Useful journalism to understand, manage and grow a business.
SearchThe employer associations consider that the housing demands are aimed mainly at public authorities, not businesses. They clarify that they cannot take a definitive position while the union call has no date and no formal notice has been filed.
CEOE and Cepyme have described the 24-hour general strike announced by CCOO and UGT for this autumn as “inadmissible.” The employer organisations question whether the demands made known so far are essentially labour-related and reject the idea that pressure from a protest directed, in their view, at public-sector management should fall on businesses, their workforces and economic activity.
The unions link the call to improving wages and access to decent housing. They have also urged the employer organisations to unblock collective bargaining and the competent public authorities to implement housing legislation.
CEOE and Cepyme argue that many of the measures being called for would require legislative or budgetary changes and would therefore fall mainly to the public authorities. From this perspective, they consider that businesses should not bear the cost of a pressure measure whose target, according to their statement, would be the Government.
The employer associations have also questioned the timing of the mobilisation, following the announcement that general elections would be held on 29 November. They have described using the activities of businesses and workers to influence an electoral process as “difficult to justify.” This is the employer organisations’ assessment, not a conclusion about the effects of the call.
CEOE and Cepyme have raised doubts about the legal basis of the strike, but have clarified that they cannot yet issue a definitive assessment. According to the information available, the call is pending ratification, has no specific date, and the formal notice required for a strike has not yet been filed.
The employer associations have announced that they will examine the call once it is formalised, including its objectives, scope and compliance with legal requirements. Therefore, their current objection does not amount to a declaration of illegality: the available documentation does not make it possible to consider that issue settled.
CCOO and UGT have announced a 24-hour strike for this autumn, but they still need to set the date and complete the formal steps indicated. Until then, all the details concerning the mobilisation’s final scope remain unknown.
The disagreement reflects two approaches: the unions present the protest as a tool to support demands concerning wages and housing, while CEOE and Cepyme question whether business activity is the appropriate means of exerting pressure for demands that they consider to be directed mainly at public authorities.
The texts reinstate measures on evictions, rent extensions and the purchase of a first home. Validation remains pending, and the prospects of support differ between the two decrees.
Read story
The organization argues that the proposal would leave investors with fewer safeguards than under the SEC and questions the initiative’s legal basis. The CFTC is still seeking comments: there is no final rule.
Read story
The expansion of Icelandic banks, financed with debt and deposits raised abroad, ended in a collapse that left hundreds of thousands of customers without immediate access to their savings. The Icesave dispute showed that deposit protection also depends on who backs it and on their ability to respond.
Read story