A philosopher of German romanticism wrote that the hunt is worth more than the prey. The same concept, referring today to the crucial question of work, could be re-read as follows: the training and professional path is worth more than the job. Because if the first is valid, the second cannot be missing. These are considerations that come to mind in these hours, when a discussion on the labor market is open between the Government and the social partners with the aim of implementing reform measures which, together with the "packages" of liberalization and administrative simplification, should promote, within the framework of a European strategy, the productive structure of the country so that it can grasp the proteus of economic recovery as soon as it appears on the international markets.
There are many problems to face and, possibly, solve or, at least, start a solution. To summarize them, it would be enough to go and re-read what the ECB wrote in its letter of 5 August: thorough review of the rules on the hiring and dismissal of employees; better protection against unemployment; the adoption of active policies which make it possible to re-employ workers who have lost their jobs in more dynamic sectors.
These are complex issues that require, as regards the reorganization of social safety nets, the allocation of significant resources or, at least, the reallocation of those now used for the various forms of income support. The Government does not have such additional resources. The attempt to reconvert and redistribute the existing ones was precluded, on the occasion of the first meeting, by the outcry of the social partners in defense of the current, unbalanced structure. Basically, there remains only one way to send a strong signal to the international community and to the markets, which is understood with the same simple and effective clarity with which, in terms of social security, the increase in the retirement age was accepted.
This signal is called the reform of Article 18 of the Workers' Statute. Reform, not suppression: because the protection against dismissals is actually a choice of civility. The compulsory reinstatement of the unjustly dismissed employee in the workplace is, on the other hand, only one of the possible methods of that protection. We don't say it; the Constitutional Court wrote it in its sentences. If the right to reinstatement belonged to the category of fundamental rights, it is not clear why at least half of employed workers should be deprived of it. The protection against dismissals needs to be reformulated: the reinstatement must remain as a sanction for a discriminatory act or in violation of particular rights of the person (dismissal due to marriage or maternity); in other cases, compensation for damages must be found through the provision of an economic indemnity according to certain and pre-established parameters.
There is a lot of confusion in the current debate. And it's not accidental. A campaign is underway, also in the media and culturally, which claims to associate precariousness with youth unemployment, as if, by solving the first problem, the second would also lead to a solution. Unfortunately no rule, like no prohibition (there is talk of pruning flexible contracts) will ever be able to support a job that does not have an adequate economic basis. Establishing a bogus job does not create more employment; destroys it. Will such an operation be possible (until when?) in the public sector; but no one will ever be able to impose on a private entrepreneur a job on terms that he considers onerous and forced. The employer will rather give up hiring.
Flexible employment relationships, in Italy as in Europe, have not spread as a consequence of the perversions of neoliberal governments, but when, in the second half of the 80s (who doesn't remember training and work contracts?), there was realize that young people were no longer hired. In our recent past (in the decade 1997-2007), here as in all OECD countries, we have seen - thanks to the happy combination of flexible contracts and modest but continuous economic growth - a peak in employment levels, including for women, up to having, here and there, areas of full employment. It is the crisis, not precariousness, that determines very serious and worrying youth unemployment rates. According to a recent OECD study (based on 2009 data, the epicenter of the economic crisis) a young Italian finds, on average, his first fixed-term job 25,5 months after the end of the training cycle.
It takes an average of 44,8 months to acquire a permanent employment relationship. This is one of the worst performances in the countries considered. As regards the first job, only Finland (27,6 months) and Spain (34,6 months) have worse data than ours. As for the achievement of a permanent relationship, only Spain and Portugal are worse off than us (with times exceeding 50 months).
In the USA (miracle of flexibility!) young people enter the job market just after 6 months. More or less like in Australia. This is a set of problems to consider when addressing the issue of labor market reform. But the executive's difficulties are evident. He has to contend with the hostility of the unions, who will surely find a public defender in the Democratic Party, still stunned by the shock of the pension reform. Only yesterday Confindustria also found the courage to stammer a few words about the modification of article 18.
What is most surprising is the line of conduct of the PdL, which in matters of work seems to have decided to mark a visit, to proclaim the principle of "neither joining nor sabotaging". Scrolling through the official documents of Angelino Alfano's party, every reference to article 18 has disappeared. Let no one be surprised, then, if the Government pound the water in the mortar, without getting to the bottom of anything. Sure that if Monti and Fornero once again found a way to amaze us, we would have to think that the government of technicians was really a gift from Providence.
