Blue, yellow, orange and red. The flag of the American state of Arizona brings together the colors of the five parties which form the future federal coalition: MR, Engagés, N-VA, CD&V and Vooruit. “Arizona is known for its immense desert in which there is not much that grows, apart from cacti,” explains Benjamin Pestieau, head of the World of Work department of the PTB. What is less known are the struggles of the miners who marked the history of this state in the southwest of the United States. There are a lot of copper mines. In 1915, a major strike began in three cities across the state. Mexican and American miners did not accept the bosses' desire to lower their wages by 10%, while the cost of living was exploding. The unity and determination of the miners allowed them to achieve a salary increase of… 60%. This victory showed the strength of the workers’ movement united beyond its origins. Since then, many struggles have marked Arizona. » This story, the head of the new PTB campaign, “Stop Arizona”, intends to use it to show that yes, it is possible to win.
A few days before the municipal elections, Solidaritythe PTB magazine, invited Benjamin Pestieau to its premises to explain the left party's plan.
The parties want to keep their future measures secret, but part of it was leaked in the “super note” written by trainer Bart De Wever. But who is this note “great” for?
Benjamin Pestieau. Bart De Wever himself calls it “super”. But it does not foresee anything good for the working class. On the contrary. If De Wever and Georges-Louis Bouchez, for example, campaigned for the regional and federal elections last June by promising that they would reward work and workers, “those who get up early”, it is the opposite. This “super note” is a generalized attack against the world of work, against workers, against those who work hard, against those who carry out difficult jobs. On the other hand, when we see the cries of enthusiasm from the employers' federations at the release of this note, we can understand quite quickly who serves and for whom it is “great”. The employers' organizations were even disappointed that the negotiations did not come to fruition more quickly because the note foresees enormous gains… for them.
In the pamphlet that the PTB published on the contents of the Arizona memo, it identified six attacks. What are they?
Benjamin Pestieau. There is an attack on workers' wages, an attack on workers' pensions, an attack on workers' working hours, an attack on sick workers, an attack on women workers and an attack on union organizations. Behind each of these attacks, there is a social vision. It is very important to understand this well.
You started by talking about an attack on our salaries. Yet, as you said, the right campaigned saying they were going to increase. What about it?
Benjamin Pestieau. Arizona's parties say our take-home pay will go up. But this increase, if it is confirmed – which remains to be seen – would in any case be very small and would not at all compensate for what they intend to take from us with the other hand. Because what is clear is that they intend to make us (again) go to the checkout: increase in VAT on basic necessities, increase in excise duties on fuel, etc.
But there are several attacks on our salaries. Among other things, by the extension of the 1996 law which blocks our salaries. Concretely, it gives the power to the government to prohibit unions from negotiating salary increases. This is unique in the world and Belgium has been condemned internationally for this law. Arizona plans to enforce this illegal law for years to come. Second, they want to attack the automatic indexation of salaries by “smoothing” the index over 12 months. This is a new technique to slow down the indexation of our salaries. If this measure had been applied in 2024, a worker with an average salary would have lost more than 330 euros per year just with this measure.
A measure that risks going down badly with many workers is the desire to no longer pay overtime, right?
Benjamin Pestieau. Yes, they want us to work overtime on Sundays and at night without extra pay. Normally, when you work overtime, work at night, etc. we receive extra pay. This additional salary must also dissuade bosses from making people work at night, on Sundays… because it is bad for health, for family and social life. And the fact – for example – that a large number of us are on leave – together on Sunday allows us to have a social life…, to get involved, to form a community. This is what they also want to tackle. No longer paying hours between 8 p.m. and midnight as overtime, for a whole series of workers – nurses, postal workers, garbage collectors, etc. That’s a lot of less money. The same goes for Sunday work… It could amount to several hundred euros each month for some.
You say in the brochure that our deferred wages are in danger too. What exactly is it?
Benjamin Pestieau. To slightly increase the net salary, they want to reduce the gross salary and social contributions, that is to say our deferred salary. This is the salary that we receive deferred in the form of public services (hospitals, schools, transport, etc.) and social benefits (sickness, pension, etc.). Reducing this salary means fewer public services and less social protection. This brings us to the attack on our pensions. They reduce the social security contributions that finance them. Then, they tell us that there is no more money to pay them and that we must therefore work longer… when it is they who emptied the coffers.
Arizona's plan is to raise the pension age further past 67?
Benjamin Pestieau. Officially no. But by expanding the field of flexi-jobs even further, the objective is to put as many pensioners back to work for a pittance as possible.
For employers and their political representatives, unproductive periods of life must be banned, whether studies, pensions, vacations… Employers are constantly seeking to regain these times of life lost to them. According to them, every moment of life must be immediately productive. And so that's why employers are trying to attack leave and pensions. For employers, we live to work while for the world of work, we work to live. In other words, for employers, human beings must be at the service of their economy while for the world of work, the economy must be at the service of human beings.
