At the start
of his mandate (November 2014), the Christian Democratic oriented EU
President Jean Claude Juncker from Luxembourg, decided to relaunch
the European Social Dialogue. On 5 March, a high-level summit in
Brussels brought together the EU-level cross-industry and sectoral
social partners together with the European Commission to discuss ways
to strengthen social dialogue. On 19 March, the Tripartite Social
Summit looked at the contribution of the social partners to investing
in growth and creating jobs. And on 21–22 April in Riga, an
informal meeting of EU Ministers for Employment and Social Affairs
held as part of the Latvian Presidency examined the role and future
development of social dialogue.
The
European magazine “Foundation Focus” number 17 of September 2015
gives special attention to the state of the European Social Dialogue.
There is a common feeling that the European Social Dialogue is in
crisis. “Collective industrial relations, including social
dialogue, have undergone dramatic change over recent decades, with a
shift to predominantly service or knowledge economies, greater
individualisation in society at large, and the growth of female
employment and changing gender roles bringing issues of work–life
balance, care arrangements and working-time patterns to the table.
And economic change is a key driver of the role of social dialogue.
After the financial crisis of 2008, the issue of European social
dialogue slipped down the policy agenda in the face of more immediate
economic concerns. Strengthening social dialogue to enable social
partners to address socioeconomic issues in Europe more effectively
has, from its outset, been a declared key task of the new Juncker
Commission.” (the editorial)
As
part of this relaunch of the European Social Dialogue a special
report on “Collective bargaining in Europe in the 21st century”
was recently (4 November) published by Eurofound, Publications office
of the European Union, Luxembourg. Authors: Eckhard Voss, Katharina
Schöneberg and Ricardo Rodriguez Contreras. It is a very
thorough academic report with much detailed evaluation of the
Collective Bargaining Systems and nature of the Social Dialogues in
the different countries of the EU. It is clear that the 2008 crisis
has hit the different European countries in a different way. Changes
are related to the existing organizational capabilities and strength
of the employers organizations and trade unions, the nature of the
Governments, the actual economic situation etc.
The executive
summary of the report ends with a paragraph on the need to find a new
balance in the collective Bargaining Process. The impression is that
the report stresses the importance of a collective bargaining process
that is much wider oriented than setting wages and working conditions
on company level. Social Dialogue and Collective Bargaining processes
should be on national level and also contain wider macro economic
goals like reduction of income inequalities, settling labor disputes,
job creation, fiscal policies etc.
“This study
has shown that, with few exceptions, most EU countries since the late
1990s have been reporting accelerated change in their collective
bargaining practices and systems.
All EU
countries have faced globalization and increased pressure on costs
and productivity; continuous economic and financial uncertainties; an
unprecedented level of unemployment; technological change;
demographic, employment and social changes and risks; increasing
income inequalities; skills gaps; and the need to adjust training
systems. These challenges are changing the role of, the problems to
be addressed by, and the actors involved in collective bargaining. As
a result, existing regulations and standard collective agreements are
being challenged by the combined pressures of flexible work
organization, costs, outsourcing and shareholder value, especially
where regulations and agreements cover entire sectors or national
economies in a standard way. This, in turn, has created pressure for
organized as well as more disorganized and fragmented
decentralization in all EU countries, accompanied by major strains
and a weakening of the regulatory power of employer organizations and
trade unions at national level.
 |
|
The map shows
“The intensity of change in collective bargaining since 1997
"A major result
of this study in this context is that since 2008 the gap has
broadened between countries that are characterized by a comparatively
high organizational strength of social partner organizations, stable
and influential practices and institutions of various forms of
tripartism, and a broad collective bargaining agenda, on the one
hand, and countries where industrial relations actors, processes and
outcomes are weaker, on the other hand. For example, in terms of the
membership density of trade union and employer organizations, all the
countries that have experienced the strongest decline in density
since the end of the 1990s are located in central and eastern Europe,
whereas all the countries that report relative stability are in
western Europe. But not only is there a growing gap; in terms of the
influence of tripartism and tripartite practices on public policies,
the shrinking group of countries where influence is reported to be
significant and goes beyond symbolic action or mere dialogue,
consultation and information are also located in western Europe.
Similar features emerge with regard to the influence of social
partners and concertation on anti-crisis programmes or social policy
packages in response to labour market problems. A further clear
result is that there is a stark contrast between those (few)
countries that report a stable situation and a broadening collective
bargaining agenda that covers not only core items but also
contributes to coping with major economic, social and other
challenges and those countries that have experienced a significant
narrowing of bargaining agendas during the past decade. The latter
group consists of many countries in central and eastern,
north-western and southern Europe." (pages 54 and 55 of the Report)
|
Taking account
of all these developments and often contradictory trends
(polarization or asymmetric convergence in terms of more flexible
procedures, but also divergence in terms of national dynamics and the
effects of the crisis), along with changes in the regulatory
influence and orientations of national governments and European
institutions, the following questions in regard to the current and
future role of collective bargaining arise, based on two approaches:
- Will
collective bargaining at company level keep on reducing its core
functions as a mechanism for setting wages and incomes within a
corridor that is mainly determined by firm performance,
competitiveness and productivity?
- Or will there
also be above that level a wider dimension of collective bargaining
in regard to social integration, equality, avoiding unfair
competition, and influencing employment and working conditions as
well as income and wealth distribution more broadly, and not only
limited to employees covered directly by bargaining agreements?
This research
suggests that the evolution of these narrow and wider dimensions of
collective bargaining since the late 1990s has been characterized by
a growing imbalance, to the detriment of the wider and more
solidarity-oriented dimension. At the same time, it has become clear
that there are still examples throughout Europe where this more
normative role of collective bargaining is alive and has even been
revitalized in response to social and labour market challenges.
Accordingly,
it is acknowledged that collective bargaining provides a solid
foundation for progress and growth in the EU Member States, not only
by setting wages and working conditions as core functions, but also
by supporting the reduction of income inequalities. In addition, it
comprises an intangible asset for industrial relations, building up
mutual trust between actors, easing the settlement of labour and
industrial disputes, and contributing to the general macroeconomic
development at national level and better company performance.”
