economist Pietro Ichino response to reports of "L'Espresso" A " union question "now exists, but has nothing to do with that of the" cost of politics ", much less alleged enrichment, career advancement and privileges of various kinds fueled by public money. To defend the union from allegations contained in the previous issue Espresso which defined the CGIL, CISL and UIL as a "caste" is today, Thursday, August 9, economist Pietro Ichino, professor of Labor Law at the University of Milan and former head of the CGIL union, in an editorial published in the Corriere della Sera . Article of the week the unions had reacted immediately. "An operation in cold, without arguments, without any investigation, including distortions intolerable, so he called Guglielmo Epifani, overshadowed the risk" of a nineteen return, ie the attempt to put to shame the institutions, the first policy and parties, then the union, "sounded the alarm on the desire of many" of a simplified society, within which the powers that are opposed to individuals, no more bodies than half, according to liberal ideology that leads the world market, wiping out rule is being viewed as a hindrance. " For the leader of the CISL Raffaele Bonanni's goal was "to make us pay for our freedom, because it weakens the union, which is rooted and strong in Italy, it is convenient to many," and had confirmed that the unions are working and will work for democratic Italy and through the joints of the representations we will confirm this. "defenses to these (ex officio, one could argue) is added to Ichino, intellectual close to the world of work but, especially in recent years, often not "tender" with the unions. The first replies Espresso economist who had accused the confederations to have benefited, in the seventies, the distribution of substantial real estate assets of the dissolved fascist National Union. The weekly says Ichino, however, "does not say to those who never should have been assigned to that heritage, if not to the heirs of free trade unions in the early twenties who had seen their sites put to the sword by the squad in black shirts and were were expropriated and then deleted from the system. " Concerning the public contributions to charitable (for security practices) and the CAAF (for tax returns), Ichino said that "a credible criticism should be based on a rigorous assessment of the cost and value of those services, which benefits every day with a good average degree of satisfaction, millions of workers" . The real question for economists is that of a trade union law "unfinished", a system of industrial relations "opaque and sticky," which favors "the fragmentation of trade union representation, guaranteeing the same rights as the proclamation of the strike, assembly and paid leave unions also joined in less than one percent of workers ". The problem is "the absence of rules on the representation and the weakening of the ceasefire pact, so any employee can join a strike called the day after the conclusion of the contract ", an absence that privileges" in fact who can scream louder. "The central trade union apparatus, Ichino said, "want a highly centralized system, in which almost everything is decided at a table in Rome, but it is unclear who is entitled to sit at the table and representing who." This approach results in marked abnormalities: for example, "representing almost exclusively expressed by regular workers and entrepreneurs of the north-central to negotiate contracts for to apply without exception throughout the national territory, even if it is inconsistent with the development of southern regions. " The call of the economist, then, is a reform of the matter: "it would be desirable that the system of industrial relations was able to give himself the rules that are currently lacking. But if it is not capable, it must be the legislature to do so. This happens in all civilized countries, you do not see why that should not happen in ours. "
(www.rassegna.it, August 9, 2007)
0 comments:
Post a Comment