|
valikko
|
juttupohja_1
UPM wants to
transfer 300 forestry workers
to its prospective subcontractors
Helsinki (26.09.2006 - Juhani Artto) The forest industry giant
UPM, based in Finland, plans to get rid of its remaining 300 forestry workers. The Wood
and Allied Workers' Union warns that UPMs real aim is to utilise low-pay labour from
near-by countries, such as Estonia and Poland.
In its 11 September press release UPM stated as follows: "UPM is to explore the
possibility of restructuring its forestry work to improve
cost-efficiency. During the autumn, the company will search for prospective partners and
assess their ability to offer different types of forestry work services."
The company's idea is to offer the forestry workers, currently in its employ, to these
forestry work service providers. The union regards the plan as unrealistic and damaging
for the company. "It risks UPM's quality system and realization of the certificate's
criteria", the union says, referring to the social clauses of the PEFC forest
certificate system.
According to the union the plan threatens to become a dangerous precedent. "Never
before employees have been contracted out to companies that do not even exist", the
union says.
In the last few years the union has had bad experiences with several forestry work service
companies. Unpaid wages has been one of the major problems. "In Finland, there are
not sufficiently responsible forestry work service companies that could take
responsibility of all work done until now by UPM's own forestry workers", UPM
Forestry's shop-stewards argue. Therefore they believe that UPM is considering the
possibility of acquiring such services from abroad.
As a considerable amount of work is anticipated in forests owned by UPM, the plan, to get
rid of the company's own forestry workers must inevitably mean a policy to further dump
wages and other terms of employment.
In the event a UPM forestry worker should opt to reject his removal to a vague
subcontractor and give notice from his job, he would then loose considerable social
benefits. Either alternative would mean the company thinks it can renege on the corporate
social responsibility principles UPM has signed up to.
Read also:
|
|