Municipal mergers offer a five-year protection period against job termination – and sometimes the immunity accumulates with multiple mergers, raising the dismissal vouchsafe up to 15 years. In the long-proposed social and healthcare reform, however, no such protection exists.
"The bill does not include this five-year protection, and it means that staffers moving to work for service-generating organisations will be handed over as transfer of business," manager Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health says. "When organisations develop, changes to job descriptions and locations may occur."
In terms of potential terminations, the lack of a protective system guaranteeing job continuity can lead to people being handed their hats in the name of organisational reform.
"It is possible that people will be laid off in connection with the reform, but personally I don’t believe it will be a common trend," Voipio-Pulkki says. "On the contrary, we have a staff shortage in addition to the fact that employees in the social and healthcare industry are nearing pension age."
Healthcare union calls for parity
Municipal social and healthcare services employ some 200,000 workers. The protection against dismissal is also a priority for the Union of Health and Social Care Professionals (Tehy).
"Our view is that people who are going over to work for a new employer, whether it involves this social reform or a municipal structure, should be guaranteed equal rights to fend against possible termination," lobbying director Jukka Maarianvaara says.
"People are anxious over whether the reform will affect their jobs, which doesn’t help their commitment. This is also an issue of lack of parity."
Chief Tarja Myllärinen from the Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities says the issues arising from the proposed reform have been much discussed in their organisation, as well.
"Unequal and unclear situations are sure to arise," she says. "The equal treatment of all employees to be affected by the reform would require legislative clarification."
