involved in the implementation of working time, i.e. the rosters and other choices that
remain possible within the rules negotiated by the unions. The same argument is valid for
part-time work, which has been regulated in the collective agreement; implementation
takes place with consent of the group commission.
More in general, the higher management of KLM wishes to increase management
prerogative. The scope for HRM is however constrained by on the one hand the
provisions of the collective agreement and on the other hand the fact that in the
development of HRM policy, management always has to take into account the
preferences and actions of the unions and the works’ councils. According to management,
this situation should be reversed. Through a strengthening of the group commissions,
KLM intents in the future to improve management-employee relations on the work floor
and to increase the scope for HRM. In the collective bargaining round 2000-2002 it is
agreed by KLM and the unions to renew the future agenda for industrial relations in the
company, which we here paraphrase: ‘ There is a new context for the company, due to
e.g. competition, mergers, capacity problems, fuel prices, and the changing labour
market. The new reality and the speed of changes do influence the organization and its
people. On the one hand there is a call for security and control, on the other hand there is
need for flexibility and tailor-made agreements ( ... ) the tension between collective rules
and local implementation is crucial. Parties involved to the agreement are of opinion that
it is part of their collective responsibility to support the transparency, the discussion and
resolution to these problems’ (agreement November 15th. 2000).
31