Is a new game finally opening up on Ilva? We will know on Monday. So far the signals that have come from the government have not been encouraging and the three commissioners of the steel group have clearly stated in the Senate that the fund will end in September and that another 132 million euros will be needed within the year to save the largest plant in the steel of Europe. But surprisingly, after last Monday's inconclusive meeting, Minister Luigi Di Maio has called a new meeting with the social partners for next Monday to address the issue of employment on which the chances of a final agreement or not depend on the future of Ilva. This is how – in this interview given to FIRSTonline – the general secretary of the Cisl metalworkers, Marco Bentivogli, sees the Ilva case, the most aware of the trade unionists on the importance of what is at stake both for workers and for Italian industry and for the country's credibility.
Welcome, You defined last Monday's meeting with the Minister of Economic Development Di Maio on Ilva as an "inconclusive summer happening" while the clouds that hang over the future of the largest Italian steel group are growing day by day on several fronts: realistically, is there still a chance – and how? – to avoid the biggest industrial disaster in the country and to relaunch Ilva by the end of the year?
“A two-hour meeting with 62 associations and four members per association like last Monday, what else could it be? There was a minute each to ask questions, among other things only to receive clarifications of a technical nature with respect to the addendum presented by the company. Frankly, it seems to me a mode aimed only at wasting time. The comparison method should be more serious. The decision to extend the commissioner until 15 September was a mistake, we continue to lose 30 million euros a month and the contractor companies are making layoffs. Not only that, the plant is becoming less safe with each passing day for the health and safety of the workers, who are forced to mend their own harnesses. Environmental protection is also penalized by the lengthening of times, while on an industrial level, competitiveness and market shares are lost. All of this takes place at a time when Italian industry, in particular that of the engineering sector, which contributes over half of our country's exports, is forced to import steel, mostly from Germany. Minister Di Maio continues to move as if he were in an electoral campaign, but we cannot continue playing. In this dispute, time is not an independent variable: if the tender has serious defects and if there are extremes, you cancel it, but do not postpone the decision further. We will now see what will happen in next Monday's meeting"
How do you evaluate the new proposals made by ArcelorMittal on an environmental level and what are the distances that still separate the Indian group from the demands of the trade unions on an employment level?
“Some parts of the environmental plan, such as the coverage of the mining parks, had already started and will be completed in advance thanks to the work of the union table. On the addendum presented on Monday 30 July we learned of the desire to bring forward the implementation times of the environmental plan by a few months, as envisaged however in the old AIA of 2012. In essence, there is little new. However, we believe that the environmental plan and the industrial/employment plan must go hand in hand. There are still issues to be resolved on employment, in particular on the number of redundancies, 4.000 for ArcelorMittal. This will be the task of the trade union table, our objective remains that of finding an employment solution for all the employees of the ILVA Group and preserving related industries: the union negotiation had in any case brought the positions closer together”.
An agreement between the company and the unions could also represent an important push for the Government to conclude the game by reaching an agreement with all the parties involved but how realistic is such a scenario?
“We have made dozens of union agreements like the one we are discussing with ArcelorMittal in these years of crisis. Of course, there are still hurdles to overcome but they are not insurmountable. However, the order must be reversed: first the Minister clarifies what he wants to do, then the union agreement is reached. If there is clarity, an agreement will be found”.
In reality, Minister Di Maio's moves on Ilva raise doubts whether the Government really wants to quickly reach an agreement with the company and the unions that will secure Ilva and lay the foundations for its relaunch, but if of Taranto what would be the bill that Italy would have to pay in employment and industrial terms?
“To date, everything suggests that we are looking for excuses to cancel the tender. It must be clear that the consequences of any cancellation would be devastating, first of all for the workers and the South of Italy. I remind you that Ilva employs, directly and indirectly, 20 people and generates something like 1% of the national GDP. Then there would have to be calculated the economic damage and credibility of a country that calls into question the commitments made when the government changes. Arcelor Mittal can't wait for anything else and paying any disputes with taxpayers' money doesn't seem brilliant to me. Di Maio has two important ministries in hand: either he understands that everyone is involved and listened to, perhaps on the basis of representativeness, but then he is the one who has to decide or he continues to look for someone who will take his responsibilities, making his role useless. Governing with 100% consensus on one's own action is possible: if nothing is done. But in this way the environment, employment and industry all fall apart and we will not allow it".
Between the fluctuations and delays on Ilva and the no toTav and Tap A common thread seems to be emerging in the Government's strategy which expresses the propensity for the so-called "happy decrease": is the union aware of this? Don't you think that as of September the union should raise the bar on the industrial and employment terrain and propose a general mobilization to save Ilva but also the infrastructure projects started some time ago?
“On Ilva it is clear that we will not stand by and watch: there are 20 jobs at risk, our reaction in the event there are no concrete answers on the future before the expiry date of the commissioner, scheduled for September 15, will not be long in coming. Degrowth is never happy, if anything it is a source of widespread malaise and poverty. The results of our country since the post-war period have been possible thanks to industrial growth, which has brought widespread prosperity. In just a few decades, Italy has gone from being an exclusively agricultural and artisanal economy, with large pockets of poverty and inequality, to an industrial power, among the top 10 economies in the world. 52% of Italian exports are metalworking, can we ever afford an anti-industrial government? All this today is too often taken for granted, together with the benefits that economic growth, not degrowth, has brought: social assistance, health care for all, pensions, school, etc. Today there are certainly new inequalities that need to be rebalanced. To do so, however, greater growth is needed to close the gap with the other large industrial countries. Indeed, we are on the eve of the 4th industrial revolution: those who know how to seize the opportunities first and best will also obtain the benefits, but the conditions must be created by investing in tangible and intangible infrastructures. All this must be accompanied by work of a cultural nature. We have to rethink training and school because 65% of our kids who attend elementary school will be in jobs that don't even exist today. I repeat: when Di Maio really wants to govern, we will never shirk our responsibilities, but the blame game is not governing but giving the country the coup de grace".
