European Union - European Industrial Relations?
eBook - ePub

European Union - European Industrial Relations?

Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer, Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer

Share book
  1. 328 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

European Union - European Industrial Relations?

Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer, Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

This book explores the prospects for the emergence of a distinctly European pattern of industrial relations, in which the European-level organisations representing employers and trade unions gain in importance vis-a-vis their national organisations. In particular, the impact of the 'Social Chapter' to the Maastricht Treaty is considered. The study

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is European Union - European Industrial Relations? an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access European Union - European Industrial Relations? by Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer, Wolfgang Lecher, Hans-Wolfgang Platzer in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Business & Business General. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Publisher
Routledge
Year
1997
ISBN
9781134724888
Edition
1

Part I
TOWARDS EUROPEAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS?

1
ON COURSE FOR EUROPEAN LABOUR RELATIONS?

The prospects for the social dialogue in the European Union


Dirk Buda1

The Protocol on Social Policy authorised the member states belonging to the European Union (EU) at the time to take decisions by a qualified majority in important areas of social policy in order to make further progress in implementing the 1989 Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers. At the same time European employers’ and trade union organisations (hereinafter referred to as the ‘social partners’) were given a more important role: before proposals for legislation are submitted by the European Commission, they must be consulted, can negotiate on the proposal before them and conclude an agreement and thus virtually take the place of the European legislator.
In principle the Protocol established the concept of ‘horizontal subsidiarity’, which the Commission and European employers’ and workers’ organisations had set themselves as a goal, providing a means of mediating between regulation by the law and by collective agreement at European level in the future. In all the member states labour and social policy constitute a ‘policy mix’ (varying from one member state to another) of provisions based, on the one hand, on the law and, on the other, collective agreements at cross-industry, sectoral and/or company level (Bispinck and Lecher 1993). It is thus only logical, and in the final analysis indispensable, for the European social partners to assume greater responsibility as it becomes easier to regulate social policy at Community level (for example in the areas of working conditions and worker information and consultation).
As far as the Commission is concerned, the crucial issue is not the way in which the proposed ‘foundation’ of minimum requirements in the field of social policy, on which the Community Charter is based, is put into effect, but simply that this type of minimum approximation is brought about at all where there is a need for transnational European action and, for example, where there is a threat of ‘social dumping’.2As regards informing and consulting workers in transnational undertakings, the Commission and the Council of the eleven member states initially made it clear that they wished to take action on the basis of the Agreement on Social Policy (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement’).3However, are the European social partners ready and able to take advantage of the new opportunities for consultation and, especially, negotiation? Under what conditions could a European system of labour relations develop in the future and what form might it take?
To answer these questions we must start by looking at the existing structures and progress made so far in ‘social dialogue’ at Community level. After this, it is worth taking a closer look at the procedures for consultation and negotiation and the part to be played by the European social partners as provided for by Articles 3 and 4 of the Agreement. We can then attempt to examine how the ‘social dialogue’ might be developed into a ‘minimum system’ of European labour relations.

THE SOCIAL DIALOGUE AT COMMUNITY LEVEL: DEFINITION, STRUCTURES, BACKGROUND

Talks between the ETUC and the European employer’s organisations UNICE and CEEP are generally described as social dialogue at Community level and were launched on the initiative of the President of the Commission, Jacques Delors, in 1985 (often called the ‘Val Duchesse talks’, after the place in Brussels where the first meeting was held on 31 January 1985). With the introduction of Article 118b in the EEC Treaty by the Single European Act in 1986, these talks became an institution, since the Commission was officially given the task, according to Article 118b, of ‘developing the dialogue between management and labour at European level which could, if the two sides consider it desirable, lead to relations based on agreement’.

The institutional structure of the social dialogue

Employers’ associations and trade unions have, of course, been involved extensively in the European policy process at Community level for decades. It is worth having a look at the various structures of the social dialogue in the broader meaning of the phrase, where a functional distinction should first be made between two things:
  • the dialogue by European institutions with the employers’ and trade union organisations;
  • the dialogue between the European social partners (with or without the participation of European institutions).
The first category includes consultation within the context of Community legislative procedures, which is practised in a variety of organisations, committees and special working groups with varying composition and modus operandi. These include the Economic and Social Committee, the advisory committees in various areas of Community social policy (e.g. health and safety at work, freedom of movement for workers, European Social Fund) and joint committees and informal working parties at sectoral level (e.g. European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), agriculture, transport, telecommunications).
The second category comprises dialogue at sectoral level (in the joint committees and informal working parties), and at the level of transnational undertakings, in addition to the above-mentioned dialogue at the level of the umbrella organisations. In some instances this has met with a fair amount of success: examples include the recommendation on working hours for employees in agriculture or the agreements in transnational undertakings on the establishment of pan-European information committees.
The Economic and Social Committee could never, however, become an institution of dialogue between management and labour, as it is not a joint organisation but is made up of individual members which have formed three different groups. The same applies to the advisory committees on social policy, which are made up of national tripartite delegations (employers, trade unions and national representatives of government). It is only the talks between the cross-industry umbrella organisations of the European social partners that have any genuine political weight.
This form of dialogue at the level of the cross-industry umbrella organisations has not been in existence just since 1985. As early as the beginning of the 1970s, arrangements were made for dialogue at Community level with the social partners’ umbrella organisations, with the creation of the Standing Committee on Employment and the organisation of ‘tripartite conferences’. This dialogue represented an extensive effort to introduce joint action (‘concertation’) between employers, trade unions and governments (with the involvement of the EC Commission and the Council) at a time when European sights were set on convergence of economic policies with a view to creating an economic and monetary union in 1980 (sic!) and harmonising social policy (1974 Action Programme on Social Policy). This ambitious project failed, however, and petered out in the mid-1970s in the wake of the general crisis in EC policy, diverging member-state policies and the ideological confrontation between the social partners (Grote 1987; Kohler-Koch and Platzer 1986).

A fresh start in the 1980s

The hitherto successful attempt to resuscitate the social dialogue in 1985 was prompted and nurtured by various interconnected factors:
  • the (temporary) economic upturn in the mid-1980s;
  • the acceleration in European integration after a long crisis, brought about by plans for the European internal market;
  • diminishing ideological and political confrontation between the social partners.
Unlike the tripartite joint action attempts of the 1970s, the focal point of the talks fostered since 1985 by the EC Commission is on promoting dialogue between the social partners. The expression ‘social dialogue’ reflects the fact that there are (still) no proper labour relations at European level and that an effort is being made to develop them under Article 118b. At the same time the emphasis is placed on the social partners’ independence and the principle of mutual recognition.
The dialogue takes place without any participation by the Council or the national governments, and the EC Commission confines itself, in principle, to playing the part of a moderator. It also differs from the first attempt in one crucial respect: no new institutions were created, informal structures being preferred, established by the social partners themselves.4This pragmatic approach to social dialogue had, as the Commission saw it, several purposes:
  • to build up and develop a climate for discussion between the social partners to promote mutual understanding, not only between employers and trade unions, but also of the complexities of labour relations and social systems in the member states;
  • to provide support for the 1992 internal market from the social partners, especially the trade unions;
  • to bring the social partners closer together on issues of (minimum) social harmonisation in Europe and ways of cultivating the social attributes of the internal market.

Stages in the development of the social dialogue5

In the initial phase (1985–8) the first priority was to involve the social partners in the plans for completing the internal market, of which the trade unions in particular were still wary. At the same time a forum was created which brought progress in the discussion on the need to develop the social aspects of the market, which later led to the Community Charter being adopted.
In a Macro-economics Working Party the social partners managed to reach agreement on the basis of a cooperative growth strategy and to adopt ‘joint opinions’ on the Commission’s annual economic reports. A second Working Party on Micro-economics dealt with questions surrounding the introduction of new technologies and drafted a joint opinion on training and motivation and on information and consultation of workers.
The dialogue was bolstered by the establishment in 1989 of a political Steering Group, made up of high-ranking representatives of the three European umbrella organisations and their national member organisations. The adoption of the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers and the Social Action Programme of the Commission implemeriting it also provided fresh stimulus. The Social Action Programme provided for consultation of the social partners’ umbrella organisations on Commission proposals in areas where there were no advisory committees (e.g. labour law).
The dialogue between the social partners was conducted in two new working parties: Prospects for a European Labour Market and Education and Training. In 1990 and 1991 alone, five joint opinions were adopted, including key opinions on mobility and the operation of the labour market in Europe, and on work organisation and the adaptability of the labour market. The dialogue was given considerable additional impetus through the Intergovernmental Conference which led to the establishment of the European Union in 1993. The negotiations on the reform of the Treaties were distinguished by the willingness of most of the member states to introduce qualified-majority decisions in the Council for some areas of social policy in order to overcome obstacles in these areas in implementing the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers. As a result an ad-hoc working group of social partners was formed to tackle the question of how both sides’ influence in this area could be increased.
On 31 October 1991 UNICE, CEEP and ETUC adopted a joint proposal addressed to the Intergovernmental Conference, which provided for mandatory consultation of the social partners on Commission proposals in the field of social affairs, and a negotiation and agreement option for the social partners with possible implementation of such agreements. This proposal was carried over almost verbatim into the Agreement (between the Eleven) on Social Policy at the meeting of the European Council in Maastricht and thus became an integral part of the EU Treaty.
In October 1992 UNICE, CEEP and ETUC formed a new Social Dialogue Committee, which, under the new circumstances, operates as a forum for orienting the dialogue.6This Committee has laid down terms of reference for two additional working parties: on education and training, in existence since 1989, and on macro-economics, where the group has been reactivated and has been concentrating on redefining a cooperative growth strategy and the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment.

Strengths and weaknesses of the dialogue so far: taking stock

If we consider how unpromising the initial situation was at European level until the beginning of the 1980s, the fact that any direct dialogue has been established between the social partners must rank as an achievement in itself. It has certainly led to a better understanding of the respective positions, not only between ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, but also between national member organisations, whose national circumstances vary. The large number of joint opinions adopted in the field of the economy, employment and labour illustrates clearly that consensus can be reached on major issues at European level.
The outcome so far is certainly promising but must be seen in the context of a series of problems and weaknesses which, at least so far, have marked the development of the dialogue. Little progress has been made in meeting goals set at summit meetings, especially with regard to constructive discussion at national or sectoral level of the results of Community social dialogue. Dialogue at Community level has thus made no real impact on labour relations in the member states. It has also proved difficult to arrive at a consensus on developing the social aspects of the internal market through dialogue between the social partners.
In essence, these weaknesses can be attributed to some basic problems experienced by the parties, which are still in evidence:
  • fundamental differences in political opinion between employers and trade unions on developing the social aspects of Community policy to achieve harmonisation at a minimal level;
  • differences in perception by the employers’ organisations and the trade unions of the purpose of social dialogue and the prospects for collective agreements at European level;
  • problems experienced by the umbrella organisations on both sides with regard to their own terms of reference and their inability to get their member associations involved.
The result has been that social dialogue has still not gone beyond discussions and statements on paper and has largely been determined by the course of EC policy in general and the Community’s social policy initiatives in particular. Autonomous dialogue between the social partners prompted by a joint willingness to aim for common operational solutions on the basis of their own plans and ideas has remained the exception. (The examples, which include some achievements at sectoral level, as in agriculture and the retail trade, or the framework agreement between ETUC and CEEP, represent major exceptions.)
With the joint proposal of 31 October 1991 addressed to the Intergovernmental Conference, however, the employers’ associations first showed themselves willing to consider the possibility of ‘agreements between management and labour’. This proposal also meant that the umbrella organisations, UNICE, CEEP and ETUC, recognised each other as parties to possible negotiations at European level.

THE ROLE OF EUROPEAN SOCIAL PARTNER ORGANISATIONS AS DETERMINED BY THE PROTOCOL ON SOCIAL POLICY

The Protocol on Social Policy, which formed an integral part of the Treaty on European Union, created a new set of conditions framing European social policy and the development of the social dialogue. At the same time, however, the provisions of the EC Treaty are still in force, so that, at least until the outcome of the 1997 Intergovernmental Conference is ratified, Community social policy has two separate and complementary legal bases:
  1. The provisions of the EC Treaty as amended by the EU Treaty.
  2. The provisions of the Agreement on Social Policy (all the member states with the exception of the United Kingdom), an integral part of the Protocol on Social Policy (all the member states) annexed to the EU Treaty.
The Agreement on Social Policy (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’) contained two main innovations:
  1. A new definition of social policy in Article 2 in the form of extension of qualified-majority decision-making (by the signatories) to the following areas of social policy in addition to the protection of health and safety at work:
    • working conditions;
    • the information and consultation of workers;
    • equality between men and women with regard to labour market opportunities and treatment at work;
    • the integration of persons excluded from the labour market.
    Other areas still require unanimous action and are thus de facto the sole responsibility of the member states (social security and social protection for workers) or are explicitly excluded from European legislative action (right of association and the right to strike).
  2. A new definition of the social dialogue in Articles 3 and 4 in line with the joint proposal of ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, dated 31 October 1991. In accordance with Article 3, the Commission is given the task of consulting ‘management and labour’ on proposals in the field of social policy in two stages: first of all in general on planned Community action, and subsequently on the ‘content of the envisaged proposal’. This proposal is accompanied by an option for the social partners to negotiate and conclude an agreement within nine months, during which time the Commission is required to hold its proposal in abeyance. Under Article 4 such agreements are to be implemented in accordance with the respective national procedures and practices or ‘at the joint request of the signatory parties by a Council decision on a proposal from the Commission’.7
In a communication concerning the application of the Protocol on Social Policy the Commission explained how it intended to implement the Protocol on Social Policy and the Agreement. On the one hand, it established criteria governing the choice of legal basis for future social policy and, accordingly, possible use of qualified-majority decision-making. On the other hand, it determined the practical arrangements for application of the new consultation and negotiation procedures for social partners introduced by Articles 3 and 4 (European Commission 1993).
In principle, the social dialogue under Article 118b of the EC Treaty and Article 4 of the Agreement can also lead to negotiations and agreements between ‘management and labour’, irrespective of any proposals for legislation. As expected, however, the employers’ confederation, UNICE, sees possibilities for negotiations and agreements only in direct connection with the Commission’s social policy initiatives (see the interview with Zygmunt Tyszkiewicz in Social Europe 2/1992:17–20). The social partners’ role and the development of dialogue between them will thus largely depend on the extent to which the Commission makes use of its new options in social policy.

Social policy initiatives on the basis of the Agreement?

The Commission based its decision as to which legal basis is to be chosen— EC Trea...

Table of contents