|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
Germany: Union and works council announce final shutdown of
Nokia factory
By Dietmar Henning
21 February 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
We can no longer save the location. These were
the words used by Ulrike Kleinebrahm, head of the trade union
IG Metall local, at a rally on Tuesday to announce the final closure
of the Nokia factory in Bochum. Shortly before the rally, the
Bochum works council and union representatives had met briefly
with the Nokia executive committee in the companys head
office in the Finnish city of Espoo.
The Bochum delegation, led by works council chair Gisela Achenbach,
had previously assured the 2,300 Nokia employees in Bochum that
the union wanted to ensure that the factory, which produces mobile
phones, stays in Germanys Ruhr area.
But the meeting in Espoo was merely a smokescreen, with Spiegel
Online referring to an illusory meeting. The closure
of the works in Bochum had been settled. The new Nokia factory,
near the city of Cluj in Romania, had already prepared to go into
production a few days previously. Over the course of the next
12 months, up to 3,500 workers are due to be hired at the new
plant to produce mobile phones for Europe, the Middle East and
Africa. The average wage of the Nokia workers in Romania is around
220 per month (gross).
In addition, it turned out that the concept drawn up by the
work councils for maintaining the factory in Bochum was already
outdated and had been presented to management last year. The works
council had calculated that on the basis of a 14.3 million
investment and a doubling of production based on the same staff
levels, the factory in Germany could produce as cheaply as workers
in the east European country of Hungary.
According to Kleinebrahm, the Nokia executive committee did
not even bother looking at the union plan: The managers
did not want to see our alternative. For Nokia, it was clear
the only issue was how to implement the closure.
The work councils were also aware that this was the only priority
and did not even bother to express the indignation that has ritually
accompanied the closure of other factories in Germany. Instead,
the union representatives were able to quickly arrive at a joint
statement with management, which began: Constructive discussions
were carried out over the future of the Nokia location in Bochumi.e.,
the closure of the factory! Both sides agreed to begin negotiations
on February 20, 2008.
Regarding the plan put forward by the union, the statement
then added casually: The management of Nokia must unfortunately
evaluate these alternative suggestions as unworkable. The necessary
efficiency was not reached and it did not support Nokias
total strategy.
The content of these negotiations over the closing down of
the factoryto be held just eight days before the Nokia board
officially inaugurates the closureis supposed to centre
on replacement work for the 2,300 Nokia employees. The statement
makes no mention of the more than 2,000 ancillary jobs (agency
workers and suppliers) that will also be lost. Both Nokia and
the works council evidently feel they have no responsibility for
these workers.
The statement continues by declaring that the works council
and Nokia had set themselves the common goal of finding
innovative solutions for the future of the Nokia employees in
Bochum. A priority is to find jobs for the Nokia employees
in Bochum with companies that both are trustworthy
and follow long-term business plans.
The trip by IG Metall representatives and the Bochum works
council to Espoo only serves to indicate to any impartial observer
that the works council, trade union and Nokia management were
involved in a plan that had been drawn up long before to ensure
that pre-Christmas work schedules could be adhered to prior to
closure. All the talk of innovative solutions, constructive
cooperation and trustworthy enterprises is nonsense.
For decades, the Ruhr area has a reputation for the type of
close cooperation between the IG Metall, works councils, management
and national politicians aimed at destroying thousands of jobs.
Many workers still remember the closure of the steel plant in
Duisburg Rhinehausen implemented 20 years ago in the face of bitter
resistance by the more than 5,000 workers employed in the plant,
who in turn mobilised the population of the entire region.
There then followed the closure of one works after another
in the region. In each instance, the union and works council submitted
alternative concepts, promised alternative jobs, negotiated
social plans and created occupational agencies that turned out
to be nothing other than the road to unemployment. At no point
was the trade union prepared to organise the labour disputes on
the basis of uniting workers at different locations. Instead,
they always saw their main role as advising management on how
the destruction of jobs could best be carried out on a socially
compatible basis, within the realm of the German system
of social partnership.
This was precisely what happened recently during the closure
of the BenQ works in Kamp Lintfort. After a series of unsuccessful
protests, demonstrations, solidarity actions and repeated offers
of cooperation, the BenQ works council then agreed to the setting
up of a so-called holding company to find replacement jobs. One
year later, more than half of the workers who had agreed to switch
to the holding company found themselves unemployed.
Now, the Nokia works council is trying to set up a similar
scheme. An additional concern for the works council, however,
is the fact that some of the Nokia employees in Bochum are former
BenQ workers and are therefore fully aware and sceptical of the
proposal for a new holding company.
A web of broken promises and lies
Proposals for such a holding company were put forward by works
council member Wolfgang Siebert in the course of his report on
the result of the meeting in Finland.
Nokia has agreed that every Nokia employee find a job,
Siebert declared, while also asserting that the works council
was keen to avoid any repetition of the experience with BenQ.
At the same time, Siebert made clear that the works council was
adamantly opposed to conducting any fight to save the existing
jobs.
When asked by a WSWS reporter if the union had any intention
of carrying out a campaign to defend jobs, Siebert rejected any
form of strike action. We have discussed a great deal with
the workforce today and the word strike did not crop
up, he said. That would be counterproductive. We would
only harm ourselves, he added. He then called out to those
employees surrounding him: Do you want to strike?
and without giving anybody time to respond, answered his own question
with a loud No. He then turned to the WSWS reporter
stating: See what I mean!
In the case of strike action, Siebert declared, production
would be distributed to other European works within the space
of a few hours. When confronted with the demand to call upon workers
in other countries for support, Siebert answered that such a proposal
was unrealistic based on the lack of support from the respective
national trade unions.
It is indeed the case that any common struggle by workers in
different countries and at different locations is impossible based
on the perspective of the trade unions. The initial reaction of
Finnish unions was to support the closure of the Bochum works,
while the Romanian trade union Cartel Alfa expressed its pleasure
at the setting up of the new Nokia factory. The Frankfurter
Rundschau writes of the local Romanian trade union leader,
Grigore Pop: Solidarity appeals by the Germans leave him
cold.
Only a week earlier, works council leader Siebert had used
a different tone and threatened the company with strikes, telling
the Frankfurter Rundschau: As soon as a final decision
is made, then the period of calm is over. If the decision
were made to close the factory, Siebert maintained, then a strike
was possible. I can hardly imagine we will be screwing mobile
phones together after the closure is announced.
Female workers reported, however, that from the very start
the works council had advised them to keep calm! Prior
to the meeting in Espoo, the works council told workers that they
should refrain from strike action to prove that the employees
in Bochum were a reliable workforce. Then, after the
meeting, workers were told that strikes made no sense because
nothing could stop the closure, anyway.
In discussion with the WSWS, one Nokia worker, Feride Poyraz,
declared that all the promises of alternative jobs made by the
trade union were aimed at reducing the level of compensatory payments
made by the company to sacked workers. Such a holding company
was no alternative: After one or two years, one finds oneself
unemployed anyway.
The same worker also doubted the assertions by the works council
that it was not aware of what management was planning: I
find that difficult to believe. The trade unions have more
obligations to management than to the workforce. Now they
come here and express their solidarity, but what were they doing
previously? Feride asked.
Most of the Nokia workers are pessimistic with regard to the
future. For Nokia, the closure is a done deal, said
Tanja Knoepke, who has worked for the company for 13 years. Tanja
was furious at the treatment of the workforce: At least
they could have given us proper notice. They already knew the
factory was threatened in 2006, when the subsidies ran out. And
then, when the plant in Romania opened up, the writing was on
the wall. But they said nothing. Now I am just one of 2,000 looking
for a new job.
See Also:
Europe: Nokia unions side with management
[5 February 2008]
Germany: Nokia announces closure
of its Bochum factory: The fight to defend jobs needs an international
strategy
[21 January 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |