SEW/OGBL denounces the absurd national school commission voting system

The OGBL’s Education and Science Syndicate (SEW/OGBL) criticizes the current voting system of the national school commission and calls for urgent changes.

The national school commission is a partnership between school authorities, school staff and parents at the Fundamental Education level. According to article 53 of the 2009 School Law, the “national school commission proposes to the Minister the reforms, lines of research and continuous training offers and improvements that it deems necessary or opportune”.

Elections for teacher representatives are held every 5 years, with the next due around the end of 2024. Since the 2014 revision of the Grand Ducal regulation on electoral procedures, the SEW/OGBL has consistently criticized the voting system, which appears to have been deliberately designed to keep it out of sight.

Although the ballot appears to be proportional – voters have the option of marking a list or giving individual votes – the regulation in question in fact provides for elections by “plurality of votes”. Seats are thus de facto allocated according to the total number of votes obtained (list ballots + individual votes) between the 4 candidates with the most votes.

In short, we could say that this is a proportional (list) election, but the calculation is done in the same way as in a majority (personalized) voting system. This unprecedented and absurd hybrid mode leads to significant distortions and a distribution of seats that does not correspond to democratic principles.

In the 2009 elections, which were held under a traditional majority system, SEW/OGBL candidates won 2 of the 4 seats.

An analysis of the 2014 elections – the first after the change in the electoral system – shows that although two SEW/OGBL candidates received more individual votes (without list voting), no seats were won.

In the 2019 elections, one seat was won solely on the personal votes of the then SEW/OGBL president, highlighting the problem with the current ballot, which favors personalized election over proportional representation.

To illustrate the absurdity of the system, we need only imagine what would happen if this method of calculation were applied to other elections. For example, in the recent elections to the Chamber of Employees, the OGBL would have won 52 of the 60 seats; in the European elections, the LSAP would have won 3 of the 6 seats; and in the elections to the Chamber of Deputies, the CSV would have won 45 of the 60 seats.

Such a hybrid system obviously favors the majority syndicate, according to the logic of “winner takes it all”.

To sum up, the SEW/OGBL’s main criticisms are as follows:

1. Lack of transparency: the ballot suggests a proportional system, while it is personalized, misleading voters and distorting the distribution of seats.
2. Unfair distribution of seats: a proportional distribution, as foreseen in a true proportional system, is not guaranteed.
3. Principle of democracy: An opaque and unfair electoral system that violates democratic principles.

SEW calls for an urgent revision of the electoral system to ensure transparent, fair and democratic elections. A truly proportional system is essential to maintain voter confidence and respect for democratic principles.

The SEW/OGBL Teachers’ syndicate calls on politicians to address this issue with the necessary urgency and to take appropriate measures to adapt the voting system as early as 2024.

Press release by the SEW/OGBL Fundamental Committee,
July 1, 2024