European Post Meeting
Speech staatssecretaris Heemskerk, Post Meeting in Brussel, 24 juni 2008.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The Netherlands has decided not yet to open the final part of the postal market for letters up to 50 grams. Opening the market would require two conditions to be met. First, an equal level playing field for newcomers in Germany and the UK, Europe's main postal markets. Second, socially acceptable labour conditions for the workers at new postal companies in the Netherlands. To date, insufficient progress has been made in either area. Another formal hurdle is the fact that the Dutch Senate has not yet approved the postal law. The Dutch House of Representatives did already approve the law, but also clearly set the two conditions for opening up.
Let me first focus on the Netherlands.
My goal is to achieve binding agreements with new postal companies about the remuneration of their postmen. I will not allow for the existing minimum wage to be structurally undercut, which appears to be happening. But I will also not suddenly introduce a new - high - minimum wage either (…..), when postal companies grow market share and postmen have more mail to deliver, wages should be increased. A gradual growth model with clear agreements on labour conditions is within our reach in the Netherlands.
Matters are more complex on a European scale. The opening of Europe's postal market, which should occur no later than January 1, 2011, seems to be getting into a dead lock. European postal companies like TNT and Deutsche Post have resorted to legal measures to remove competitive obstacles. TNT believes that the German government has practically locked its market. Deutsche Post believes the Dutch government should open its market now. Also the UK is investigating new regulations based upon the Hooper report. I am wondering who's still playing by the rules. Member states are watching each other and the European Commission. So, how are we to proceed? What should be on the postal agenda, which Charlie McCreevy announced?
The Dutch have been fighting the water, creating polders, by working together and reaching consensus. My argument is that a European 'polder model' can leads us out of the risk of a dead lock. This means consultations between governments, labour unions and employers on both a national and European level. Our intention should be to balance social conditions with room for innovation. Such a model would meet the following conditions:
1.) First, it would acknowledge that the work of postmen is changing. We send e-mails and text messages more than we send postcards. Sometimes, business mail has to be delivered the same day using couriers. On other occasions, letters can just as well be delivered a few days later. Mail sorting is almost completely automated. These changes affect the work of the gold old postman and his job prospects. In due course, part-time work will prevail. This can lead to fulltime employment or be a welcome supplement to one's household income.
2.) In a European polder model, employers and unions agree on constructive ways to deal with these inevitable changes. Newcomers to the postal market meet socially acceptable minimum standards. This, in turn, requires social partners to recognise that postmen can be paid more when revenues grow. Responsible unions support job creation at both incumbents and newcomers. This is why the Dutch government supports binding agreements about a gradual growth model approach to labour conditions. That is also why I am of the opinion that international labour unions, Eurofedop and Unipost should have been present at the panels.
3.) Large European companies like TNT and Deutsche Post position themselves at socially responsible companies. Fierce competition in the Dutch and German markets should not lead to a 'race to the bottom', whereby they see who can offer the worst labour conditions in their home market. Innovative products and services are a more sustainable and socially responsible competitive strategy.
4.) Finally, innovative newcomers are welcome in the European polder. Member states should give each of them a fair chance. This means former state-owned postal companies cannot be protected from competition through VAT hurdles or stringent license requirements. European Commissioners Kroes and McCreevy should not only verbally take a clear stance but should also act against such measures of Member States.
I am convinced that consumers will benefit from a free postal market. Businesses, charities and sports clubs will save money when sending mail. The postal market and the work of the postman will change as a result. These benefits, however, do not absolve us from our moral responsibility to open the market in a socially responsible way. This, at least, is what the Dutch have learnt from previous liberalisation projects.
It's in the interest of all member states to create a fair playing field with socially acceptable labour conditions. The private sector should work with the unions both locally and on a European scale. Together, they should agree on how to deal with the inevitable changes and how to build a gradual growth model for the labour conditions of newcomers. The European Commission should and will then be strict and just when securing fair competition.
Thank you very much.