The Unity List’s political spokesman, Mai Villadsen, and SF’s group chairman, Jacob Mark, announced at the same time that their parties intend to vote against that legislative intervention.
– It is a bad feeling because we do not get to change the unequal pay that is in Denmark, says Jacob Mark.
– We have been presented with nothing new. They want to raise the mediation sketch into law, and they want to make an intervention and a pay committee. That means we are voting no.
Mai Villadsen is also frustrated with the government’s solution:
– This is so deeply disappointing for our welfare society. I’m really worried that this will mean that a lot of employees will flee the public sector.
On the contrary, the Radicals intend to vote for legislative intervention, says employment spokeswoman Samira Nawa.
– We fully understand the frustration that the nurses’ conflict stems from. This is also true in other female-dominated subjects, she says.
– Therefore, we need to find a solution that is broader than a single industry or a single subject.
After the nurses voted no to the agreement in the public sector, the parties joined the Conciliation Institution. Here, the meetings ended with a conciliation proposal that included a pay structure committee.
But that was not enough to persuade the nurses. They again voted no, which triggered the strike that has been going on since 19 June.
It is nonetheless the proposal that the government, according to the parties, will elevate to law.
A legislative intervention must be voted through the Folketing by a majority. But if the legislative intervention is to pass quickly through the Folketing, it must be dealt with urgently. In that case, it will require a dispensation from three quarters of the Folketing.
Just because one intends to vote against the bill itself, parties may well vote for it to be dealt with urgently. For example, according to Jacob Mark, SF will discuss whether the party should vote for an urgent treatment.
Quelle: Die nordische Seite
