After the drawn-out drama of Deutsche Bahn v. GDL with strikes of various intensity from July through December 2007, Germany is now facing another round of strikes, this time initiated by Verdi, the joint union for service personnel. Federal and municipal employers are offering a four percent salary increase over two years combined with a return to a 40-hour week as opposed to the current 38.5-hour week. The unions are demanding an eight percent increase or a minimum of €200 per month. Both sides are determined not to give in and have only negotiated such side issues as providing trainees with permanent contracts.

Verdi, GEW (Teachers’ Union), GdP (Policemens’ Union) and the Beamtenbund (Civil Servants’ Union) have joined forces for the first time and will coordinate strikes beginning on 14 February and lasting until 22 February.

The first step will be a strike by school teachers and daycare teachers as well as federal and local police. The federal police strike can influence security checks at various airports! Strikes against public transport (U-Bahn, bus, streetcar) have not yet been mentioned but are a possibility.

Negotiations are due to be resumed on 25 February.

Another possible target will be retail shops if the unionized salespersons decide to support Verdi (there will be voices here stating that you won’t notice them as service in Germany is rotten anyway).

I still can't resist.

Shop services expected to improve during the strike period.

Blimey! There's gonna be that many strikes that I'd better learn to speak French.

And I have to ask, why? It's the (un)civil servants that are striking not the shop workers. What have they got to do with the shops?

The Beamters are taking a risk, after all, if the country doesn't fall apart when they're on strilke then who needs them.

200 euro increase for 6hrs per month = 33 euro per hour... not too shabby. this sounds like it might be more than an 8% increase, or do civil servants in germany make such a high hourly rate?

The Beamter won't be striking - they're not allowed to. The Angestellter will be striking, leaving the Beamter to run skeleton services, as happened during the Bahn strikes.

i find it irkesome when teachers and some other services strike. Isn't there a better way to neogiate/discuss what you'd like withough affecting so many others (especially when it comes to kids, learning, and safety)?

granted, i don't think safety for that week would be a major concern... i can't imagine the people acting up due to less or no police.

@ maekelborger - from the linked article:


@ Allershausen: See the OP, salespersons are considering joining the fray.

Very unwise in the long run for salespeople to join in. Who needs unionized salespeople in the first place?

Might be the first step to getting self service tills.

There was a teacher's strike lasting several months when I was in high school back in Canada; I had absolutely no complaints. Although the people who had to take their exams for University in the fall, or parents stuck finding a way to care for their younger school-aged children while they were working really had a difficult time.

Erm, ok, I somehow managed to not see that bit, sorry!


Might be the first step to getting some service! They can employ people who know how to smile.

What planet are you on

A man can dream!

A couple of things should be clarified (or at least, I had to do a bit of research for clarification because I was confused about this contradiction -- perhaps the rest of you are not as dumb as I am). While the strike does involve police unions, and there are people who work for the police (secretaries and whatnot) who might strike, the police themselves cannot and will not 'walk out'. Your Joe Schmoe local cop already works beyond 38.5 hours per week (42 to be exact) so the negotiations don't apply.

Shoplifterskeepers of the world unite & take over (or: an explanation from ver.di on why they are so diverse).

Please note the punctuation on ver.di, they can get pretty sniffy about a missing "." to be honest.

I didn't want to confuse those not in the know. Matter of fact, I even removed the . with them in mind.

Wow, I wish I could join a union for sales people here in the States
We'd get paid mad money, and people don't smile because the customers suck

Even Angela Ferkel has said the improvment in the economy should be felt by everyone.
Like a LOT of people, TTers in private industry included, public employees have been facing falls in real term pay for years.
Why should they accept more cuts in real term pay now? Becasue that is what the employers offer ammounts to.

I agree with you Monkstown; over the last ten years or so the annual pay rises have been at or below the inflation level so, far from being an increase in pay they have been a nett loss. Also food and rent, particularly rent, have increased by more than the inflation level so that I now have less disposable income than I had a decade ago.
But the icing on the cake is to have my submissions for promotion or regrading turned down by managers who get a large performance bonus at the end of every year!

Not to be left out, the long term unemployed are organizing into a union and planning their own national walk-out to protest the current level of "Arbeitslosgeld" and "Hartz IV".

They're threatening to get jobs and begin working unless their demands are met.

A bizarre concept but it might work.

"non-workers of the world unite!"

will the u-bahns still be running?

Changes in real, i.e., inflation-adjusted pay have many causes: however, I don't suppose you would finger the rise in the MwSt, which also allowed merchants to disguise price increases concurrent with the MwSt increase.

At any rate, changes in real pay, may or may not reflect a reversion to the mean. What were the pay increases like between 1990 and 1995, for example? MT, I suppose you doubt that a person risking their own capital in a business is actually risking anything at all?

Ok so, what I don't get with all these strike people complaining that they need their pay increased. That just increases the fees and taxes everyone pays.

Why don't they argue that taxes should be less than the 50-60% that they are, figure out a way to work more productively in various things (seriously people, haven't you noticed how unproductive people are here - even when at work? I work less actual "tasks" here than I ever did stateside!) and get rid of the people who quite simply are incompitant to hire those who actually can and know how to do something (as opposed to those who sit with a contract screwing up to never be let go?)...

Oh wait.. that involve actually doing something... when they can kick back on strike, walk around for a few hours, leave to have a few beers, and let the unions negotiators demand more money - while the rest of us suffer.

Humm... some Democrat I am...

You look at the big fucks ups at people who "take risk" with their "own" capital.
You ever seen Thomas Haffa down the arbeitsamt or begging for change at Hauptbahnhof?

Bavarian Finance Minister Huber who has flushed MILLIONS of OUR money down the drain as boss of the Bayerische Landesbank, do tell me when you see him sleeping rough on the street.

There's a poster campaign out now from the public sector unions:
Good people, doing a good job, deserve good pay.

That applies to all working people, including TTers in private industry that are also seeing the bosses trying to cut their real term pay.

Ever heard of shareholders's equity, MT? As if no sole proprietorship or partnership ever went belly up, taking owners' invested capital with it.

Why Haffa is still in business is his great sales skills, TBH. Maybe your complaint should be about the German justice system.

As for Huber, well that's one problem with the concept of a Landesbank, MT. Public ownership also entails moral hazard and thus risks for the taxpayer. It's usually the far left that idolizes state ownership, BTW.


"Good" pay is subjective. BTW, what kind of job security do they have vis-a-vis those working in the private sector? Most of the ones I know all have jobs for life and can buy a property for no money down. Sloganeering is one thing- how about some numbers as to the cost of employing people in the public sector? Pay is a quantitative matter to which MT wants to decide using qualitative methods.


Well, MT, private sector pay has a lot of determinants, including firm- and industry-specific market conditions. If your firm's products or services face severe pricing pressure, something has to give, and for most firms, labor costs are the most significant input.

The concept of "job for life", if it ever really existed, is well on the way out for most working people in the public sector.
The trend is towards short term contracts, outsourcing, lower actual and real term pay - and that is something, despite their posturing, the SPD and Greens have also supported.

There are PLENTY of men and women in rich Munich who work a full time week providing essential public services and end up taking home significantly under EUR 1500 a month.
Funny how those who are against organised labour usually aren't the ones who have to try and bring up a family in an expensive city on those kind of wages.

They are worried about the privatisation of services leading to pay cuts.
They are worried about falling real wages.
They find it hard to pay rent even in the lowish end of the private rented housing market and face a public housing market that is contracting.

Are they supposed to just accept falling living standards?
Angela Merkel said EVERYONE should benefit from the improved economic situation.
It's time she put the money where her mouth is.

Paradoxically, MT, your proposed solution will actually hurt rather than help:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home

Since you are unable to do anything other than sloganeering, MT, perhaps you care to tell us exactly which sort of public sector jobs are paying less than 1500 euros a month Netto? Exactly how many public sector workers don't have civil service protection? Funny how you never seem to have numbers that quantify anything that you are complaining about.

Just because some politician (in this case Merkel) expresses a general opinion, it doesn't mean that there aren't other ways at looking at the issue.

Tax increases, MT, including the MwSt, help fuel inflation and a higher cost of living, yet you are noticeably silent on that. Economic reform is the best hope for any long-term increases in real wages, and there isn't a free lunch.

BTW, MT, how many people who make what are in your opinion low wages are also smokers? What basis do you have to say that those who aren't infatuated with the unions aren't themselves raising a family?

Qualified Kinderpfleger/In working in the public sector for example:
http://www.boeckler.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-3D...ml&vm=beruf

Interestingly some of the worst paid jobs in the public sector are the ones done primarily by women.


58% of those employed in the public sector in Germany DON'T have "beamte", "job for life" status:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96ffentlicher_Dienst
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beamte

Again, I'd GUESS that women are over represented amongst those that don't have such protection.


Heh?

No.

I opposed the increase in MwSt precisely because it hits the poorest hardest.
Likewise, the headline figures on inflation mean precious little to the low to middling income sectors as a greater proportion of their budget is spent on things that are rising fastest in price, notably food and fuel.


I would GUESS that the amongst the poorest in society there are a higher proportion of smokers.
But that's the deserving poor / feckless poor argument that conservatives have been trying to use for well over a century or more.

Well, MT, I bring it up because I know a couple of very modest means who both smoked regularly up to five months ago. The husband's doctor told him he had to quit for health reasons, so the wife did as well. They determined that they would save 2000 euros annually by not smoking. Those at the bottom of the income distribution who smoke could give themselves a hefty after-tax pay raise by quitting.

Could cut their food bill by robbing out of Tengelmann's as well.

But seriously, why should it always be the poorest who are expected to make the sacrifices?

Well, MT, like it or not inflation affects everyone, admittedly the poorest are hit the hardest. The poor are always the most vulnerable to any negative economic or financial changes, but your solution (cost-push inflation from large wage increases) will only perpetuate the problem- increased wage costs for employers will cause them to raise retail prices, so you are back where you began. The long-term solution is increases in productivity that lower unit costs of production.

Pious platitudes aren't going to overcome the laws of economics, MT. You simply cannot completely insulate the poor from price increases. That probably would come as an electrical shock to Kurt Beck and ver.di, but that's the way it is. Effective solutions will take that into account. Ineffective ones will merely cause additional problems without solving anything.

Food is a necessity. I sure hope you aren't claiming that cigarettes and cigars are. Of course, why is nutritiuous food taxed at all?

Increasing in productivity means more work done for the same money so less money for the same work.

The issue is quite clear cut: Working people tightened their belts in the tough times.
Now there is money in the economy why should they accept effective pay cuts?


Good point.
Given that the Linkspartei is campaigning for free at point of use nutricious meals in Munich schools, would you vote for them on March 2nd?

Cloud. Lining. Silver. While the streetsweepers have laid down their brooms and parked their little sweepy-carts to join the demonstration at Orleansplatz in Munich today meaning that Munich will be schmutzig, they are being joined by the traffic wardens.

Do you have any proof that this is the case over the long term, MT? Of course not. If you don't want to rely on increases in productivity at all to fuel any economic growth, then you are stuck with increasing inputs such as labor and capital. Problem is, wouldn't investors prefer to do that where productivity is increasing rather than, at best, standing still? Increase in real wages in the long run and throughout economies or industries is only possible through productivity increases, which are almost entirely fueled by increased automation (paid for by employers).

Your entire thinking in economics is based upon false premises which have been disproven long ago, and also jealousy.


It is certainly not clear cut. I don't think you were complaining about the sharp increases in the cost of labor in the 1990s, which were usually in excess of productivity increases and were a prime cause of the restraint earlier in this decade.
The euro also has a bit to do with it, but that's another story.
As for what public servants can and will accept, that is up to them, but it's not the free lunch you think it is. Public salaries must be paid out of taxes, and the federal government has to take the future fiscal conditions of the country into account in wage negotiations, something neither you nor ver.di is likely to care about (although they should).


The Linkspartei will obviously not be getting my support, in part because of their rabid anti-Americanism, but largely because of their overall nutty economic policies. As for free nutritious meals in Munich schools, I have no opposition to that. Now when will the Linkspartei campaign for a removal of the MwSt on all nutrituous food, which is precisely the issue I raised?

Does this mean I can park anywhere I want today?

What irks me the most about all these strikers in Germany is all the juvenile rattle-waving and whistle-blowing that these plastic big wearers engage in.

If youre gonna strike then at least try and be a little more innovative and stylish about it - see the strikers in France and Belgium. There a day of strike action is a full entertainment packed day out complete with fire-eaters, jugglers, drummers, musicians, great food..

err wrong. Let me put it in simple terms for you, since you like binary arguments. Inputs aren't limited to labour but also machines etc. You can have the people doing the same work earning the same money but productivity can be increased by using machines to increase the output.

You have to realise that not only do workers compete with other workers but also with the cost of capital. If you push up the cost of labour, capital investments become a relatively more attractive way of increasing outputs and thus productivity.

Please spell this out in simple terms. I can't see what point you're making or where the 6 hours are directly connected to Eur 200,-.

A man after my own heart !!

So, is MT saying that pay increases should match increases in inflation, i.e., be indexed to inflation?

I, for one, don't doubt this at all, but I am equally certain that businesses that can only exist by paying their employees less than subsistence wages have no justification to exist. Many members of the CDU/CSU believe that if they are dragged, kicking and screaming, to the negotiating table to agree a minimum wage, then that wage should be no more than Euro 4.50/hour. For those who struggle with arithmetic that's Eur 360,- week or 1440/month gross. Can anybody on this Forum tell me how somebody should live on this in a normal way, i.e. with all bills paid, a little money for leisure time and a little set aside for the unexpected ?
It's pure self-seeking, hypocrisy. Having experienced how things often work on this Forum, I would like to make plain, that I HAVE NOT said that you are a pure self-seeking hypocrite.

That sort of wage does seem very low; however, if it is so untenable, how would employers find anyone to work for 4,50 euros per hour? If the salary is too low, no one would work for it, especially in Munich, Wiesbaden, or Stuttgart.

For which types of jobs would such a wage be paid? How much do you define as a "subsistence wage" especially if you require money for leisure built into that wage? How can you assume that wage would have to support a family all by itself, or even a single person?

I think a better solution is a negative-income tax and reforms like a simpler tax code (among other things) to make it easier to start and operate small businesses.

As for self-seeking hypocrisy, it would seem to me that would only apply to someone who actually paid wages of something like 3 euros an hour in their own business. Do any CDU/CSU legislators at the federal level own businesses that employ workers? I rather doubt it.

I think that MT is saying that people should not accept the level of their earnings being diminished in real terms. How they do that is indeterminate as there are many means and strike action is just one of them.

Do they get paid while striking? What other means do they have to force employers to give them whatever wage increase they want (whether it is realistic or not)?

Seems to me some sort of proft-sharing arrangement might be best.

Been happening to me for years...

Wage levels: in extreme cases, in the hotel trade, room staff have been shown to be working for Euro 2/3 per hour. I'm afraid that your view that people wouldn't work for these pay levels is disproved by the facts. It's more a question of how desperate (an vulnerable) people are.

Subsistence wage: I don't need to determine this, the state already has in it's levels of social security benefit. Please don't tell me you don't know what these levels are.

Tax changes: I agree with you about simpler tax coding and making it easier to get into small businesses. I'm not sure what a negative income tax is. I'm not in favour of "top up" payments from the state to support businesses that can't pay realistic wages UNLESS it's a short term measure to help achieve stability.

I clearly struggle with maths. 80 hour working weeks? I presume you are taking the stupidly high Gerry taxes into account.


Thats why minimum wages are a stupid idea. If in my restaurant/hotel I have to up the lowest level staff from 66c to €4.50, then I have to also up the wages of every single person above them on the pay scale. My dishwasher needs more wages, my kitchen porter needs more wages than the dishwasher, my commis needs more wages than the KP, my chef de partie needs more wages than the commis etc etc etc. The end effect to me is an enormous increase in what I have to pay out, so I have to raise my prices to cover the price of labour. Inflation at best, bankrupt restaurant at worst.


Should I as a business owner have to worry about how "desperate" people are? If I advertise a job at 66c an hour, and nobody applies, then I have to raise the wages maybe. At some point, supply and demand meet in joyous capitalist harmony.

I think you'd be surprised, also at the same results with other parties, but this is really not the place. I may be a little radical but I'm fair. I'd be quite happy to discuss the make-up of the federal parliament with you at another time.