By: Klea Jeretič
On Monday, September 22nd, Prime Minister Golob, in a rather authoritarian manner, announced mandatory Christmas bonuses. At the National Assembly session, he declared: “There will be a Christmas bonus. For everyone. Mandatory.” No social dialogue, no analysis, just a unilateral statement. In a democracy, this is a dangerous way to make decisions. The measure was presented to the public as a form of wage relief, though in reality it is a one-time payment that does not affect regular salaries, does not increase pension bases, and is not a long-term measure. It is political PR and vote-buying, not a thoughtful economic policy.
Such a measure would not relieve wages but would instead burden the economy. Businesses plan their finances in advance, typically at the end of the year for the following year. Now, in the final quarter, they are faced with a new, substantial expense they had not budgeted for. Where will they cut costs? First in investment, development, and modernisation – the very things that make a country competitive in the long run. Rapid changes to the tax and business environment harm the private sector, as entrepreneurs cannot forecast their operations. Micro-enterprises are especially vulnerable, often unable to afford such costs, and even larger companies face unplanned multimillion-euro expenses.
Take the public sector: it employs around 190,000 people. If the Christmas bonus amounts to €639 per employee, as announced, that would mean €121.4 million in additional expenditures, despite a nearly €2 billion budget deficit already projected for 2025. This measure reflects extreme irresponsibility in managing public finances and creates fiscal instability at a time when the economy is cooling.
For example, RTV Slovenia has around 2,015 employees. A mandatory bonus would mean €1.3 million in additional costs, even though RTV is already operating at a loss. Taxpayers will once again foot the bill. And this will not be the only case.
Such a budget deficit will eventually trigger the need for austerity and cutbacks, which could reduce investment in public goods – services primarily accessed by lower-income citizens. This increases the risk of social inequality due to reduced access to public services.
Let me be clear: I support Christmas bonuses as a reward for business success and recognition of employee effort, where profits allow. But a universal, mandatory payout is not a reward; it is a forced supplement that can lead to budgetary pressure, reduced investment, and fiscal instability.
Prime Minister Golob often emphasises record profits in the economy. True, some companies are doing well, but not all. And it certainly does not mean the state has stable public finances. If businesses are forced to take on additional burdens, it will ultimately mean fewer investments, fewer jobs, and less competitiveness.
Meanwhile, the government is already collecting contributions for long-term care. Since July 1st, we all pay it. Yet the service still does not exist. The state collects the money first, and the service comes later. In the meantime, household incomes are shrinking, we are paying for something we cannot even access. This is not responsible social policy; it is redistribution in a country already overtaxed, with weak and often inaccessible public services.
That is why we must speak clearly: rewards for work – yes, but only if businesses and public finances can afford them. What the government is doing now is a dangerous practice: first collecting money for a non-existent long-term care system, then distributing it as a “gift” and presenting it as relief. In reality, what remains are costs, unnecessary bureaucracy, and greater fiscal instability.