Engagement in European social dialogue: an investigation into the role of social partner structural capacity

• Author: Barbara Bechter,Thomas Prosser,Bernd Brandl
• Date: 01 July 2017
• Published date: 01 July 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12192

Engagement in European social dialogue:

an investigation into the role of social

partner structural capacity

Barbara Bechter, Bernd Brandl and Thomas Prosser

ABSTRACT

Despite the importance of social dialogue for the European social model, there has

been little attention to the factors that account for social partner engagement with

European social dialogue. On the basis of data from 28 European sectoral social

dialogue committees, this article investigates structural factors that account for the

conclusion of European sectoral social dialogue agreements. It is found that actors’

organisational density is a necessary but not sufficient factor for successful European

social dialogue and four different categories of sectoral social partner engagement

with European social dialogue are identified.

1 INTRODUCTION

The realisation and functioning of a European social market economy, which simul-

taneously promotes sustainable economic growth and social cohesion, is also based

and dependent on the functioning of social dialogue, that is, on consultations, negoti-

ations and joint actions between social partners (European Commission, 2015).

Though social dialogue exhibits a high degree of institutional and organisational het-

erogeneity across European countries, it exists in all European Union (EU) Member

States (Marginson and Sisson, 2004). Even though social dialogue in the EU is deeply

rooted in national structures, it has also increasingly taken place at European level.

1

In particular, since the launch of an institutionalised European social dialogue in

1985, European social partners have attempted to simultaneously ensure the fair

treatment of workers and foster the competitiveness of businesses in an increasingly

integrated European market (Welz, 2008). The European Commission (EC) indeed

sees social dialogue as important to its current objectives, and social partners have as-

sumed a role in the ‘Europe 2020’strategy and new ‘European semester’system of

governance (Meardi and Marginson, 2014).

❒Barbara Bechter is Assistant Professor in Human Resource Management (Durham University Business

School, UK); Bernd Brandl is Reader in Management (Durham University Business School, UK); and

Thomas Prosser is Senior Lecturer in European Social Policy (Cardiff Business School, UK).

Correspondence should be addressed to Barbara Bechter, Durham University, Mill Hill Lane, Durham

DH13LB, UK; email: barbara.bechter@durham.ac.uk

1

In the following article, we refer to national social dialogue, or national level social dialogue, to describe

country-specific forms and structures of social dialogue, which, depending on the country, can take place at

company, sector or national level (or at a combination of different levels). For national social dialogue, in

the sense that the domain of social dialogue covers the whole country, we use the term country-wide social

dialogue.

Industrial Relations Journal 48:4, 365–382

ISSN 0019-8692

© 2017 Brian Towers (BRITOW) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Despite literature on the outcomes of European social dialogue, that is, on the joint

texts produced in European-level social dialogue (Degryse, 2015; European Commis-

sion, 2010; Pochet et al., 2009) and the quality of implementation outcomes (Prosser,

2012; Prosser and Perin, 2015), little is known about the structural factors that ac-

count for the participation of social partners in the dialogue (Keller and Sörries,

1998; Leisink, 2002) and especially since enlargement of the EU in 2004. Against

the background that the EC recently emphasised the importance of adequate struc-

tures of European social partner organisations and their national affiliates

(European Commission, 2014), this article therefore aims to identify necessary and

sufficient factors for the engagement of social partners at European-level social dia-

logue by focusing on one major forum of institutionalised interaction, that is, on

European sectoral social dialogue committees (SSDCs). Against the background that

in recent years, European-level social partner institutions became increasingly

contested and reformed (Marginson and Welz, 2015), this endeavour will not only

contribute to academic literature but also shine new light on how social partners

can better contribute to the challenges of European integration.

The article is organised as follows. First, it outlines the background and structural

framework of European sectoral social dialogue and reviews its role and outcomes.

On the basis of this, a four-point framework is derived that conceptualises different

forms of social partner engagement in SSDCs. The article’s methodological and

empirical strategies are then described, and findings are consequently set out. A

conclusion that classifies sectoral social dialogue regimes on the basis of the analytical

framework and discusses the impact of the results on European social dialogue’s

prospects is finally reached.

2 THE IDEA AND FRAMEWORK OF THE SECTORAL SOCIAL DIALOGUE

In the majority of Western European countries, the sector is (still) the traditional and

predominant level at which social partners organise and conclude collective agree-

ments on work and employment-related issues (European Commission, 2015).

Though in recent decades sectoral agreements in Western European countries have

tended to fragment by a steady process of decentralisation of collective bargaining

(Hyman, 2001; Marginson, 2015; Marginson et al., 2003) and sectoral dialogue

remains, with a few exceptions, ‘poorly’developed in Central and Eastern European

countries (Meardi, 2007), sectoral social dialogue in Western Europe still plays an

important role in the governance of work and employment (Meardi and Marginson,

2014).

Against the background of the existence of sectoral social dialogue structures in

many European countries, European public authorities have also promoted the sector

as a key level of European social dialogue (Dufresne et al., 2006; Falkner et al., 2005;

Keller and Sörries, 1998; Welz, 2008). A particular concern has been fostering SSDCs;

these institutions were launched in the 15 member states of the EU (EU15) in 1998 to

replace the existing structure of joint committees and informal working groups.

Sectoral social dialogue committees are forums where national sectoral social part-

ners exchange information on a wide range of social and work-related issues and

which also enjoy the right to negotiate and conclude EU-level agreements.

2

Such

2

In the following, we use the term national sectoral partnersto describe employers’organisations and trade

unions that represent the interests of their constituencies within their home country.

366 Barbara Bechter, Bernd Brandl and Thomas Prosser

© 2017 Brian Towers (BRITOW) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd