UEL president Reckinger blames unions for collapse of social talks

The president of the Luxembourg Employers' Association (UEL), Michel Reckinger, said on Thursday morning on RTL Radio that the government’s failure to reach an agreement with the social partners was mainly the unions’ fault. He stated that the social partners are not impossible, but entered the social round with different points of view.

The unions defended their role in collective agreements and accepted slight increases in pension contributions. The existing mechanism for the readjustment of pensions and year-end bonuses will remain in place, slowing the adjustment of pensions to wage progression, and people wishing to retire at 60 will have to work eight months longer.

But for employers' representative Michel Reckinger, these steps did not amount to real compromise. "No, I don't think you can put it that way," he said. “You have to look at where the negotiations began.” He stressed the importance of looking at the starting point, namely the increase in legal Sunday working hours from four to eight, which only shops with fewer than 30 employees can still do without a collective agreement

'Fake news'

For the employers’ representative, however, the reference point was not the current legal situation of four hours, but the government’s draft proposal to raise Sunday working hours in retail entirely from four to eight without linking them to collective agreements.

The argument that collective agreements would have been weakened by the initial draft was not accepted by Reckinger. He also said he could not understand why the unions opposed eight Sunday hours, since employees who already worked four hours “want to work longer” and would receive the supplement.

Reckinger also accused the unions twice of spreading "fake news": first regarding the government’s stance on collective agreements, and second to attract participants to the 28 June demonstration. (Editor's note: It could not be verified whether the claim came from the government or the employers, nor whether union flyers or slogans such as "Our pensions are in danger" met the definition of fake news).

Asked whether his criticism also applied to the 12,000 to 15,000 demonstrators or the Christian Social People’s Party's social wing, Reckinger replied: “Thank God I have nothing to do with the social wing of the CSV,” calling the matter an internal issue for the party.

Pensions: 'Employers alone stood up for the youth'

Pensions remained the central issue. Here too, the Reckinger saw no concessions from the unions. He declared that in the social rounds, employers were the only ones who had demanded saving measures.

In this sense, he said, they were the only ones standing up for the youth, who would have to pay more if the reform did not go far enough. He even stated that they had been the only ones to put “ socially cushioned measures” on the table, indicating there should be some measure of fairer redistribution.
 
According to Reckinger, one positive outcome was that everyone had become wiser since the pension debate began almost a year ago. However, the employers’ representative expressed hope that pensions would not become an election campaign issue, but that further measures would already be taken before the 2029 elections. The subject, he said, was too important to risk triggering a bidding war of “very quick, very simple, populist solutions.”

Listen to the full the interview in Luxembourgish