The government has submitted a bill proposing longer or more frequent Sunday opening hours for shops. The legislation faces opposition not only from trade unions and opposition parties but also from within the ruling Christian Social People’s Party (CSV) party – particularly parliamentary group leader Marc Spautz. Additionally, the Council of State has expressed concerns as the bill was once again discussed by the responsible parliamentary committee on Wednesday.
Read also – Frieden brushes off party criticism over Sunday work reformDespite the contentious debate, the mood ahead of the session was unexpectedly positive, including from the Minister of Labour, who has faced strong resistance in recent weeks. This stands in contrast to the cautious stance of the Council of State, which stopped short of opposing the bill but urged legislators to carefully consider its implications.
If a balance is to be struck between the practical needs of employers and the protection of employees, the Council wrote, the potential negative impact of Sunday work on family life must not be underestimated.
The unions have intensified pressure by sending a letter to Prime Minister Luc Frieden, demanding that Sunday work be a key topic at the upcoming government, employer, and union meeting scheduled for 9 July. They insist that the draft law must explicitly require any extension of Sunday opening hours – from four to eight hours – to be contingent on a collective agreement or an inter-professional accord.
Read also – Government open to dialogue and compromise on pensions: PM FriedenIn light of this forthcoming meeting, the issue of Sunday work was removed from the parliamentary committee’s agenda on Wednesday. Labour Minister Georges Mischo expressed reservations about the unions’ demands ahead of the talks: “That is not optimal, and I believe the Prime Minister will now look to steer the dialogue in the right direction so that we are not stuck from the outset, and can have a constructive discussion on equal footing.”
This cautious approach has found some resonance not only within the opposition but also among members of the parliamentary majority.
MP Marc Spautz said: “On one hand, I was a bit surprised by such a letter, but on the other hand, I understand that they wanted to remind everyone what their priorities are. It’s also logical that if they make demands, the employers will respond with their own demands if they haven’t already. However, I’m confident that on 9 [July], we’ll be able to discuss every aspect with full knowledge of the facts.”
Echoing this sentiment, MP Marc Baum of The Left (Déi Lénk) said: “I think their main goal is to clarify exactly what is on the agenda. They’ve previously experienced institutional meetings where they were more or less sidelined. So it makes sense to set the framework clearly from the start. If we want a discussion on equal footing, as the Prime Minister said, I find that quite understandable.”
The opposition remains sceptical that the 9 July meeting will lead to a definitive solution.
MP Georges Engel from the Luxembourg Socialist Workers’ Party (LSAP) stated: “They will have to see whether they can put all those topics on the table on 9 July. I would be surprised if they manage to do it in one morning. And if not, then they need to take their time. That’s also part of social dialogue, to really listen to one another.”
MP Djuna Bernard of The Greens (Déi Gréng) also said: “The whole process needs to be in a format where people listen to each other constructively, in one or more sessions. That’s basically what a tripartite is about, and the reality of the situation makes it necessary.”
As the 9 July meeting approaches, all eyes will be on how these discussions unfold.
