Cinque Newspaper, 10 Feb 2007 Italian
Vice Minister, how do you think it could be possible to balance work flexibility and rights within the Industrial Relations context?
This balance is possible by the implementation of a policy –the same policy put in place by the other European countries – that guarantees a social benefit when workers lose their job. This would avoid that flexibility turns into precariousness. We should guarantee either a permanent job or a minimum social benefit when people are looking for a job whilst unemployed. At the present time we are still far behind with both fronts.
Do you consider the Biagi Laws regulating IR as negative itself?
This Law uses the name “Biagi” inappropriately, where as this law increases precarious contracts but it does not provide social benefits during the period of unemployment, as Biagi himself wanted. Within this particular context this law should be abrogated because there is only the part that destabilises workers.
Don’t you reckon that a low productivity in the public sector could be related to a rigid system of Industrial Relations that made public workers over confident of the fact they could not be sacked?
For sure, an excessive confidence on the work place has encouraged a low productivity during the 70’s and the 80’s, however the public sector has changed considerably over the last twenty years and salaries have not been indexed accordingly. There are also excellences in the public sector and the Ministry of Finances has put in place several efforts thanks to which we run efficiently many projects. It is right to require more productivity but it is time to stop considering all public employees as lazy workers. It would be necessary to index-link their salaries instead because nowadays a whole family cannot cope with €1200 per month.
As far as public managers are concerned, would you consider linking their high salaries to the productivity and therefore to the objectives and milestones achieved?
Public managers need to take their own responsibilities, which means they should respond of the results they achieved.
Would that imply reducing their salaries?
I believe cut of salaries is a complex matter; but for sure we should introduce incentives and disincentives.
As regards the national financial situation, do you reckon that governments are concerned to cut public spending and are more keen to increase taxes when it comes to reduce the deficit?
I reckon it is necessary to reduce spending where it represents inefficiency and waste. It is important to know though that public spending is conceived to guarantee social rights, such as pensions, healthcare and housing. We have already reduced the government spending and as a result of this action, poverty social bands have increased. Public spending should be re-organised, not cut
If the citizen does not find convenient asking for fiscal invoices, how is it feasible to put social parties in conflict of interest when it comes to tackle fiscal evasion?
The Government has been discussing about this recently during the approval of the financial budget; we pledged to increase fiscal deductions on invoices declared. However people sometimes take as a reference point the fiscal model applied in the States that is based on invoices deduction. It is important to bear in mind that this model mainly privileges the high middle class but it does not represent a real advantage for lower income earners; this is profoundly unequal. Fight against fiscal evasion needs to be done through the implementation of multiple tools, such as control systems and by enforcing the idea of a mutual trust with citizens, which means they pay taxes to have efficient services.
Emiliano Savini
Emiliano Maria Savini 
Leave a comment