on the budget bill in particular as regards the rules on work and pensions. If he is allowed a technical judgment (as a former trade unionist), the undersigned shares the judgment of the CISL on the outcome of the negotiation and on the results obtained by the trade unions (even if he happens to not consider some of them positive).
Remaining at a technical level, as regards the reasons for the general strike, in the debate of these days there is increasingly, as the cause of the agitation, the dissent on the distribution of the 7 billion reduction in personal income tax, within the same universe. of employees and pensioners, according to a hallucinating approach, because it has never been seen – except in the times of the most vulgar egalitarianism – that the "opponent" was the recipient of a medium or medium-high income and that "Class struggle" took place between supermarket orders and employees who were once defined as "concept". In short, the straw that broke the camel's back and provoked the use of the strike seems to have depended on the lack of (due to certain parties) that "solidarity contribution" which had to balance the increase in bills for an amount of 250 million (immediately recovered from other sources) as part of a "refreshment" which in a few months exceeded 7 billion. However disproportionate the reaction may be (even if we add a little more to pensions, ignoring the recent calls from the OECD) it would not be the first time that the unions have exaggerated.
Personally, I remember a general strike that was very successful until the De Mita government fell in the early 90s due to the introduction of a ticket on hospital admissions worth 300 million (lire), which the subsequent government , chaired by Giulio Andreotti, was urged to abolish. I will be wrong but I find instead deeply incorrect the reasons why CGIL and UIL have called the workers to strike, as if they wanted to impose, with the struggle, a different vision, marked by a dogmatic pauperism, of the situation of a country that seeks to to emerge from the crisis forward. Basically, Italy has returned to the fore on the international scene, has recovered the confidence of partners and markets, is in third place in the G20 countries for the growth rate exceeding all expectations, is at the forefront of the vaccination campaign of mass or is it a country in disarray, poorer and more desperate? Draghi certainly does not need Landini to remind him that these economic results are the result of the rebound and that their consolidation is by no means assured, in the presence of the risks incumbent on the cost of raw materials, inputs and services, as well as due to the uncertainties of the evolution of the pandemic in its unpredictable variants. But the disconcerting aspect concerns the reasons for the general strike, their generic nature.
December 16 seems to be the day of destiny, of catharsis, of a world of work that rebels because – as has been written – "in Italy there is more and more a huge social question that deserves concrete answers". The same social unease that Pierpaolo Bombardieri wants to bring to the streets "because in Italy all is not well". Thus the strike becomes a sort of exorcism of the ills of the country, the bloodletting of a surgeon at the time of the technological revolution, the sacrifice of a heifer to an unknown, annoyed and malevolent god.
Let's read what CGIL and UIL have placed at the basis of the mobilization (which then went “up to the general strike”): to counter precariousness and tax evasion; reform pensions; prevent relocation; launch a new industrial policy that gives the state a stronger role in the economy; provide more resources for health, education and non self-sufficiency; reduce inequalities starting from the South; relaunch social cohesion. It seems that the CGIL and UIL, in building their platform have looted the slogans of the banners displayed during the demonstrations. But the government could respond to this "genericism" in terms – also general – but much more precise, planned and financed in the context of the NRP and in the time frame up to 2026. Yes, because no budget law could have the superhuman ability to respond to the demands of trade unions. The budget law could anticipate, while remaining in its ordinary role, some medium-term reform content. It may not be the case. But CGIL and UIL cannot pretend to ignore that there are other institutional and administrative bodies in which the government tries to carry out those reforms, envisaged as precise conditionalities in the PNRR, which cannot be circumvented or postponed, because from their correct implementation the disbursement of substantial loans depends. Do we want to talk about work?
FRAMEWORK OF MEASURES AND RESOURCES (BILLION EUROS): Total 6.66 billion.
Intervention areas / Measures Total 1. Active employment policies and employment support 6.01. Reform 1.1: Active employment policies and training 4.40. Reform 1.2: National plan to combat undeclared work – Investment 1.1: Strengthening of Employment Centers 0.60. Investment 1.2: Creation of women's businesses 0.40. Investment 1.3: Gender Equality Certification System 0.01. Investment 1.4: Dual system 0.60. 2: Universal civil service 0.65. Investment 2.1: Universal civil service 0.65.
Let's imagine that news will have reached the headquarters of the warring organizations, of programs that they themselves had agreed with the Conte 2 government (nostalgia, rogue!) Precisely in order to obtain greater "employability" and more stable and qualified employment relationships (Gol , skills plan, reform of the cig, etc.). We want to remind those who feared, with the lifting of the block, a massacre of layoffs, that instead there is a clear prevalence of voluntary resignations? "The growth in terminated relationships concerns all causes of termination: among these the most significant increase – writes the Job – is constituted by Resignations (equal to 85.2%) while a more contained growth is recorded in Retirements (+2, 0%) in other lawsuits (+ 12%) and in layoffs (+ 17.7%, equal to +17 thousand) ". (source: Ministry of Labor).
As regards the tax reform, there is a delegation bill in Parliament, requested by the EU; in the budget bill new rules are foreseen for the collection (now they are at about 12% of the amounts ascertained and due). Then there is the problem of the fight against tax evasion which allows us to return to the PNRR in which the following is foreseen: “Shifting the tax burden from work, in particular by reducing tax breaks and reforming out-of-date cadastral values. Countering tax evasion, particularly in the form of non-invoicing, by enhancing mandatory electronic payments also by lowering the legal limits for cash payments ".
In the field of education and research, the Pnrr envisages the strengthening of the offer of educational services: from nursery schools to universities for 19.44 billion, to which 11.44 billion are added for research for a total of 30.88 billions. Approximately 40% of the “territorializable” resources of the Plan are destined for the South, reflecting the attention paid to the issue of territorial rebalancing: it is worth remembering since just yesterday an authoritative trade unionist accused the government of having forgotten the South.
More than 11 billion are allocated to inclusion and cohesion, also with reference to the problems of disability (another reason for criticism of the government) with the aim of de-institutionalizing and promoting the autonomy of people with disabilities, through the strengthening and the qualification of the offer of social services by the local areas, the simplification of access to social and health services, the revision of the procedures for assessing disabilities, the promotion of independent living projects, the definition of individual projects and customized.
In order to develop public health that enhances investments in the health system in terms of human, digital, structural, instrumental and technological resources, strengthen scientific research in the biomedical and health sectors and strengthen and innovate the technological and digital structure of the NHS at Central and Regional, 8.63 billion are allocated which according to the CGIL and UIL are insufficient: any regrets for the Mes?
Venenum in cauda industrial policy which according to the strike platform must provide for a role of the state in the economy. In truth, just under 24 billion are allocated in the NRP to strengthen the export-oriented manufacturing sector in the challenge of innovation and modernization through contributions to support investments in machinery, plants and equipment for technologically advanced production. The amount of the contributions is equal to 40% of the total amount of the admitted expenses.
We stop here. Far be it from us to play the pipe for the Draghi government. The "landing" of programs and the adequate use of resources face a path full of pitfalls and limits that are difficult to overcome. But the purpose of this paper is another: to demonstrate that those union requests, randomly strung like slogans, for which Italian workers are called to strike, have already received more than adequate responses. Much more concrete and detailed than claims that seem to be an auto-da-fé by trade unions that do not contribute to solving the problems, but become (would it be better to say "remain"?) Themselves a relevant part of the "Italy question".
Article published on bulletinadapt.it
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/economia/perche-lo-sciopero-generale-del-16-dicembre-e-incomprensibile/ on Thu, 16 Dec 2021 06:49:49 +0000.