Ahead of the economic and social reform summit scheduled for the Chancellor’s Office on Wednesday, Christiane Benner, the IG Metall’s first chairwoman, demanded a clear delineation of responsibilities between the government and the social partners. “We cannot take over the government’s work or conduct a ‘Coalition Negotiation 2.0’,” Benner told the Funke Media Group publications on Tuesday. “The laws are made by the government and passed by parliament. That requires a clear division of roles.”
While stressing the fundamental importance of the meeting, she acknowledged that dialogue with the social partners was necessary given the stressed economic climate. “The situation is very serious; the German economy has been stagnating for six years,” the union representative noted.
Addressing possible cuts to subsidies-which are currently only political considerations within the coalition-Benner offered stern criticism. “I am against distributing money indiscriminately, and I am also against drastically cutting funds uniformly,” she stated. Instead, she advocated for a targeted industrial policy with clear investment priorities aimed at securing growth and competitiveness.
Benner pointed out that Germany operates in an international arena alongside China and the USA, both of which are consistently pursuing their industrial policy interests. She argued that an “even playing field” no longer exists, making outdated industrial policy approaches inadequate.
She expressed openness to cooperation with the federal government, provided that this strategy is focused on investing in Germany’s industrial base. The union is prepared to offer support in areas such as green steel, electric mobility, and a low industrial electricity price, with the decisive goal of safeguarding industrial jobs and regional value creation.
As the representative of employees’ interests, Benner also highlighted that many citizens are suffering from rising costs for rent, energy, and food. “Social cuts do not create a single job,” she emphasized.
Furthermore, she voiced strong criticism regarding discussions about reforming the working time law. In many enterprises facing weak order volumes, the debate over a weekly working time instead of the conventional eight-hour day is “absurd.” She argued that further efforts should focus on professional qualification and improving female labor force participation. She also referenced the high demands placed on people in practice, questioning: “Nine hours for household duties, eating, brushing teeth, putting children to bed, sleeping-what else is supposed to come into that?”
