PRESIDENT’S COLUMN

www.rmt.org.uk :: february 2006 :: RMTnews 25 The recent Irish Ferries dispute provided a stark example of the kind of onslaught to expect on workers’ wages and conditions if the proposed EU services directive is implemented across the bloc. Irish Ferries announced plans to replace nearly 600 Irish seafarers with sweated labour from Eastern Europe at considerably lower rates of pay. The company ignored Ireland’s minimum wage legislation by registering its ships in Cyprus and the Dublin government claims nothing can be done about it. This provoked huge protests across Ireland and even Irish premier Bertie Ahern was ringing his hands about the injustice of the situation. Yet the Irish government is supporting the introduction of the EU Services Directive which would institutionalise the disgraceful antics of Irish Ferries into EU law and accelerate such ‘social dumping’. Exploiters’ charter The aim of the services directive, known as the Frankenstein Directive, is to introduce free-market competition to all economic services operating within the EU, including health and education. Under the Directive’s “country of origin” principle, service providers would be allowed to operate according to the laws of their country of origin rather than those of the host country – setting in train a further race to the bottom in terms of pay and conditions. This would allow companies registered in EU member states with minimal labour standards to undercut pay and conditions secured by workers in other member states. The directive would also allow a British company to establish itself in a poorer member state and return to Britain to implement lower standards. This is just the latest example of the EU’s neo-liberal agenda following directives demanding the ‘liberalisation’ of railways, postal services and other essential services. Brussels is using the free movement of labour, capital and services across the EU, enshrined in EU rules, to dilute and even destroy labour standards which have been hard-won over many decades by national labour movements. Tensions have been rising in Ireland since 2004, when Ireland joined Britain and Sweden in accepting workers from Eastern European countries newly admitted to the European Union. Over 200,000 migrants, chiefly from Poland and Latvia, now work in bars, construction sites and farms, often for cash pay below the minimum wage. The Irish trade union movement is now facing the problems that arise from merging an Irish labour force of two million with an East European labour force of 70 million. The services directive will only entrench these exploitative developments in Ireland and Britain by increasing ‘social dumping’, displacing workers with cheap foreign labour and feeding the poison of racism and the far-right. So what next? If the European Parliament adopts the services directive this month, it will then go to the European Council of Ministers. If past performance is any guide, the British and Irish governments seem likely to back the “country of origin” principle. However, the French government is calling for the withdrawal of the “country of origin” principle and “the Directive must not undermine the rules applicable in France in the area of employees’ rights”. Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder has warned that “the contents of the directive put fear and horror into the hearts of people” while the Austrian Chancellor has stated that he could only support a directive text that would “prevent social dumping”. Therefore, even if EU institutions backed these anti-worker directives, labour and democratic movements across the EU must campaign for their non- implementation. Tony Donaghey President’s column No to the Services Directive T he Estonian government has announced plans to buy 66 per cent of Estonian Railways from the US and Estonian investors who bought the company in 2000. Economy Minister Edgar Savisaar said that there was “a great probability that the Economy Ministry has come to the position that we support re- purchase”. The 66 per cent stake is owned by Baltic Rail Services, while the Estonian government owns 34 per cent. The current coalition government consists of the Reformists, the Centre Party and the People’s Union and one is against the purchase of the shares, but have said the current three billion kroons (192 million euros) being asked for by Baltic Rail Services is irrational. BRS paid about 1 billion kroons with the obligation to invest hundreds of millions of kroons. ”I want to know why the price has tripled in the meantime,” said Meelis Atonen, former economy minister who also sat on the council of Estonian Railway. “It is clearly too much. We should not pay for the unbeneficial investments like US locomotives that are not suitable and good enough for Estonian Railway”. Investment obligations set out in the contract have also not been fully met. Baltic Rail Services CEO Edward Burkhardt claim that investors have lost about 800 million kroons in revenues due to the low infrastructure fees set by the government that BRS can charge competitors. Some parties, such as the People’s Union, want to see the government regain control of infrastructure, while leaving cargo-handling to the private sector. But even if the government is only interested in the infrastructure, it will also have to purchase operating services as well. ESTONIA TO RENATIONALISE RAIL