The creation and future of the new Danish trade union confederation

Introduction

A new Danish trade union confederation Fagbevægelsens Hovedorganisation (FH) formally came into being on 1 January 2019, following the amalgamation of the two largest trade union confederations in Denmark. The Trade Union Confederation Denmark (LO), which represented trade unions organising skilled and unskilled workers in primarily the private sector, merged with FTF, which organised primarily salaried employees in the public sector. The new trade union confederation represents 1.1 million employees. ¹

That the merger actually succeeded this time was due to specific matches in the positions and interests of the large trade union federations within LO and FTF. Some member organisations – mainly from within FTF and the public sector trade unions – wanted to strengthen the Danish trade union movement (including their own position) with the aim of gaining political power. Others – mainly within the LO – saw the union merger as an opportunity to solve specific financial challenges faced by the existing confederations. ² In the end, some sceptical FTF unions opted out of the merger, but the large majority of unions have embraced the formation of FH.

Below, we identify the main changes resulting in the successful formation of the new FH. In largely chronological order, we analyse the positions of the large trade unions in relation to the two main motivations for the merger: to strengthen the trade union movement’s position of power and to counter declining membership and the ensuing financial difficulties. These motivations are in line with the findings of previous research on union mergers as a way to achieve renewal and counter challenges (Murray, 2017; Navrbjerg and Larsen, 2018). Furthermore, we describe the scepticism towards the merger among parts of the trade union movement, which has resulted in some unions breaking away. Finally, we present some conclusions and perspectives regarding the new confederation FH.

A new trade union confederation – from idea to reality

The idea of merging the Danish trade union confederations into one main trade union confederation is old. For example, LO has historically advocated that one main union confederation – i.e. the LO – should represent all Danish unions. In 2003, LO broke its formal ties with the Social Democratic Party. An increasing share of trade union members not supporting the Social Democratic Party, combined with declining union density, motivated the break and eventually gave LO more room for political manoeuvre including a rapprochement to the party-political independent FTF. In the following years, LO and FTF strengthened their collaboration in a number of policy areas, albeit without this leading to major changes. The third trade union confederation – The Danish Confederation of Professional Associations (Akademikerne), which mainly represents masters and PhDs – also took part in these collaborative initiatives. However, among the three confederate trade unions there was a clear hierarchy: LO was by far the largest union confederation with member unions organising 788,000 workers. They were, along with their counterpart DA, the key organisations taking part in tripartite consultations and negotiations organised by the Danish government. FTF was the second largest union confederation covering around 346,000 employees, while Akademikerne represented around 236,000 workers (Due and Madsen, 2011).

In the summer of 2012, a change seemed to be under way. The president of the powerful Danish Metal Workers Union (Dansk Metal) used his resignation to state that Denmark was too small a country for three trade union confederations. However, FTF President, Bente Sorgenfrey, stated that FTF was not ready for merger. ³

A couple of years later, the idea of a new trade union confederation finally gained momentum when LO and FTF started to discuss possible pathways to create a new joint confederation. Akademikerne was invited to take part, but declined the invitation. In 2015, at their respective congresses LO and FTF decided to start a process towards a closer cooperation and explore the possibilities of creating ‘a new confederation’ that resembled a new start and not just a fusion.

Previous talks about a merger were stranded for various reasons. First, LO’s affiliates struggled to see the potential gains from merging with FTF or for that matter Akademikerne. Secondly, internal discussions within FTF demonstrated that at least three of FTF’s affiliates, including the Danish Nurses Organisation (Dansk Sygeplejeråd), the Danish Union of Teachers (Danmarks Lærerforening) and the Finance Employees Union (Finansforbundet) preferred a closer collaboration with Akademikerne to one with LO (Andersen and Ibsen, 2013). However, their position radically changed in the years leading up to 13 April 2018, when FTF and LO held separate congresses at which they decided to shut down their own organisations, only to meet later in the afternoon and form the new amalgamated union confederation, FH.

A strong new overall confederation

For the two large LO federations with a significant proportion of public employees – HK (organising, among others, clerical workers) and FOA (organising, among others, social care workers) – a new confederation is expected to lead to a stronger and more aggressive Danish trade union movement. These organisations see the potential of public sector unions joining forces and thus strengthening their power vis-à-vis the public employer associations such as the Ministry of Finance and Local Government Denmark (KL). Similar interests were present among organisations in the FTF. FTF was viewed among its own members as the smaller confederation with a strong media profile, but ultimately the ‘little sister’ of LO, as the president of FTF herself often stated. ⁴

The most notable change in view on a merger took place among the FTF organisations from 2013 onwards (Andersen and Ibsen, 2013). The Danish Teachers’ Association and BUPL (organising workers in kindergartens) abandoned their initial preference for closer ties with Akademikerne, and became some of the strongest advocates for a new confederation between FTF and LO. Their change of position was largely due to viewing a future together with the LO organisations as a way of strengthening their own position as well as that of the trade union movement in order to give a higher profile to broader welfare agendas. The Danish Nurses Organisation was initially hesitant about the merger between LO and FTF, but eventually came round and saw the advantages of being able to influence the broader welfare agendas.

FTF’s limited power compared to LO also included their role in collective bargaining. For example, through its Basic Agreement (Hovedaftale) with the Confederation of Danish Employers, DA, LO has a coordinating role in the private sector negotiations ensuring that the results reached among the peak bargaining organisations within manufacturing are transferred to other sectors even in the event that negotiations break down (Ibsen, 2016: 296). However, FTF has no equivalent role in public sector bargaining.

The Danish Metal Workers Union was positive about the new confederation, but it has been crucial for them and the other private LO federations that the LO/DA Basic Agreement and thus the coordinated collective bargaining system in the private sector remain unaffected by the merger between LO and FTF. In order to remove any doubts about supporting the merger, LO in 2015 secured an agreement with the DA confirming the continuation of the Basic Agreement in the event of a merger. ⁵

Declining membership and economic hardship

At its peak in the mid-1990s, the LO and its federations organised around 1.2 million workers. However, since then membership of the LO federations has fallen by around 400,000 (Ibsen et al., 2015). The loss of members can in part be explained by a changing labour market demanding more workers with further education, which has gradually reduced the potential number of LO affiliated workers. However, the full explanation also includes workers refraining from joining a union as well as workers going to the so-called yellow unions (Ilsøe, 2013). In recent years, the decline has been slowed down, but, prior to the merger, LO estimated a loss of 20,000 members a year for the coming years. This places pressure on finances. Prior to the decision about the merger, dominant LO federations announced that the LO had to cut wage costs by 25 per cent irrespective of the outcome of the merger process. FTF’s membership base has been relatively stable in recent years, but, with a much smaller administrative staff, the prospects in pooling resources and professionalising analytical tasks and political interest representation for enhancing service to member organisations are promising. The main goal of the new confederation FH has thus been to reap economies of scale, i.e. one headquarters, one secretariat, IT system, etc.

Making ends meet in the final stages of the merger

A main challenge in formulating the political foundation of the new confederation was to embrace both the unskilled and skilled workers of 3F, the United Federations of Danish Workers, as well as the well-paid employees of the banks and financial institutions in Finansforbundet. These two federations – with the latter being affiliated with FTF and 3F being part of LO – reflected the two extremes among the many occupational groups in more than 80 organisations under FTF and LO. Surprisingly, the president of Finansforbundet in the early stages of the process argued intensively in favour of a merger between LO and FTF although an increasing share of employees within the finance sector hold a masters degree. The main reason given by Finansforbundet was simply to create the most powerful confederation.

However, the 3F leadership remained sceptical about the merger. Somewhat polemically, the president of 3F asked: ‘if a new confederation is the answer, then what is the question?’ Being Denmark’s largest trade union, 3F has had an influential position in LO. Maintaining a similar position in the new FH might prove difficult. Furthermore, 3F feared that their strong focus on upskilling the unskilled and low-skilled workers could be lost in a large confederation dominated by skilled workers. In the process of formulating the political foundation for the new confederation, it became clear that the leadership of LO and FTF would go a long way in order to make it attractive for 3F. However, during this process Finansforbundet became increasingly sceptical about the potential outcome and eventually declared that they would no longer support the merger. They argued that this was not a new confederation, but a ‘New LO’. ⁶

At the extraordinary congresses on 13 April 2018, a two-thirds majority of delegates in both LO and FTF would secure the merger. In LO, the 3F delegates could not block the merger on their own; they needed the support of some of LO’s smaller member unions. However, in the days leading up to the vote it became clear that 3F was isolated in terms of opposing the union merger. Furthermore, it became clear that other major LO federations were prepared to move forward without 3F. Faced with the risk of defeat, 3F changed their position just two days prior to the extraordinary congress and embraced the idea of a new confederation.

Among the FTF federations, Finansforbundet chose not to join the new confederation and eventually Konstruktørforeninegn (organising building experts), the Danish Association of Occupational Therapists (Ergoterapeutforeningen), the Association of Danish Physiotherapists (Danske fysioterapeuter) and the Danish Association of Midwives (Jordemoderforeningen) decided not to join the FH. Instead, they joined Akademikerne and it is yet to be seen whether Finansforbundet will follow suit.

A new narrative for the Danish trade union movement

Strong employer counterparts, declining membership and financial incentives are the main drivers of the union merger process between LO and FTF. However, the new confederate trade union is also an ‘opportunity seized’ to change the narrative of a trade union movement eroded by globalisation and individualisation.

The creation of the new confederate trade union happened simultaneously with the collective bargaining round in the public sector in 2018. Together, these events have set a historic frame for the Danish trade union movement. At the time of the merger in April 2018, the ordinary collective bargaining process had collapsed and negotiations for the whole public sector were transferred to the mediation institution. Provoked by the strong public employers emphasising austerity and the management prerogative, the public sector trade unions had previously formed a unique and unprecedented musketeer’s oath (‘one for all, all for one’) including all trade unions across LO, FTF and Akademikerne on vital issues regarding wage development and working time. The musketeer’s oath proved to be a powerful tool in mobilising members and winning public opinion (Hansen and Mailand, 2018). With only a few weeks to an unprecedented general strike and massive lockout of the entire Danish public sector potentially breaking out, the merger of the new confederate trade union fell into place. Two weeks later, the first public sector compromise was reached between the regional employers and a number of trade unions from the LO family in the mediation institution. In the following week, compromises were reached throughout the public sector and the general strike was avoided.

The union merger, together with the bargaining round in the public sector, received unprecedented media attention, and emphasised the ability of the Danish trade union movement to stand strong and tough in opposition to employers.

Conclusions and perspectives

After several years in the making, the new trade union confederation, FH, became a reality. Our analysis demonstrates that two premises enabled this significant merger to take place. First, the change of preference among public sector trade unions – representing teachers, pre-school teachers and child-care workers and nurses – for joining forces with the LO groups rather than Akademikerne enabled the realisation of a new FH. Second, a shrinking membership base and the associated financial difficulties within LO, along with the promise of not intervening in the private collective bargaining system, removed opposition to the merger among the LO’s most powerful member unions in the private sector.

The merger in itself demonstrates the new agility and power of the Danish trade union movement. The merger may enhance potential members’ evaluation of trade unions and their propensity to join. Most concretely, the collective loss of members will henceforth appear less severe and acute. However, staunching the loss of members depends mainly on the individual federations and their ability to cater for new members and compete against the yellow unions. Nevertheless, this is a vital success criterion of the new FH.

Another success criterion of the new FH is its ability to act efficiently and influence not only labour market policy but also broader welfare policies. The new trade union confederation encompasses 79 small and large trade unions. The internal organisation reflects a balance between securing union democracy – also for the smaller trade unions – and efficiency in term of decision-making. At a first glance, the executive committee encompassing 25 members, a general council of 56 members and a very large congress does not appear to be an expression of an agile organisation. However, despite internal challenges, the president of FH, Lizette Risgaard, has been very visible in the media since the launch of FH. This visibility includes promoting agendas on combating growing inequality in Danish society, and pushing for a government-led pension reform as suggested by the Social Democratic opposition party. Whether these initiatives will result in actual change is too early to judge. Finally, the FH must prove able to maintain solidarity and unity despite embracing very different sets of interests. This includes reconciling potentially conflicting interests of public and private sector unions; of unskilled workers and workers with a university degree; and of workers in traditional and emerging industries, among others.