Bus strike
While management imposes split
Over 16,000 Swedish bus shifts at its own conveniences, the drivers challenged their time between breaks can be as government's commitment to much as five hours. "Many drivers say the strike is about the right to neoliberalism and privatisa- go to the toilet!" This had now tion. Peter Lindgren reports. been resolved. "After two hours at the wheel, the driver will have the
The strike started on February 25, right to a 6-11 minutes break. After but expanded dramatically in early three hours s/he will have a break of
March, forcing the employers to 8-15 minutes. The privatisation of public urban sign a compromise deal on 9 March.
Kommunal, the union of public transport began in 1989, with private operator invited to submit employees had demanded a wageraise of three percent instead of the the lowest possible tender to one percent offered provide a fixed service. Competition employers. The final deal is 6.15%, is stiff, and the various companies see driver flexibility as a key means over the next two years.
But the real issue is working hours. According to union negotia- "We have paid a heavy price for tor, Anders Wettemark, you could this EU-instigated system," says start work at six in the morning, Anders Wettemark. "But this is also have one or two breaks during the the reason why the drivers were so day and quit your job at ten in the solid behind the strike."
According to Wettemark,
The union demanded that all member of the radical left Socialist work in a 24 hour period be Party, this is the most important confined to a 12 hour span, ensuring that drivers have a Swedish legislation still reflects reasonable amount of free time and the influence of the strong labour rest. The employers offered a movement. At 84%, Sweden's rate maxium span of 16 hours. The final of union affiliation is the highest in the world. The state appointed
According to Wettemark, mediators had no right to force any good for the few places where of the parties in a conflict to sign an employers are especially wild in agreement. the highly their behaviour, but in Stockholm, organised Swedish labour market, the average span is already 13 strikebreaking is not allowed during legal strikes. No-one, not even conservatives, promotes strike-
12 International Viewpoint #310 April 1999
Assisted by the NATO bureaucracy, the American administration prepared a grotesque under-estimation of the costs of NATO expansion. In 1996 the
Congressional Budget Office estimated that integration of the four Visegrad countries (Poland, Hungary, Czech
Republic and Slovakia) would cost 61-
125 billion dollars over the first 15 years.
The US Defence Department claimed expansion would cost no more than
$35bn over 13 years, with the US contrithe bution not exceeding two billion dollars
Api over ten years! In late 1997 NATO's
Vot
Military Committee came to the rescue, lon claiming that the three-country enlargever ment plan would cost only 1.5bn over ten
NA years, with the USA only paying 25% of doc the total. The Defence Department whi rejected its own calculations, and sed declared agreement with the new,
Ser ridiculously low "estimate."
dec
After four days of animated debate, for the mel
The strike was expected to be a of long one. Both sides had funds for a
Eut long fight. The employers costs
Hu were covered by the national
Th employers association SAF.
During the strike, Wettemark argued that "the decisive factor will in be the reaction of the general th public. That's why it is so important
A for us to launch a campaign explaining what our motives are.
We will collect signatures amongst the public, demanding that the
C employers sign an agreement acceptable for the union.
01
One opinion poll on the first day of the strike showed 85% public al support for the strike. By the last
In day of the strike, this had fallen, but re
Wettemark "this is a very hopeful g sign. Many, many people are experiencing the same problems as we in their jobs. Not only public employees has suffered during these last neoliberal years."
Swebus is the country's largest road transport company, with 30% of the market. The company was privatised several years ago, and sold to the British multinational
Stagecoach, an infamous union- busting company. In December 1998
Stagecoach drivers in New Zealand struck in protest at their new employer's anti-union behaviour.
This was the first attempt by
Stagecoach to try the same tactics in
The results were inconclusive. In their press statement following the settlement, the employers said "perhaps we have been too interested in bringing down costs. Maybe in the future we shall try harder to attract more passengers." *
• PO Box 27410, London SW9 9WQ, Britain.
Rest of world e-mail <International_Viewpoint@compuserve.com> moln, тn2.. 9719048. Editor and director: Yannis Felekis, Eressou 34, 106 81 Athens, Greece. Printed by loannis Kotsatos & Cia, Marinou Antipa 4, 163 46 llioupoli, Greece. Distributed by
the Madrid accord was ratified on 30 April, by a comfortable majority of 80 votes in the 100-seat senate. Though the long (7,000 word) resolution contained very precise instructions and limits on NATO development and its new strategic doctrine. By fixing some of the issues which would otherwise have been discussed at NATO's Washington summit, the Senate confirmed the continued dual decision-making process in American foreign policy.
According to the Senate resolution, the main justification for NATO enlargement was "the possibility of reemergence of a hegemonic power confronting Europe, and tempted to invade Poland, Hungary or the Czech Republic." The resolution clearly stated that: • "NATO decisions and actions are independent of all other intergovernmental forums," such as the United Nations, OSCE or Euro-
• Russia has no veto over NATO decisions, even from within the
Permanent Joint NATO-Russia
• NATO can engage in missions outside its own territory if there is consensus among the member states about the existence of a threat to their interests. • US "leadership" of NATO is reaffirmed, including the continued guaranteed presence of US officers in
International Viewpoint
NAVY
most of the key command positions. • The military and financial costs will be "shared" in a "more equitable" way, ie the Europeans will pay more. In fact, NATO enlargement will not mean any expansion of the US contribution to the Organisation's budget. The US contribution in 1998 is established as a ceiling for all future annual payments. • The US president is obliged to consult the Senate before any further enlargement of the alliance.
This last point is the biggest limit on the Clinton administration's future
An amendment proposed by Republican Senator John Warner (Virginia) fixes a three year minimum waiting period before any future admission of new members to NATO. He received 41 votes, which is not enough to pass the amendment, but enough to block any new admission, which requires 67 Senate votes.
This is a problem for Clinton. The official line, adopted at the Madrid summit, is that NATO has an "open door" for east European countries, including the three Baltic republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Moscow has explicitly stated that integration of these former Soviet Republics into NATO would be a casus belli.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, the main architect of the first phase of NATO enlargement, has already proposed that the Washington summit invite Slovenia, and maybe even Rumania and Lithuania to join the alliance.
The Clinton administration faces a real dilemma at the Washington summit. Either the US pushes back any new enlargement decisions, which will give the impression that there will be no more expansion, or accept further expansion, but risk rejection of this decision by the Senate, which will demand an evaluation of the first stage of expansion before any further countries are admitted.
In fact, the first three new members are still far from military integration. This, of course, weakens NATO's military vocation, which, for the Senate, is its most important characteristic.
The Senate is very unlikely to approve Lithuania's integration into NATO, even if the NATO states agree to
A compromise might be possible over Slovenia, since integrating the ex-Yugoslav republic would create territorial continuity between the existing NATO states and Hungary.
But one thing is sure. The decisions adopted at the Washington summit will depend more on the orientations voted by the US senate than any of the concerns European governments. * * The author teaches political science at Université de Paris- VIII, France. This is the text of a report he presented at a symposium on Europe held in March. We thank him for authorizing us to reprint it.
Eleven issues, delivered by airmail for only
YOUR NAME
Britain/Ireland
ADDRESS
Denmark
Germany
Greece
Holland renewal new subscribers
£25 £13 DKK 380 DKK200 DM 110 DM 55 6000 dr 3000 dr f95 f50
CODE
CITY
E-MAIL/O
COUNTRY
Send no cash with order. We will invoice you.
Sweden
Australia/NZ
Canada
USA
SEK 400 SEK 200
$ 70 0 $ 35
CS 80 C$ 40 •
USS 70 US$ 35 0
USS 70 US$ 35
International Viewpoint #310 April 1999 13
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
half price for all new readers! Analysis with attitude!