Share

Landini, Bentivogli and the FCA case: but what is the union for?

The relationship with FCA reveals two opposing trade union conceptions in the new secretary of the CGIL and in the leader of the metalworkers of the CISL: the first takes refuge in ideological prejudices while the second can exhibit the results of the recent company contract which brought a wage increase into workers' pockets of 144 euros which had never been seen in the bargaining of Fiat and FCA.

Landini, Bentivogli and the FCA case: but what is the union for?

But what is the use of the union today? To understand this and to verify how different the visions of the union that dwell at its tops remain, it is enough to put around a table the new secretary of the CGIL, Maurizio Landini, and the leader of the metalworkers of the Fim-Cisl, Marco Bentivogli. This is exactly what "Il Diario del Lavoro" did, an ancient and glorious site on labor relations founded and directed by Massimo Mascini who yesterday presented his 2018 Labor Yearbook at the Libricome event at the Auditorium della Musica in Rome, interviewing the two trade unionists and the former General Manager of Confindustria and now president of Assonime, Innocenzo Cipolletta who stimulated the unions to become protagonists again with companies, at least on the grounds in which new industrial relations can produce concrete steps forward.

The comparison formula was limited to one hour but couldn't have been more apt: few frills and a lot of substance. Pressed by the moderator Nunzia Penelope especially on relations with FCA, Landini and Bentivogli exposed two union philosophies a thousand miles away from each other: the first – that of the secretary of the CGIL – still steeped in old trade union ideology and the other – that of Bentivogli – anchored to the concreteness of the results the action of a union that wants to participate in the decisions of the company.

Landini explained that the relationship with Fiat and then with FCA became increasingly conflictual when the union realized that the company wanted to introduce an American conception of union relations. Out of modesty, the CGIL secretary did not name the head of Fiat and then of FCA who, according to him, was at the origin of the clash with the union, or rather with the CGIL: that gentleman was Sergio Marchionne to whom it would be time to recognizing that his competitive challenge has made it possible not only to save and relaunch a company in a state of bankruptcy like Fiat but also to save all the jobs in all the Italian plants and to enrich the workers' paychecks.

To Landini's ideological smokestacks and nineteenth-century prejudices Bentivogli had a good time contrasting the facts, starting with those of recent days when, by signing the new corporate contract in FCA together with Uilm, his Fim-Cisl brought home, in addition to other benefits, a per capita wage increase of 144 euros per month for the group's 87 employees, including those of CNH Industrial. A union success that had never been seen in the history of company bargaining in Fiat and that once again Fiom-Cgil did not sign.

But is the task of a union worthy of the name to produce ideologies and ideologies or to improve workers' wages and conditions? Anyone who witnessed the confrontation between Landini and Bentivogli didn't struggle much to find the obvious answer and maybe it's time for the CGIL to find it too if they don't want to do battles against windmills and be left with nothing in hand.

comments