ammattiliitot ja tasa-arvo

Tässä kaikille Loimaan kassan faneille, varsinkin naisille:


OECD:n vuoden 2004 työllisyyskatsauksen mukaan maissa, joissa järjestäytymisaste tai työehtosopimusneuvottelujen kattavuus on korkeampi, vallitsee paljon suurempi tasa-arvo kuin maissa, joissa järjestäytymisaste on pieni. Uusia työpaikkojakin syntyy samaan tahtiin kuin muissa maissa. Näin OECD vahvisti sen, minkä Maailmanpankki oli jo omassa tarkastelussaan aiemmin todennut: liitot parantavat oikeudenmukaisuutta talouden suorituskykyä kuitenkaan heikentämättä.

Esim. USA:ssa eniten ansaitseva kymmenys palkansaajista (täysaikaista työtä tekevät miehet) hankkii 4.6 kertaa enemmän kuin matalapalkkaisin kymmenys. Kanadassa ero on 3.7 kertainen, Saksassa 2.9 ja Ruotissa vain 2.3 kertainen. Järjestäytymisaste on kuitenkin pudonnut vuodesta 1980 vuoteen 2000 mennessä 33 prosentista 21 prosenttiin kaikissa OECD-maissa. Erityisen suuri se on ollut Englannissa eli 51 prosentista 31 prosenttiin ja USA:ssa 22 prosentista 13 prosenttiin. Näissä maissa myös palkkaerot ovat kasvamassa.

Alla lyhyt yhteenveto OECD:n työllisyyskatsauksesta 2004.

"
Union Impacts - An Update

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Employment Outlook (2004) draws on comprehensive new statistical
evidence to confirm that countries with high levels of union density or
collective bargaining coverage are much more equal than countries with
low union density, but perform no worse in terms of creating jobs.
(Chapter 3. Wage-Setting Institutions and Outcomes.) This finding, which
is in line with a recent major review of the evidence by the World Bank
and a previous OECD study in the Employment Outlook for 1997, shows that
unions are still a force for greater fairness, which do not undermine
economic performance.

The OECD finds that gaps between higher paid and lower paid workers are
lowest where union density is high, and bargaining is either centralized
or closely co-ordinated. For example, the top 10% of male full-time
workers earn at least 4.6 times as much as the bottom 10% in the US,
compared to 3.7 times as much in Canada, 2.9 times as much in Germany,
and just 2.3 times as much in Sweden. High union density also narrows
pay gaps between women and men, and between younger and older workers.
By narrowing pay gaps, unions counter poverty and make family incomes
much more equal than would otherwise be the case.

While the OECD generally thinks that wages should be very flexible, and
that low wages price so-called low skill workers out of jobs, they admit
there is little evidence to back this up. If anything, countries with
high union density have higher rather than lower overall rates of
employment, especially for women, though there is a tendency for older
workers to retire earlier in high union density countries.

As the OECD notes, the impacts of collective bargaining can and do vary
a great deal between different countries and over different time
periods, and also vary with the extent to which bargaining is either
centralized or co-ordinated. Job creation and labour market performance
varies a great deal among both highly unionized and low union density
countries.

This study provides a great deal of useful detail on trends in union
density and collective bargaining coverage in OECD countries. Union
density (union members as a proportion of the workforce) has, from 1980
to 2000, fallen from 33% to 21% for all OECD countries (weighted by
population) with particularly big declines in the UK (51% to 31%), the
US (22% to 13%), Australia and New Zealand. Union density in Canada has
slipped a bit less than average, from 33% to 28%. The study also notes
that collective bargaining has tended to become much more decentralized,
though this has been offset by increased co-ordination in some countries.

While not drawing an explicit link from weaker unions, the study finds
that the share of business income going to wages fell somewhat from 1980
to 2000 (after falling sharply in the 1970s) and that real hourly wages
in the business sector of OECD countries as a whole have increased by
just 1% per year over the last twenty years. Also, earnings inequality
has tended to increase, most notably in the US and the UK. It is notable
(though not noted by the OECD) that earnings differences between the top
and bottom 10% of workers remain low and quite stable in the continental
European countries where collective bargaining coverage is highest.

Laatija: Andrew Jackson/Canadian Labour Congress

OECD:n työllisyyskatsaus 2004 osoitteessa: http://www.oecd.org/document/62/0,2340,en_2649_37457_31935102_1_1_1_37457,00.html