Industrial Relations in Europe 2012 - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

IE IT LV LT LU MT NL PL PT RO SE Joint consultation procedures are in place. Intense social dialogue. Collective bargaining every three years, although the crisis has put this system under severe pressure. Ireland is the only country in Europe with a constitution which does not contain provisions on the public service. The procedural rules for collective bargaining are established by law. National - level framework agreements deal with issues regarding two or more divisions, such as telework, the use of temporary agency workers, or the definition of national level bargaining units or divisions, within limits established by the law. Industry/sub-sector-wide national collective agreements regulate employment conditions and industrial relations and set rules and subject for lower-level negotiations (integrative, decentralised contracts). There is no obligation to negotiate collective agreements in the public sector. Different regulations for different sectors (such as health, education, internal affairs) are in place. Joint consultation at the national level takes place at the Tripartite Council of the Republic of Lithuania. Legislation gives central agreements effect for public servants and non-manual workers. Existence of both genuine and de facto collective bargaining. For civil servants and white collar staff unilateral regulations (on basis of proposals of professional organisations of employees) exist while for blue collar workers collective bargaining is important. Existence of joint consultation procedures at national level within the Economic and Social Council. On the governmental level a very centralised dialogue is characteristic. A tripartite consultation body acts as industrial tribunal and a Joint Negotiation Council in matters concerning the service conditions of public servants. Trade unions are consulted in sectoral specific matters and engage in collective bargaining. Joint consultation at national level takes place twice a year between the government and the social partners. Formally the state has the power to set employment conditions unilaterally. Formally, statutory civil servants have no right to collective bargaining but informal negotiations practices exist. Consultation of public sector union confederations is obligatory. Civil servants with special status are denied the right to bargain collectively. At enterprise level, collective agreements may be concluded with the exception of those employed in units under state budget. The government can make unilateral decisions on public sector terms and conditions. Consultation is foreseen for issues such as employment programmes, human resource policy, retirement regulations. Sectoral level negotiations focus on matters such as remuneration, overtime, and training. Public sector unions can engage in negotiations but final decisions are taken by government. No bargaining on pay in central government; wage levels and increases are established by government regulation. Separate negotiations for public servants and contractual staff. Separate agreements for different groups of employees in county councils and municipalities. For example, the actual pay of each employee is negotiated locally between the agency and the local trade unions. 45
SI SK UK Centralised social dialogue. Voluntary negotiations in the civil service cover the terms and conditions of performance of civil service duties, working time, leaves, salary scales and social security coverage. Joint consultation and voluntary negotiations are more common in the public sector than in the private sector. Most unions focus on the representation of a particular occupational group. Sources: Mormont (2004), Hessel (2008), Bossaert and Kaeding (2009), Adam (2011), Vaughan- Whitehead (2012). Further discussion of country clustering can be found in chapter 3 of this report. Trends in bargaining regulation Since the 1970s, a trend away from unilateral regulation towards collective bargaining or towards mixed regulation systems can be observed (Traxler, 1999). This process started with Finland shifting from unilateral regulation to collective bargaining in the early 1970s, followed by Belgium in the mid-1970s and France to a very limited extent in the early 1980s. The Italian public sector system of collective bargaining also shifted from a unilateral to a mixed system in the early 1980s (the right to collective bargaining was introduced in Italy in 1983, although with several limitations, see Bordogna and Neri 2011), followed by Spain at the end of the 1980s. Considering that in the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs), the mode of regulation in the public sector was similar to unilateral regulation and shifted in the 1990s to collective bargaining or a mixed system, the dominance of public sector collective bargaining is a “recent” phenomenon. The Industrial Relations in Europe Report 2010 reported for the majority of the CEECs highly decentralised collective bargaining structures in the private sector. This highlights a major difference between private and public sector collective bargaining as the majority of public sector collective bargaining systems in the CEECs are characterised by relatively centralised collective bargaining. The reason for this difference between private and public sector collective bargaining can be explained by well-established tripartism in the public sector in many CEECs. According to the country case studies documented in Hessel (2008), in many CEECs employer and employee organisations have built up forms of cooperation and consultation from scratch in which central state authorities have a key role in collective bargaining. See also chapter 2 of this report for a discussion of collective bargaining structures in the CEECs. In many countries the level and structure of collective bargaining has also changed considerably over time. Frequently these changes are the direct result of various forms public sector reforms, or liberalisation and privatisation of public services in the same period (see Hessel, 2008). These changes lead to an increasing fragmentation of the collective bargaining system which is expressed by a diffusion towards multiple levels of collective bargaining and by differentiating within collective bargaining between different occupations and/or sectors (e.g. public administration, health, education) and second, by an increasing relevance of decentralised levels of collective bargaining. The main rationale behind this trend towards deconcentration and decentralisation of collective bargaining is guided by the idea that it allows more flexibility in regulating employment relationships and conditions, which in turn increases the efficiency of the public sector as a whole. However, not all EU Member States follow this idea of increasing the efficiency of the public sector by restructuring collective 46
Page 1 and 2: Industrial Relations in Europe 2012
Page 3 and 4: Neither the European Commission nor
Page 6: Table of contents Executive summary
Page 9 and 10: employers. The second covers countr
Page 11 and 12: as has trade union fragmentation, d
Page 13 and 14: collective bargaining, in other cou
Page 15 and 16: fragmentation and pay dispersion ha
Page 17 and 18: Generating new jobs and transformin
Page 19 and 20: een negligible. Second- and third-t
Page 21 and 22: Nevertheless, the study indicated m
Page 24 and 25: Chapter 1: Overview of European, na
Page 26 and 27: 2010, collective bargaining coverag
Page 28 and 29: short period of eight years. In Est
Page 30 and 31: Chart 1.6: Bargaining centralisatio
Page 32 and 33: A core aim of the CAWIE project has
Page 34 and 35: purposes of the present analysis. T
Page 36 and 37: have been substituted by contractin
Page 38 and 39: Table 1.1 shows that in 11 countrie
Page 40 and 41: SI SK UK Central level agreements.
Page 42 and 43: IT LV LT LU MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK
Page 44 and 45: Across the EU the magnitude of the
Page 48 and 49: argaining in the same way so that d
Page 50 and 51: Table 1.6: Major unions in the publ
Page 52 and 53: LU LV MT NL General Confederation o
Page 54 and 55: As shown by Visser (2010) for the n
Page 56 and 57: 1.5 Employers’ associations In co
Page 58 and 59: SI SK Governmental bargaining group
Page 60 and 61: State-centred, including Greece, Sp
Page 62 and 63: Chart 1.12: Comparison between nati
Page 64 and 65: this would imply that industrial re
Page 66 and 67: Doellgast, V. and Greer, I. (2007),
Page 68 and 69: Chapter 2: Industrial relations dev
Page 70 and 71: the only available source of compar
Page 72 and 73: Chart 2.4: Annual net earnings in t
Page 74 and 75: Table 2.1 GINI coefficients for the
Page 76 and 77: producers’ Finally, the governmen
Page 78 and 79: A weakening membership base indicat
Page 80 and 81: less eager to join an employers’
Page 82 and 83: The lower degree of bargaining coor
Page 84 and 85: Existence of tripartite council con
Page 86 and 87: including trade unions in policymak
Page 88 and 89: Legal extension of collective agree
Page 90 and 91: Descriptive statistical evidence (s
Page 92 and 93: of sector-level collective agreemen
Page 94 and 95: * Italics indicate pacts addressing
Page 96 and 97:
the liberal CEECs (LT, LV, EE, RO a
Page 98 and 99:
2.3.7 Interim conclusions Unionisat
Page 100 and 101:
Chart 2.16: Multi-national companie
Page 102 and 103:
Box 2.3 Coping with the economic cr
Page 104 and 105:
motivation for employers was findin
Page 106 and 107:
EE HU rapid increase before the cri
Page 108 and 109:
SK 2011: cuts/freeze planned SI 200
Page 110 and 111:
cooperation within the EU, where be
Page 112 and 113:
cabinet resignation, Romania renege
Page 114 and 115:
important for building additional r
Page 116 and 117:
References Avdagic, S. (2005), ‘S
Page 118:
egulationin Eastern Europe’, in D
Page 121 and 122:
and not an exact measurement of the
Page 123 and 124:
Of the remaining countries, four -
Page 125 and 126:
In some cases this is linked to emp
Page 127 and 128:
and social security activities have
Page 129 and 130:
Table 3.4 Part-time employment, 201
Page 131 and 132:
Table 3.6 Number employed in tempor
Page 133 and 134:
3.4 Employment status and the right
Page 135 and 136:
employees (Angestellte and Arbeiter
Page 137 and 138:
Table 3.8 Trade union density in th
Page 139 and 140:
distinguish between ‘technical’
Page 141 and 142:
with adequate services as well as t
Page 143 and 144:
Wales) about pay increases, based o
Page 145 and 146:
majority public ownership) than in
Page 147 and 148:
3.7 Centralisation, decentralisatio
Page 149 and 150:
government over the entire bargaini
Page 151 and 152:
3.8 Industrial conflict and settlem
Page 153 and 154:
all of public employees. Career civ
Page 155 and 156:
is also paid to equal pay and low-p
Page 157 and 158:
Casale G. (2008), Public service la
Page 159 and 160:
Pedersini R. (2009), “La riforma
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix 3.1 Number employed in pub
Page 164 and 165:
Chapter 4: The consequences of the
Page 166 and 167:
had a lengthy engagement with NPM r
Page 168 and 169:
Moreover, after an initial increase
Page 170 and 171:
GDP), Denmark (3.2%), Cyprus (0.9%)
Page 172 and 173:
in 2009 - a target that was missed
Page 174 and 175:
public sector and its workforce in
Page 176 and 177:
Pay Cut Pay Freeze Other measures H
Page 178 and 179:
Nevertheless, it should be remember
Page 180 and 181:
able to progress to higher salary p
Page 182 and 183:
the sharing of information technolo
Page 184 and 185:
and moves towards fiscal consolidat
Page 186 and 187:
the importance of inward investment
Page 188 and 189:
In countries less affected by auste
Page 190 and 191:
Spain -18,000 in 2010 in public adm
Page 192 and 193:
4.5.2 Responses of social partners
Page 194 and 195:
Country Protest & Strikes Finland F
Page 196 and 197:
Country Protest & Strikes Spain Ext
Page 198 and 199:
It has been suggested that although
Page 200 and 201:
Acknowledgements We thank Berndt Ke
Page 202 and 203:
Ibsen, C., Larsen, T., Madsen, J. a
Page 204 and 205:
Chapter 5: Greening the social dial
Page 206 and 207:
(Ueapme 2010 55 ). Fostering the ad
Page 208 and 209:
5.3 Cooperative approaches in manag
Page 210 and 211:
Chemical industry institutes) is th
Page 212 and 213:
5.4 Representation within an emergi
Page 214 and 215:
In other countries, the emergence o
Page 216 and 217:
Skills developments Career and empl
Page 218 and 219:
(WiRES 83 ) looked into the aspect
Page 220 and 221:
Career and employment security Heal
Page 222 and 223:
solar energy production, has launch
Page 224 and 225:
will hire unemployed workers, with
Page 226 and 227:
Overall, industrial relations in gr
Page 228 and 229:
References Arbeiterkammer Wien, Ins
Page 230 and 231:
Chapter 6: Social partner involveme
Page 232 and 233:
the same country in different areas
Page 234 and 235:
6.3 Unemployment benefit systems Th
Page 236 and 237:
established tripartite cooperation.
Page 238 and 239:
would appear that the funds were a
Page 240 and 241:
Further, according to the most rece
Page 242 and 243:
An example of social concertation i
Page 244 and 245:
government will facilitate the acco
Page 246 and 247:
funds. The schemes were based on pe
Page 248 and 249:
of industrial actions in the summer
Page 250 and 251:
managing these insurance funds is t
Page 252 and 253:
6.6.2 Social partner influence on p
Page 254 and 255:
etirement income gap by private fun
Page 256 and 257:
Acknowledgements The author would l
Page 258:
Natali D (2009), Public/private mix
Page 261 and 262:
Commission must consult the social
Page 263 and 264:
social partners' increasing role as
Page 265 and 266:
The agreement is a significant achi
Page 267 and 268:
the Commission not to present it to
Page 269 and 270:
In late July 2012 the cross-industr
Page 271 and 272:
Through the AGS the Commission has
Page 273 and 274:
workplaces in local and regional go
Page 275 and 276:
Moreover, the social partners are c
Page 277 and 278:
Change Summit in Cancun in December
Page 279 and 280:
linked to the Europe 2020 strategy
Page 281 and 282:
EU's flagship policy towards the se
Page 283 and 284:
to be included in the national LLL
Page 285 and 286:
industry and sectoral social dialog
Page 287 and 288:
In the construction sector, the Eur
Page 289 and 290:
In the sugar sector, the implementa
Page 291 and 292:
Directive on 30 May 2012. In this,
Page 293 and 294:
well represented at the higher leve
Page 295 and 296:
to establish and/or improve nationa
Page 297 and 298:
Federation of Textiles, Clothing an
Page 299 and 300:
Chart 7.1 Number and type of texts
Page 301 and 302:
commitment to the aim of full imple
Page 303 and 304:
Table 7.1: European sectoral social
Page 305 and 306:
Table 7.2: European social partner
Page 307 and 308:
Recovering and strengthening compet
Page 309 and 310:
Joint position regarding the Europe
Page 311 and 312:
developments, explains the Commissi
Page 313 and 314:
The review is based on consultation
Page 315 and 316:
concluded on 21 May 2012 a European
Page 317 and 318:
Furthermore, studies were commissio
Page 319 and 320:
Report of 26 October 2012 on the im
Page 321 and 322:
Six judgments were delivered relati
Page 323 and 324:
In Case C-3/10 162 , the ECJ ruled
Page 325 and 326:
In Case C 282/10 179 , the ECJ deci
Page 327 and 328:
8.3 Health and safety of workers 8.
Page 329 and 330:
8.3.5 Exposure to asbestos Practica
Page 331 and 332:
of data due to the need for major a
Page 333 and 334:
and effects of the EU Directives on
Page 335 and 336:
2. FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS DIRECTI
Page 337 and 338:
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS Free
show all

Industrial Relations in Europe 2012 - European Commission - Europa

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?