The future of the industrial economy in this country deserves a serious debate and a more prominent place in the election campaign. A succession of major restructurings adds urgency to that debate, although we must keep a cool head. The Belgian economy certainly faces challenges, but doom-mongering about an impending recession is not yet based on facts.
From a human point of view, every bankruptcy or mass layoff is a tragedy. On a broader economic scale, that is less certain. The decline of a failing company, such as Van Hool unfortunately became, also offers room for other, newer companies to take its place. Dismissed employees can also ultimately benefit from this, although they may see it differently at the time of the loss.
The restructuring in the distribution branch of sports chain Decathlon is also more ambiguous than it seems at first glance. Decathlon is shifting tasks to neighboring countries, making the distribution hall in Willebroek redundant. Critics eagerly use that statement to once again make the case for the federal government’s financial and economic policy: it would drive companies across the border with excessively high wage costs.
There is certainly something to be said about those wage costs – and something can also be done about it with tax reform. Yet in this case another, more controversial question arises. Should we want a distributor like Decathlon? Make no mistake, distribution is an important sector that mainly offers jobs for a large group of low-skilled people. But a company like Decathlon consciously pushes the boundaries of employment law, again when it comes to dismissals.
Only a month ago this newspaper reported how employees in the distribution hall are being chased and intimidated and how trade unions are excluded from any consultation. Decathlon profiles itself as one of those companies that deals with its staff in a new way, but in practice it quickly turns out to be just a trendy layer of chrome on a very old and rough form of ‘patronage’.
In fact, the Decathlon dossier points to another pain point in our labor market: the lack of mobility among employees. It’s strange that employees remain loyal for so long to an employer who cuts corners. It is even crazier that this happens in a permanently heated labor market with many vacancies, even for people with less education. It would be much more logical if the employees had already sought better places themselves. Decathlon would then be forced to behave more politely or indeed to move to countries that turn a blind eye to the undermining of basic rights.
The fact that the relatively rigid Belgian/Flemish labor market is not very mobile is not a new finding. Anyone who has a job wants to keep that same job for a long time. Those who cannot find a job have difficulty getting over the high walls of the market. Experts doubt whether poor labor mobility is always a bad thing. The Decathlon issue shows that there are also disadvantages for employees.
Tags: Decathlon dossier points sore point labor market lack mobility among employees
