Bilateral III: no specific protections for trade unionists (cross-border guide)

Context

In a nutshell

• The Economic and Tax Commission of the Council of States ruled out the rule that would have strengthened protections for union representatives in companies. - Measure 14 aims to ensure better protection of social partnership at company level. - The Commission justified the decision contrary to measure 14 on the grounds that it would not be directly related to the Switzerland-EU package.

The details of the decision

The Economic and Taxation Commission of the Council of States examined the proposed introduction of a rule that would strengthen protections for union representatives in companies. Measure 14, in particular, aimed to ensure better protection of social partnership at company level, even in the event of conflicts or changes in the structure of the company. According to the sources, the Commission justified the decision contrary to measure 14 on the grounds that it would not be directly related to the Switzerland-EU package.

The current situation

Switzerland is a country known for its economic stability and its ability to attract foreign investment. However, the Economic and Taxation Commission of the Council of States decided to exclude the rule that would have strengthened protections for union representatives in companies. This means that Swiss companies will not be obliged to introduce protective measures for trade union representatives, even if it is likely

Operational details

The Council of State's Economic and Taxation Commission ruled out the rule that would have strengthened protections for union representatives in companies. Measure 14 aims to ensure better protection of social partnership at company level. The Commission justified the decision contrary to measure 14 on the grounds that it would not be directly related to the Switzerland-EU package. The Swiss Trade Union (USS) had defined in February the protection of staff representatives from dismissal as a "minimum solution" which, as an "indispensable part" of the package of measures, should not be called into question.

The Commission's decision elicited negative reactions from trade unions. The USSF stated that measure 14 was a fundamental request to ensure the protection of workers' rights. In particular, the USS highlighted that protection from dismissal is an essential rule to ensure freedom of association and collective bargaining.

In Switzerland, protection against dismissal is regulated by the federal law of 24 March 1943 on trade unions and freedom of association and collective bargaining (LPOS). According to LPOS, union representatives are entitled to special protection against dismissal. However, the law does not provide any specific protection for trade union representatives in companies.

The decision

Useful tools to protect your net income

To reduce FX leakage, compare CHF-EUR exchange options and banks for cross-border workers.

Key points

The Council of State's Economic and Taxation Commission ruled out the rule that would have strengthened protections for union representatives in companies. Measure 14 aims to ensure better protection of social partnership at company level. The Swiss Union of Entrepreneurs (USI) had expressed scepticism on this point. The Commission justified the decision contrary to measure 14 on the grounds that it would not be directly related to the Switzerland-EU package. The Commission stressed that measure 14 is not closely related to the Swiss-EU budget package, which includes 130 measures to modernise trade and social legislation. Of these, only 30 are directly linked to labour legislation. The Commission also highlighted that measure 14 was not the subject of consultations with trade union and business representatives. The Commission's decision has been criticised by trade unions, who argue that measure 14 is necessary to protect workers' rights. The unions also pointed out that the Commission has already approved other measures that could have a negative impact on the social partnership. In Switzerland, social partnership is regulated by federal and cantonal laws. The Federal Labour Act (LStG) of 13 December 1943 sets out the general principles of social partnership. However, labour legislation varies greatly from canton to canton. The study also highlighted that Swiss companies that have a stronger social partnership have lower productivity than companies that do not have a social partnership. References to regulations Federal Labour Act (LStG) of 13 December 1943. Labour Law of the Canton of Zurich of 12 May 1995. Comparisons between practical scenarios Measure 14 could have a negative impact on the attractiveness of Swiss companies. Swiss companies that have a stronger social partnership are less attractive to foreign investors. Swiss companies that have a stronger social partnership have lower productivity than companies that do not have a social partnership.