Group Discussion (extract)

Topic: Direct employee participation in the view of the works council 2016

D: We, from our point of view, for us. A typical example: About these office hours, working hours, those
are always such fundamental questions. And for us, we have always experienced it in such a way that
participation of the workforce does not originate from the committee that much. We often experience
participation, especially in the area of rescue services, as a turn-off of work council interests. That
means, it comes from the management. For example it’s about working schedules. Which working
schedules do you want to have for the guards? Then, the working schedules are voted upon
democratically. And they are then brought to the vote in the workforce. So then the workforce is
gathered together and if I now have three working schedules and then I let the majority decide –
everyone can make a stroke – which working schedule they prefer, then I may come to the conclusion
that not even a third wants the working schedule, which will be introduced. And up to two-thirds may
have voted for the other two working schedules, so that actually not the overall majority determined
the working schedule, but only the percentage majority. So not 50 percent of the people, but only the
most votes for a working schedule was decisive. And when then the works council comes and says: ,Ey,
come on guys. Schedules and such. Free days. The interests, what do you want?’ As much free time in
one row as possible. That whole stuff, you know. How many night shifts following each other and so on.
What do I know what kind of questions there are. And then they always respond: ,Ey what do you want,
works council?’ There is no better participation. The colleagues have voted wonderfully and more
democracy is not possible at all. And then you as the works council can easily look a bit stupid. If you try
to look outside the box. Long-term questions: What about health? How does it effect you in the long run
if you work like this? Doesn’t interest them at all. As such the management discovers the participation of
the employees as an instrument to cancel out co-determination interests and regulations. Participation
is always about everyone thinking about himself. I for myself and them for themselves. Than the
representation of interests – the works council – in my opinion takes another point of view. It is then
sometimes difficult to involve the workforce. 00:32:20-8

M: But one thing we cannot pretend. You cannot let everyone participate. Then that also leads to
beatings for us. I'm now talking about ourselves. Because you cannot keep everyone happy. This is also a
fact. I believe in the role of works councils we are a kind of pioneer. For example, we have now
according to the economic situation collected the bargaining agreement "Protection and Employment"
in a vote at the meeting of the workforce. We said we wanted to do that. We want to shorten four
percent of working time. In order to send an immediate fast signal to the company, we are ready to
make a loss. And therefore we had a vote at the meeting of the workforce, hand up or not. And that’s
also a kind of participation. And what would we have done – this question we also asked ourselves –
what would we have done if not even half of them had raised the hand? Yes that is also risky. 00:33:19-4

G: In this case I would not have asked the question. 00:33:20-7

M: What? 00:33:21-4

G: You ask the question, because you have the expectation that it will happen. 00:33:24-1

M: Right. Correct. But what I would like to say is: You cannot involve everyone. That somehow doesn’t
work out. You'll suffer a beating. In larger committees you get several opinions, that is correct. There are
departments that are totally happy about something, there are departments that are not too happy
about it. That’s always different. I believe, ultimately, the works council lays down a kind of path for
participation. Do you know what I mean? 00:33:49-5