The debate in the leadership of the Democratic Party was dominated by personal resentments and frustrations, with very little insight into the issue of work and in general on the economic policy that Italy should adopt to get out of the doldrums. D'Alema called to the rescue of his theses the Nobel Stiglitz who, in his opinion, would have argued that labor reforms can only be made in periods of expansion and not during a crisis. I don't think D'Alema understood Stiglitz's thinking well, given that Germany in 2003 and Spain in 2013 successfully implemented labor market reforms at the very worst moment of the economic crisis.
Certainly it would have been better to do them in calmer times, but the previous governments, including that of D'Alema himself, did not want to, or were able to tackle the problem even though they saw that Italian productivity was falling dangerously. Yet Renzi in his initial report had been quite explicit in explaining the European and Italian situation. In Europe, he said, we have a reputation for postponing problems and this hardens the German position against any loosening of fiscal or monetary rules. The Italians, it is thought in Germany, if they are not kept in check, tend to relax and forget to make reforms. So Renzi has clarified several times that "Italy must be changed in order to change Europe". That is, Italy must amaze the other European countries with the launch of some incisive reforms of which that of the labor market is among the main ones together with the functioning of the PA and Justice, all issues that the Government is in fact addressing.
And there's no time to waste. In this summer's meeting with Draghi in Città della Pieve, the president of the ECB must have explained to the young head of the Italian government that a concrete and striking move was needed to overcome the resistance of the northern countries towards an even more expansive monetary policy by Italy. In this sense, it is true that Italy today possesses the keys to be able to open the doors of Brussels by letting in the wind of an expansive policy at the Community level, and cornering Mrs Merkel who, as the minister also said Padoan cannot maintain such a large surplus of its trade balance for too long. Other than Fassina ranting who superficially hopes for a revolt against Europe!
But a reform of the labor market in any case serves Italy above all since the current rules are one of the causes of the country's loss of competitiveness, and therefore of the prolongation of the investment and employment crisis. We must give up the uncertainty created by the judicial confusion on the application of the reinstatement, and the difference between workers that has thus been created, and the inefficiencies that all this creates in the use of labour. Alongside the renunciation of Article 18 (which now affects a minority of workers) there is the redesign of the social safety nets, and a real abstention of the rights of the many precarious workers who today do not have them. Changing the rules is important. But even more important is the cultural change that is being introduced into the world of work as lucidly stated in 2003 by the German Chancellor Schröder when presenting his labor reform: "we will promote individual responsibility and demand a greater contribution from everyone". And it is absolutely false that this reform would weaken the bargaining power of workers and therefore their wages. Indeed, if anything, the opposite is true because the increase in productivity will lead to an increase in wages.
But to speed up this process, two other profound changes are needed: clear rules on company representation and a privileged relationship between company bargaining and national bargaining. And these are precisely the two new themes that Renzi included in his speech to the PD Directorate, claiming to challenge the unions to go to Palazzo Chigi (in the famous green room) to change the current rules, which are confusing and difficult to apply. This, even more than Article 18, is the real heart of the labor problem. And none of the many who took part in the debate in the Directorate stopped to talk about this great novelty. Did they not understand or were they embarrassed?
The path that we must take to get out of the crisis is well outlined by Renzi who is instrumentally accused of having no vision and of moving forward only for slogans. It is not a question of making great sacrifices but of having faith in the future and in change, unhinging the laziness of those who have found a comfortable niche in which to withdraw in this blocked system.
