bargaining with the unions, is more significant to the higher management of KLM than
the frequent ‘internal’ consultation with the works council. The unions are also
extensively consulted in company restructuring; on any financial and organisational
change within the company (at least four times per year but often more frequently) the
unions are formally consulted. In an interview, KLM compares its industrial relations
tradition and practice to the Dutch Social-Economic Council, in which all players in
industrial relations are represented at national level to discuss and co-ordinate social-
economic policy changes. When negotiating change, KLM always attempts to speak to
all unions at the same time. KLM refers to such negotiations as a ‘conservative’ or a
‘ritual’ process: all the unions submit different letters with divergent demands and wish to
see all their demands at least addressed before the actual negotiations commence. On the
one hand, KLM perceives this process as laborious; on the other hand it enables the
creation of support and consensus.
The KLM collective agreements have become more complex and extensive over the
years. In principle regarding the main lines of wage setting, bargaining takes place
multilaterally for all agreements. In a second stage bilateral agreements are started. The
four collective agreements differentiate in the wage scales, working hours, granted
leaves, and the pension regulation. KLM would like to revise the agreements, but as
many provisions are the result of a ‘political’ exchange, the unions consider them as
established rights that are interrelated like ‘communicating vessels’. A revision of the
pension scheme for example is historically related to leave in the framework of working
time reduction: if the company wishes to revise the pension scheme, the unions will
expect changes in working time in return. Due to the ‘collective memory’ of the workers’
representation such exchanges made in the past cannot be ignored. This poses a barrier to
the innovation of the collective wage agreements.
At KLM, although there is in general a willingness to reach agreement, not all unions
always have an aim to reach a joint result; unions may (and sometimes do) act
strategically. In the past, after having reached agreement in principle, one of the unions
rather unexpectedly withdrew its support, which, according to KLM, served to
demonstrate its ‘tough stance’ in the negotiations: the union feared membership losses if
it signed the agreement as it stood. Competition for membership amongst some categories
of staff (notably ground staff) thus makes the outcomes of the bargaining process less
predictable.
Notwithstanding, trade unions show responsible behaviour in the case of extreme urgent
economic conditions. For example after September 11th. 2001, the system of cooperation
between management and the unions has proven to be flexible. The collective agreement
was reopened after good communication with the unions on the measures to be taken in
response to the terrorist attacks. The discussions first and foremost focussed on the safety
of the crew and passengers, only after a couple of weeks the economic consequences
appeared on the agenda. The unions did not immediately agree to the opening up of the
collective wage agreement, they preferred to await a number of subsequent updates of the
economic situation. When the management cut its own salary, also a number of ad hoc
measures were taken in the production process. First the number of staff hired from
temporary employment agencies was reduced, and 20% work time reduction was realized
26