Most privatized enterprises tend to preserve
or increase the number of workplaces. This is related to the fact
that up to now privatization has essentially involved the creation
of new private enterprises or expansion of the activity of already
operating ones. To some extent the increase in employment is also
due to the fact that preserving or increasing the number of jobs is
stipulated as a condition in the contracts in most privatization
transactions. As indicated by the study, that condition was present
in the contracts of 4 out of the 5 enterprises, with only one of
them having made 500 workers redundant. (see Table 4).
The data about concluded large privatization
transactions show that of the transactions concluded by the
Privatization Agency (they all fall within the category of "big
privatization transactions"), 7 included a condition of termination
requiring the creation of new jobs, in 5 of the contracts the
condition was to preserve existing jobs, and only 2 included no
such clause, with no information being available about the
rest.
The commitments concerning the number of
jobs are related to agreed additional investments. Such commitments
have been made in more than 45% of the concluded transactions.
The results of the survey refute the common
assumption that privatization leads to job cuts. Only less than 10%
of all privatized enterprises in the country reduced the number of
workplaces, and the rest either increased or preserved existing
jobs. The reason for this specific to Bulgarian privatization
phenomenon lies in the fact that privatization in Bulgaria was
delayed. During the pre-privatization stage, owing to the
limitation of state subsidies (see
Table 6), there were significant
personnel cuts in the state-owned enterprises, and in some cases it
even fell to a level below the minimum necessary for the normal
operation of the enterprises. The phenomenon "unpaid leave" turned
into a mechanism for mass discharge of labor force.
In this respect, however, Bulgaria is not
unique. "The empirical analysis of the Chilean experience shows
that the change in ownership related to privatization does not in
itself affect employment but leads to greater efficiency without
bringing about an increase in the general level of
unemployment".(1)
Table 6.
ENTERPRISE SUBSIDIES AS A SHARE OF
THE STATE BUDGET EXPENDITURES:
1989
|
1990
|
1991
|
1992
|
1993
|
1994
|
26.4
|
25.7
|
9.0
|
3.65
|
3.9
|
4.6
|
Source: State Budget Bill for the
resective year
The data from the survey indicating an
increase in the number of workplaces in the privatized enterprises
ought to dispel the fears of privatization of the employees and the
trade unions.
The increase in employment also results from
the general expansion of production and enhanced efficiency of the
overall activity of the privatized enterprises.
Another characteristic tendency related to
the organization of labor in the privatized enterprises is the
change in working hours, with modifications in the organization of
shift work. Furthermore, there appears to be greater
interchangeability and rotation, especially in the enterprises
bought by the staff.
-------------------------
(1) Dominique Hachette and Rolf Luders, Privatisation in
Chile: An Economic Appraisal, ICEG, 1993, p. 10
|