Right-Left, Left-Right, yet it always seems to be back to square one. But if the subject of the current debate is the introduction of the so-called "Minimum Wage", and therefore the introduction of a guarantee instrument that would seem to benefit male and female workers, why would the political class, and/or in any case a certain part of it, specifically the government majority, even if justifying the need to continue to proceed through collective bargaining and the reduction of the tax burden of companies, seem to consider it necessary to make a thorny issue that is difficult to introduce and apply, postponing it until September, not already its concrete zation rather than mere discussion?

The question of work, at the center of the confrontation between the first female prime minister and the first female secretariat of the most important opposition party, what conflicts would it be capable of generating when the terrain of the dispute concerns solely the introduction of a form of protection of the weakest part of the contractual synallagma in one of the most critical moments in the history of the country? What would be the meaning and significance of a contrast of this consistency? Why discuss a measure of dignity when every best expression of guarantee would seem to find its raison d'être precisely in the implementation of every minimal form of protection for the humblest and most disadvantaged classes? All the more when the dutiful, the necessary, correlation between social rights and civil rights, would seem to impose with priority criterion the implementation of the dictates of Directive 2022/2041/EU of 19 October 2022, relating to the minimum wages adequate in the European Union, to be transposed into the national legislative scene within, except for error, on November 15, 2024. tabili to compliance.

In the meantime, because such a European directive, as underlined by several parties, far from imposing the legal minimum wage on the Member States, would rather seem to contain an exhortation to carry out an intellectually honest reflection on the stringent limits and on the potential of collective bargaining alone to regulate the labor-law sector.

Therefore, because, in general, the gradual mortification of the guaranteed level of wage compensation, even in the simultaneous presence of every form of collective bargaining, would seem to have highlighted its flaws, consequently necessitating the support of alternative forms of protection such as that of the institution of the legal minimum wage.

Finally, because the terrain of political confrontation, precisely in a social context that is difficult to manage due to inflation and price increases, does not seem to be able to focus in dichotomous terms precisely on issues relating to the protection of mechanisms of social stability.

Let's be clear: the mere fact that the minimum wage is among the hottest topics of public debate in the sector of social and labor policies would not seem to constitute, even in terms of the heated confrontation of contrast, an element of harm since, in any event, the European Directive on adequate minimum wages, dating back to the last months of the year 2020, will hardly remain unimplemented.

And the reason seems to be in terms of the most mirrored simplicity if we only move on to consider the pure and simple definitional profile: the minimum wage constitutes the amount of minimum wage that, by law, a worker should receive for the service rendered in a given period of time and which, in no way, can be subject to reduction by virtue of collective agreements or private bargaining. To say it otherwise and more clearly: in the current state of the legislation in force, there would not seem to be any arguments such as to suggest that the introduction of the minimum wage can in any way cause the weakening of the trade union parties and of collective bargaining, which, if anything, could ultimately be strengthened. And saying it even more clearly: why on earth postpone the confrontation with the woman leader of the opposition who would simply like to bring, as a priority, to the attention of the woman leader of the majority the need to fight precariousness and poor work?

Could such a necessity not become a shared ground for intervention through the preparation of stringent measures in this sense that can act as a comfort for the weaker party of the contractual relationship? Why continue to exacerbate the sense of political opposition by pursuing the reasons for a rift between the two axes which, evidently, no concrete result would seem to be capable of producing? Wouldn't it be easier to coordinate, to make them coexist, the two different proposals in such a way as to guarantee the supreme and most pressing interest of the weaker class?

The only categorical imperative, superior to the mere political interest of the occasion, would seem to be, as in fact it is, the need to fight precariousness and poor work. And if this is the case, as it seems to be, why can't we proceed immediately, along the path of coordinating the proposals in the field? What would be the insurmountable obstacle that would hinder the simultaneous introduction of a law useful for establishing the universal value of collective agreements signed by the most representative organizations and for introducing a contractual minimum wage in critical sectors in full and complete compliance with the parameters of the European directive? The solution really seems to lie somewhere in the proverbial middle. And the biggest mistake would seem, if anything, to be precisely that which claims to place the reasons for collective bargaining in sharp contrast with those linked to the need to establish a threshold parameter below which no pay can be considered as such. All the more so when, beyond any propaganda, the European directive in question, far from wanting to impose anything, actually supports the fact that the amount of the minimum wage cannot in any way be established a priori from above, but must be discussed together with all the social partners.

Is there then, perhaps, a lack of political will? We will still have to start somewhere, and probably a strong signal of political intelligence and an example of good governance could be precisely that of being able to find the point of conjunction with the opposition forces for the realization of the common good which can certainly be achieved in the achievement of a "rich salary", to use the expression of the Deputy Prime Minister Antonio Tajani, but only after guaranteeing the "minimum" one. If the base is missing, the apex cannot be reached. If not now, when?

Josephine Di Salvatore

(Lawyer – Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata