Workers reject increase was somewhat above the ceiling fixed by the state commission - an important political break-through. There were also additional increases for those below the average wage. The fifth holiday week will be introduced one year earlier. On the question of flexibility there was no change, so here the employers won. But it is a gen-
ON May 3rd, 82,000 workers in Norway's private sector went on strike for improved pay and conditions in the biggest action since
1921. Now negotiations in the publie sector have broken down, and there could be major strike action there too.
ANDERS EKLAND eral formulation; the concrete implementation is a question of local negotiations, so how this turns out depend to a large degree on the strength of the local unions.
### Out of touch
The fact that the trade union leadership was out of touch with the rank and file
-ORWAY is a rich nation, especial- the very meagre deal that was negotiated in ly thanks to its oil. But the the beginning of April. the defensive position of the working class in Europe to attack the established rights of the workers. They have tried to build a national consensus on low wage growth, or more precisely a wage growth that is in line with our main trading partners" as the official mantra goes. After a good agreement from the workers' point of view in 1998, the state set up a tripartite commission to look at wage-policy. The result was, not surprisingly, that the union leaderships accepted a very low ceiling for wage growth. They claimed that part of the wage increase in 1998 had to be considered as an "up-front" part of the 2000 agreement. Historically the differences between average industrial wages and the wages of senior executives in Norway has been relatively low compared to the US and continental Europe. In the nineties, the bourgeoisie has tried to change that, giving themselves generous wage increases, bonuses, and stockoptions of all kinds. Recently there has been a spate of "golden parachute" scandals.
### Culture of greed
This new culture of greed has also influenced the wages of the top union bureaucrats. The trade union negotiating delegation on average earned twice as much as the workers they represented! Profits have also shown a huge increase since the early nineties, with dividends almost tripling. In addition the tax system was changed in 1992, taxing capital gains less than before. So it was no surprise that the overwhelmingly majority of union members in the private sector voted no to 6 International Viewpoint #322 June 2000
Normally wage negotiations happen every second year, but this was to be prolonged to three years! There was increased flexibility. The hourly wage rate was increased by a tiny amount, about 0.1 Euro! Holidays would remain the same this year, one day would be added in 2001 and three more days in 2003! That sounds OK unless you understand that the fight for a fifth week's holiday started 18 years ago. The union bureaucrats tried to sell this deal to the rank and file but with no success. There was over 60% participation in the ballot with an impressive 64% against the deal. This was the largest no-vote on a national level since WWII. Of 17 individual unions taking part, 16 had a no-majority. The no-vote was a political victory for the trade union left based in the two parties to the left of the Labour party, the Socialist Left Party (its left-wing) and the Red Electoral Alliance.
### Left runs strike
It was very much the left that ran the strike — there was quite a consolidated layer of left trade unionists to the forefront. There was also important European solidarity especially from transport unions across Scandanavia and from IG Metal in Germany who boycotted the companies where there was action. The union leadership and the employers organisation did not want a drawn out strike in which they might lose more, so the strike was ended in eight days, with most of the left's demands won
The period before the next negotiations was to be two years as usual (not three). The wage increase was nearly four times higher than previously offered. This wage became very clear. When the no-vote hap pened, they explained it as a reaction to the golden parachutes and the "greed culture". But their moral indignation was not taken seriously as the press showed that union representatives on the boards almost without exception had kept silent when the golden parachutes were handed out.
What happened during this strike was a chain of positive events with important lessons for the future
• the political/trade union left has substantial support for its ideas and demands and could achieve more if it was better organised there are strong egalitarian sentiments among trade unionists,
• to work for active, democratic unions is of paramount importance.
In the public sector the teachers' and nurses' unions have had a high profile and demanded substantial increases, as much as 20% over a two-year period. This had an impact in the September parliamentary elections, in which the Socialist Left vote increased significantly - much of it from women in the public sector. These women are generaly more left-wing than males of the same age and income.
Sstudent nurses have refused to work in the hospitals, because they will not accept the low wages and bad working conditions. Given the high oil-prices, the level of wage increases for nurses and teachers is a political question for the Norwegian bourgeoisie. They have to decide whether a tough line or concessions are the best strategy for them in the long run. The no-vote in the private sector showed that there are limits as to how far they can sell their austerity policies so they may feel the need to make concessions to head off public sector action. *
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
* Norway austerity