Introduction

Institut für Arbeits-, Sozial- und Wirtschaftsrecht IIIProf. Dr. Heinz-Dietrich Steinmeyer

Social Dialogue and co-determination in the area of Social

Security

by

Prof. Dr. Heinz-Dietrich Steinmeyer


Folie 2

Introduction

• Social Dialogue has a long tradition in Europe and even a longer tradition in Germany

• Already in the 1950s first efforts on the EEC level

• Since then further developed by EEC and EU• Influence of social partners on politics and

legislation of EU (European Social Committee)

• Some form of institutionalised social dialogue in most EU countries


Folie 3

Introduction

• In Germany in addition: - special tradition of co-determination and co-

decision - result mainly of social and economic catastrophy at

the end of World War II - to be found in business (Works Council, Co- determination on company level) in social security (self-administration of institutions) in politics - more or less informal and on a consultative basis


Folie 4

Introduction

• Therefore to be distinguished between - tripartite social dialogue in the areas of social policy and economic policy - bipartite social dialogue and negotiations between unions and employers - bipartite or tripartite dialogue or co- determination in social security


Folie 5

EU Level

• Social Dialogue in the sense of the EC Treaty:

All forms of contacts concerning social issues between employees, employers and other people and institutions concerned or involved

Official EU papers call social dialogue the center of the European social model


Folie 6

EU level

– Generally in all cases of European legislation concerning the area of social policy the social partners are involved; they will be asked for comments in a very early stage

– In EU Law also an institutionalised form of social dialogue – the Economic and Social Committee; is involved in the legislative process

- consisting currently of 344 members from member states – certain number per country.

- tripartite in another way: - employers/business - trade unions - „various interests“ – self-employed, consumers etc. - Mandatory consultative involvement


Folie 7

EU level

Social partners under EU Law they even have a quasi-

legislative role; they can agree on a directive and this will then put into EU law by European Council and European Parliament. The EU legislators may take it or leave it, i.e. they cannot be forced to accept it but they either may accept it as it is or reject it – but the final decision is still with the legislators


Folie 8

Consultative bodies im European countries

• In a great number of European countries there are consulting bodies on the national level

• Old and famous example: The Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands Main advisory body to the Dutch government and parliament on

national and international social and economic policy - 11 representatives of employers - 11 representatives of employees - 11 independent experts (selected by government) Functions: - consult the government and parliament - executing certain laws - certain supervisory functions


Folie 9

Consultative bodies in European Countries

• In France: Conseil Économique et Social (CES) - Advisory Assembly of 231 members - nine departments (among others Social Affairs and Labour) - in certain cases consultation process mandatory - Composed of 18 representative groups - among others trade unions, enterprises, farmers etc. - Manadatory referral - Consultation on its own initiative - 68 members appointed by government – the rest

sent by the representative groups


Folie 10

Consultative bodies in European countries

• In Spain: Economic and Social Council - Consisting of 60 members 1/3 Trade unions 1/3 Employers associations 1/3 other organisations plus 6 experts mostly designated by the groups but appointed by government - Functions – close to the French model


Folie 11


• Tripartite system in Romania CES - 9 members appointed by government - 9 members trade unions - 9 members employers associations


Folie 12


• Portugal – interesting combination of - general CES (Conselho Económico e Social) with delegates of the most representative organizations in society and economy and - a tripartite consultative body on social policy = Permanent Committee for Social Dialogue – involving social welfare policies with 4 representatives of the government, 4 of employer´s confederations and 4 of worker´s confederations


Folie 13


• Austria – is a special case – similar to Germany• But with a more complex structure - There are three chambers - the Federal Economic Chamber - the Federal Chamber of Labour - the Chamber of Agriculture - In addition there is an Advisory Council for Economic and Social Affairs - and – last but not least – social partners maintain representatives in the social insurance institutions – organised as self- administering entities under public law


Folie 14


• The Federal (and Province) Chamber of Labour - all employees are members - in each Austrian province a General Assembly is elected – like parliamentary elections - Participation in the legislative process by consultation - Services for members – among others legal assistance in labour law disputes• The Federal Economic Chamber - covering the business community


Folie 15


• Representatives in the Social Security system

- system is run by the social partners - state is limited to supervision


Folie 16


Evaluation1. All institutions only consultative2. To be seen in most European countries - except United Kingdom – no wonder - and – strange enough – Germany3. Usually representing the social partners4. Sometimes also additional interests5. Therefore usually the view of them6. Very often not tripartite and if so – usually

not joint official statements but presenting views.


Folie 17


7. Advantages: - corporatism results in negotiations and

may produce more adequate results - consensual solutions avoid conflicts and

collective labour disputes - Dutch experience with „Poldermodel“: – „All in all I´d say we are fairly happy with the council and it is an enrichment of our society“


Folie 18


8. Disadvantages - very often old boys network - those who are represented have influence – the others not - slows down legislative process - good ideas may end in bad compromises - Quoting Austrians „we have peace but we are always behind“ - Interests are not always really representative


Folie 19

Germany

• Why no such institutions in Germany? - one major trade union system, i.e. vast majority are in trade unions organised in DGB (German Trade Union Association) – representative body was there - same applies in case of employers organisation - in practice government consults them in any legislation affecting their interests - Criticism: - mostly like concerning the other countries - unions loose membership – representative? - follow special interests – for example against increasing retirement age to 67 - argument: represent those who have work and not those who need work (unemployed)


Folie 20

Germany

• And – the special story in Germany isSelf-administration in social securityAll institutions are autonomous legal

entitiesAll are run by executives elected by a

self-governing body – usually an assembly of the insured and the employers – equal numbers

The assemblies as such are elected in „Social Elections“ every four years


Folie 21

Germany

• Social Elections (Sozialwahl) mean that - employees and - employers may elect representatives for an assembly called

„Verwaltungsrat“ (Administrative Assembly) The employers usually send in one list – practically no election The employee´s side – usually list election –

competing trade unions and other organisations – sometimes no election like in case of employers


Folie 22

Germany

• Function and role - social insurance institutions have a certain autonomy - in detail depends on the area of social insurance in pension insurance very limited decision on budget within limits in health insurance considerably - fixing the contribution rate - decision on budget - negotiating prices and services with health care providers - involved in fixing of prices for pharmaceuticals - competing with each other


Folie 23

Germany

in industrial accident insurance - determining contribution rules - negotiating with providers - issuing regulations for the prevention of accidents - decisions on organisation and re-organisation within the limits set by law in unemployment insurance - tripartite bodies - setting rules for executing laws


Folie 24

Germany

• Unofficial function: - institutionalized interests - providing expertise• Reforms in pension insurance strongly influenced by

expertise of administrations and its officials• Ongoing reforms in industrial accident insurance - strong resistance against organisational reform trying to modernise the system – from 19th century to 21st century - trying to keep institutions as they are• Reforms in health insurance – usually a fight of

government against institutionalised and organised interests – funds, physicians etc.


Folie 25

Germany

• Advantages and disadvantages 1. Those affected and finance the system have influence 2. Perception – this is my system 3. But „social elections“ do not really function – people do not know why to vote 4. Members of the assemblies not always very engaged – just another honorary post; members of the assembly sometimes unprofessional


Folie 26

Conclusion

• Nobody – and nothing – is perfect• Almost everything has pros and cons• Provides more social peace• Might ease legislative process• Increases affection towards the system• Parliament and government do not

have to fix all details• Certain kind of division of power

Introduction

Documents

Transcript of Introduction