The papers are full of reaction to Monday's announcement that the labour market organisations have nearly, probably, potentially reached a deal to cut the cost of labour in Finland in an effort to improve the country's competitiveness. It's been in the works since last year's election, when Prime Minister Juha Sipilä announced he wanted to cut the unit cost of labour, and it has occupied Finland's unions and employers since then.
On Monday it was announced that some employee contributions to pensions and unemployment insurance will rise, holiday pay will be cut for those in the public sector, working hours will rise by three days over the course of a year and some employer costs will be cut.
In a comment piece Helsingin Sanomat political journalist Teemu Luukka says that the agreement is historic. For a century working weeks have shortened and real pay has risen. Now unions have agreed to reverse that trend.
Ideological disappointments
Helsari's editorial focuses on the broader implications. The deal falls short of what the government wanted, and the section on localised wage bargaining is far from their own plan. Government parties have not said whether they will accept the agreement, and HS says in some respects it could be a defeat for the National Coalition party in particular.
"There were ideological disappointments too for those who are disappointed: if the deal is accepted, a bourgeois government will cement the labour market organisations' right to veto all legislation in working life and social security," said HS in a leader article. "That's what (the blue-collar union confederation) SAK has been aiming for."
Business daily Kauppalehti's verdict is clear. There is lots to complain about in the deal, and it doesn't meet Sipilä's requirements for a 5 percent drop in the cost of labour, but it'll have to do--and it's much better for the unions than the legislation on cutting sick pay, bonuses and holidays that the government had planned if the deal failed. Still, all eyes are on the government and the SAK, which will take a week before announcing it's view on the agreement. KL thinks that's just for show.
"It would be strange if SAK's member unions shot down the deal," said KL in an editorial. "It is the best possible document that's available right now."
Trust in the media
Every major Finnish paper carries a joint editorial on Tuesday in support of journalism and opposing so-called 'fake' media, which have in recent months become very popular in Finland. These outlets are not committed to follow the journalistic guidelines set out by the Council for the Mass Media, and often publish inaccurate and misleading stories that generate hate speech and racism online.
The editors of 21 titles joined together to state prominently that they will support their journalists when attacked and try to debunk false stories propagated by the 'alternative' online outlets.
Cost of deportations
Finnish authorities moved quickly last year to tighten the criteria for asylum seekers. They often stated that only a fraction of the 32,000 who arrived in 2015 would eventually be allowed to stay. The rest would be deported.
Aamulehti published an STT report on how that might happen in practice. To summarise: it will be expensive. Lats year the police returned some 3,180 people who had received a negative decision. They say now that it's too early to say how many who receive a negative decision will return voluntarily and how many will be returned by force in 2016, but that number could double or even treble according to police inspector Jukka Hertell.
The cost of each deportation is around a thousand euros, and therefore the repatriations will cost a pretty penny. STT reports that up to now Finland has managed to return a high percentage of failed asylum seekers, some 60-70 percent, compared to a figure in other European countries of around 40 percent.
