Mayor Dagur B. Eggertsson was once again interviewed on television, yesterday, February 19th, and misled the public regarding the propositions which the City of Reykjavík has made to the members of Efling. The City of Reykjavík has not offered the members of Efling a special correction of the lowest wages over and above the rate hikes included in the Quality of Life Agreement.
The sums of which the mayor spoke in yesterday’s interview, with reference to the wages of an unskilled preschool employee, are based on not including the existing special payments in the original sum but including them in the final sum. The mayor’s presentation is in keeping with the modus operandi employed by the negotiating committee of the City of Reykjavík, where contractual rights are dressed up as supplements to wages. The aim seems to be to beautify the city’s meager proposals.
In fact, the negotiating committee of Efling would approve a proposal which calls for a raise of basic wages commensurate with the Quality of Life Agreement, with an additional wage correction ranging from 17-46 thousand kronas – and has in fact put it forth many times. Such a correction would not have to come in the form of a raise in basic wages but could be a special bonus which would not be included in a basis for the calculation of pay for overtime and shift-work.
The negotiating committee of Efling has already put forth three proposals based on two different approaches to achieve the wage correction. It has declared its willingness to negotiate the sums and premises of such additional raises in the case of different fields of work and work places. The City of Reykjavík has rejected these approaches out of hand, without being willing to discuss the possible implementations and plans which are on offer.
The meeting of the union representatives of Efling approved the following resolution this morning:
“Mayor Dagur B. Eggertsson: you have repeatedly been offered a chance to discuss our demands with the members of Efling. You have always rejected those offers. Instead, you have only emerged when given a chance to be interviewed alone on television, where you have demeaned our struggle for decent wages and justice. You claim to favor open dialogue in politics. We lament and condemn the fact that you won’t engage us in a dialogue, your own employees.”