In a joint press release, SINAFI - National Financiers Union, SIM Marina, SIM Coast Guard, SIM Guardia di Finanza, SIM Aeronautica e Free Representation express bitterness and strong concern about the particularly conservative orientations that emerged from the hearings of the heads of the individual military administrations, about the consideration of the rights to be granted to military personnel and the concept of union that they would like to outline.
Cultural and conceptual settings, those expressed, which risk distorting the legislative process inherent in the process of organizing the military world, launched in implementation of the principles outlined in the 120 / 2018 ruling of the Constitutional Court and, if implemented by the legislator, risk delivering to the personnel of the Armed Forces and Military Police with a military order a dangerous and ineffective instrument of pseudo protection.
To hypothesize, as expressed by the Summits, that decentralized negotiations, protections and irremovability for trade union leaders should not be envisaged, the possibility of having recourse to the Labor Judge in the event of serious defaults by the Administrations, to the onset of any "anti-union conduct" would unequivocally mean , wanting to disregard the fundamental and basic principles of trade union freedom. Likewise, provide for the disqualification from office of union leaders who are subject to disciplinary sanctions as proposed by military leaders or the revocation of ministerial authorization not explicitly referring to behavior against the law, rather than an attempt to safeguard the prerogatives of the FF.AA. appears to be intent on relegating the nascent OO.SS to a position of subordination
It is quite clear that disregarding the cultural processes of unionization and its founding rules by the top management of the Administrations does not help the dialogue and turns into a dangerous invasion of the field in the functions of politics.
This conceptual, obstructive, clearly demonstrated approach risks translating into an intention to condition the principle of freedom typical of union organization and eliminates the right balance between duties and rights.
We are aware and agree on the need to provide for forms of balancing trade union freedom with the constitutional rights granted to citizens (the non-implementation of the strike or other actions replacing it, the foreclosure on some matters concerning the operation of the apparatus, the employment of personnel in certain contexts and the functional hierarchical relationship), as well as, moreover, referred to by the 87 OIL Convention, but we will not accept in any way a radical distortion of trade union prerogatives and freedom.
As regards, instead, the transitional phase, which must accompany this process until the enactment of the law, these OO.SS. they do not agree with the establishment of a joint technical committee or control room, between all the Administrations of the Sub-Fund which, in a unilateral way, can issue rules of domestic law in an arbitrary manner by setting rules to which the trade union structures will have to adhere.
Given the need to set up technical or political tables, to talk about the rules of operation or the method of dialogue between trade unions, it is necessary to involve all the parties involved and with equal roles, otherwise a conduct that would override and weaken the role would be implemented. of the union.
We believe that those that are emerging are not the right and correct trade union relations that should coexist between administrations and trade unions and, for this reason, we hope for a timely repentance of these behaviors aimed at restoring balanced and profitable trade union relations.