How Long Do I Let My Brows Go?

A generational conflict? (ADAPT Bulletin published on December 10, 2007, n. 46) The proposal

INTRODUCTION - Two different governments, two different agreements. Legitimate children of a different political scenario. The Pact for Italy on the one hand, the Protocol of 23 July 2007 on the other. The first signed July 5, 2002, with the aim of crystallizing the guidelines in the enabling act of the White Paper No 30/2003 and later merged in the implementing Decree No. 276/2003. The second is the protocol on security, employment and competitiveness to the equitable and sustainable growth, submitted to the Social Partners on the night of July 20 last year by the Government. One governs the three subjects to be included greater public interest (social security, labor market and tax), the other deals only with the first two. The Pact for Italy was not negotiated by the CGIL, conversely, has signed the Protocol of 23 July. The methodological approach of the Covenant is based on a comparison pattern mining community, or the so-called "social dialogue". That, in continuity with the White Paper allows the Government not to see paralyzed legislative action, because of the absence of a bond of unanimity of consensus on certain matters. You should keep in mind that these stories do not exclude any way how to compare the comparison between those involved in bargaining, but rather are measures to prevent the numbness negotiation and, therefore, slowing the legislative machinery. Without a doubt better than a model of dialogue that, in factual reality, sometimes tends to escape their commitments in negotiations. This is the case of the Protocol of 23 July, a victim of second thoughts and controversies about whether or not to change it in the Houses of Parliament, after it had already been signed by the social partners and confirmed by 5 million workers in the referendum. "The critical point - the professor writes on the pages of the Bulletin Tiraboschi ADAPT-remains a serious de-legitimization of all the parties signed the agreement in July, the government first and foremost, in the case had violated the most basic rule of the meeting, namely the principle that pacts must be respected for what they are. " A comparison between the two agreements allow us to trace a geography of the various solutions identified by themselves, and proceeds in a comparative perspective, allows us to distinguish the innovative spirit of the one, the inertia for reform of the other.

DOWNLOAD THE WHOLE ON www.fmb.unimore.it