The government said yesterday it would be amending the National Holidays and Other Public Holidays Act in order to implement the budget measure whereby holidays falling on the weekend would not be added to employees' annual vacation entitlement.
In an official statement last night, the government did not give details on the proposed amendment but only said that the changes would include "provisions covering cases where public holidays fall on Saturdays or Sundays".
A measure announced in the last budget stipulated that in order to enhance productivity and competitiveness, no days would be added to vacation leave when public holidays fall on weekends, as has been the practice.
The proposal raised a hornet's nest. Trade unions have argued that giving additional days off for holidays falling on weekends was enshrined in collective agreements and the government had no right to interfere with such contracts. The spectre of industrial action has been raised by the General Workers' Union if the government goes ahead with the measure.
But Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi has repeatedly declared in public it was important the measure starts being implemented as from next year and that a way to do so was being sought.
At one stage, Dr Gonzi had indicated that the Employment and Industrial Relations Act would be amended to allow the proposed measure to be implemented.
As luck would have it, January 1 falls on a Saturday and Christmas Day 2005 will fall on a Sunday. The other two holidays falling on weekends next year are that of St. Joseph the Worker, celebrated on March 19 - a Saturday - and May 1, May Day - a Sunday.
The government's decision to try and find a way out of the impasse was apparently precipitated yesterday by a joint statement issued following a meeting between the GWU and the Federation of Industry.
The two bodies said the Employment and Industrial Relations Act, which was enacted following long-drawn negotiations between employers, unions and the government, laid down that collective agreements were legally binding and that this principle should be respected by everyone, including the government.
The joint statement said the FOI appealed to the GWU not to cause industrial turmoil but also appealed to the government to "clarify the measure announced in the budget".
Industrial relations consultant Andrew Borg Cardona said when contacted yesterday that the "easiest way" for the government would be to identify a number of public holidays and strike them off the list of public holidays. Otherwise legal notices would have to be enacted each year, stipulating which are the public holidays.
Employers are demanding that at least three public holidays be struck off.
George Abela, another lawyer who also specialises in industrial relations, said he was against the government interfering with the principle of collective bargaining.
"There are industries and other private establishments, such as banks, where there are no problems with productivity and the government should not impose such measures on the private sector. If there are companies willing to grant additional leave to their employees, so be it," Dr Abela said.
"But if we really believe in competitiveness, politicians should put their heads together and set an example by removing some public holidays that exist only because of their political nature," he added.
Contacted yesterday, Malta Employers' Association director general Joseph Farrugia said "it was a mistake for the FOI to issue a joint statement with the GWU on the issue.
"You cannot first make a budget proposal, asking for the removal of public holidays falling on weekends, and then withdraw from it.
"The government wants to increase productivity by reducing some excessive holidays. To me it is not clear what the unions want. They know Malta has more holidays than the EU average and if they are using the collective agreement issue just to delay, then I cannot agree with them.
"If unions want to increase productivity they have to realise we have to increase the time spent at work. If we can find a solution without touching the Employment and Industrial Relations Act, let's go for it. The Prime Minister has the full backing of the employers on this matter," Mr Farrugia said.
FOI president Anton Borg said the FOI had met the GWU because the union had sent letters to industrialists and informed them about their contractual obligations emanating from collective agreements. The union had also said it assumed that employers who did not reply were in agreement with the union.
The FOI had instructed its members not to reply and met the GWU on behalf of its members.
In its statement, the government yesterday again left the door open for a "national" agreement on any measures that would improve productivity and competitiveness. That would be in the best interest of the country, it said.
Thus, if an agreement was reached in the coming days between the social partners at the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development, the government declared it would be willing to revise the proposed measure in line with such agreement. "However, the measure agreed upon must be effective, concrete and conducive to the attainment of the aims which the national interest dictates on everybody," the official statement concluded.