PARIS METRO MONOPOLY RATP BUYS UP MANCHESTER TRAM

A fter entering into the transport sector in London, Bournemouth and Bath in March, French state-owned transport group RATP – which in English stands for Autonomous Operator of Parisian Transports – has now implanted itself in Manchester. Its subsidiary RATP Dev announced last month that it was acquiring the British company Stagecoach Metrolink (SML), responsible for the operation and maintenance of the Manchester tram. This network has four lines and transports 21 million passengers each year. It should "grow in the short term," said the company, which refused to reveal the amount of the transaction. Formed in 1948, RATP has its origins as the public transport operator for the city of Paris. Today it is the fifth largest operator of urban transport in the world and now has more than 3,000 employees in Britain and a turnover of £200 million. "To achieve this acquisition, there were very tight talks between Stagecoach and RATP Dev and between RATP Dev and the Manchester transport authorities" said Jean-Marc Janaillac, CEO of RATP Dev. Wanting to compensate for the expected loss of its near monopoly in the Paris region due to EU transport ‘liberalisation’ rules, since 2002 RATP has launched itself as an international transport giant. This accelerated earlier this year after the merger between Veolia Transport and Transdev, which is 25 per cent owned by RATP. So it has expanded into Britain, taking over 62 bus routes in London and in Bournemouth. In Italy, where it already had a presence, it won the operation of bus and metro networks in Genoa and Venice. It also got hold of transport activities in Geneva, Switzerland. The present turnover of RATP Dev in twelve countries will triple to over £600 million in 2011. This subsidiary will carry 16.5 per cent of Group revenues in 2011 and it aims to increase it to around £900 million by 2015 ‘international agreements’ in Tier 5, have been set up for the international trade agreement commitments, though the UK government does not draw attention to this. UK government regulations actually encourage the use of Tier 2 ICTs. Transnational corporations bringing in skilled workers for less than a year can pay them just the UK minimum wage, made up to a low industry level wage with ‘tax free expenses’, and with no National Insurance. So UK regulations ensure that ICTs are, overall, a cheap labour source. Because these workers are brought in temporarily and rely on the corporation for their visa, they will not become organised. The EU’s Mode 4 trade concessions are the most sinister measure because of the secrecy, the implications for workers, and particularly for the permanence. They allow corporations to bring in workers for their own established operations but also to supply workers into other firms, relieving those firms of all employer responsibilities. Under Mode 4 the corporate right to displace UK workers with cheaper temporary migrant labour becomes irreversible, fixed in international trade law. India is the main country asking for Mode 4 access, so that Indian corporations such as Tata can supply cheap labour into the EU, though actually the UK is the main target. In the EU/India Free Trade Agreement, expected to be completed in December this year, Mode 4 labour access is the single demand that India is making. Thus this trade agreement hinges on British workers’ jobs being sacrificed in exchange investment opportunities for transnational financial services firms. Yet while the EU/India trade agreement is being heavily contested in India because of the effects there, British workers have not been told about it. There has been deliberate secrecy throughout the 4 years of negotiations. Tory Party, Lib-Dems, Labour Party, Greens and UKIP politicians, as well as high profile journalists, have all known about Mode 4 commitments but have failed to tell workers in Britain. The BIS House of Commons Select Committee, overseeing the Dept of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) which connects with EU trade policy, has similarly failed in its role. Despite the Committee’s extensive and expensive enquiries on trade, the labour aspect has not emerged in its reports. This supposed ‘watchdog’ committee has chosen to ignore it, despite the effects on workers and on the national economy, now and in the future. Workers in many sectors and at all skills levels will be affected by the Mode 4 commitments, especially in combination with existing internal EU labour liberalisation measures. Transnational corporations will cash in on importing cheap workers as long as UK government measures allow and facilitate it and disregard the negative effects. Clearly UK workers have to act for themselves to bring this to public debate. RMT has recognised the urgency of the threat of Mode 4 ‘labour commodification’ especially in the EU/India Free Trade Agreement and is campaigning to bring it to public attention and to hold the government accountable. WHY ‘MODE 4’? The World Trade Organisation categorises the ‘modes’ in which cross border services can be delivered. Mode 1 – e.g. by internet Mode 2 – client crosses border eg tourism, foreign student market Mode 3- company establishing cross borders Mode 4 – workers are moved as ‘service suppliers’ Company watch PARIS METRO MONOPOLY RATP BUYS UP MANCHESTER TRAM RMT helpline 0800 376 3706 :: september 2011 :: RMTnews 13 Gary Abbott