© Arnaud Serexhe
The topic of Sunday business hours has launched numerous political discussions, but what do the people concerned have to say about it?
With multiple draft bills presented to the Chamber of Deputies in recent months, Sunday working hours and shop opening times remain a hot topic in Luxembourg. In a face-to-face discussion on Thursday, the OGBL trade union president Nora Back met with Arsène Laplume, general manager of the Massen shopping centre, to discuss the government's proposals.
Back expressed satisfaction at the recent Council of State backing for trade union critiques of the draft bills, saying their points could have been written by the unions themselves. Laplume, for his part, said it was regrettable that unions and collective agreements play a more vital role these days, as in times past it was down to employers to handle matters with their staff and people were less likely to work eight-hour shifts. However, the former LSAP labour ministers Dan Kersch and Georges Engel went on to apply a law which meant employees had to conduct long commutes for shifts of merely four hours.
Questioning the necessity of collective agreements
The OGBL president pointed to the law, which had not been respected in a long while. She said the unions were not wholly against Sunday business hours, but these should be encompassed by collective agreements. The businesses which currently open for longer than four hours on Sundays are already under collective agreements.
Laplume countered that weekends were vital for business turnover in northern Luxembourg. 20 to 35 years ago, Sunday turnover accounted for around 40%, but nowadays this has halved. Laplume also questioned the need for unions to work out collective agreements, as the government requires a legal framework.
Back replied that this framework only protects employees on minimum wage, and at the same time, minimum wage is not sufficient and lower than neighbouring countries in terms of purchasing power.
Opinions also differed on whether shops should even be open on Sundays. Laplume said Sunday no longer holds a special status as it did in the past, as the church plays a much smaller role in the population's daily life. However, Back said it wasn't about attending church, but instead ensuring that people's daily lives are regulated, and for example, ensuring children are cared for.
Are people getting sicker? Or is it a question of attitude?
The debate moved on to the topic of absenteeism. Back stated it was untrue that people were taking advantage of sick days more than in the past. Laplume countered that the National Health Fund registered a high deficit, to which Back questioned whether this could be attributed to absenteeism. She said if a company experiences a particularly high rate of absence, the employer should ask themselves why. Laplume said this was not due to working conditions but down to the hiring of young people in particular, to which Back retaliated that generalisations were unhelpful and that there should not be witchhunts against sick employees. She also refused to accept Laplume's claim that many women use pregnancy as an excuse to stay off sick.
When asked what impact an increase in minimum wage would have, Laplume said his business was already impacted, although it did not make up the largest proportion of the wage bill. However, he said there was a risk that prices of items such as food could increase, affecting consumption. Back replied that an increase in minimum wage could only positively affect purchasing power and the need for this measure was evident from the fact that Luxembourg has one of the highest rates of working poor – that is, people who experience financial hardship despite their employment.
