Europeanization of social partnership in EU-acceding Countries*

Journal for East European Management Studies, 2007 by Iankova, Elena A

With the advancement of the eastern enlargement of the EU, some advocates of the European social model saw enlargement as the "Trojan horse" against Europeanization, for the Americanization of Europe. In response, the EU recommended the strengthening of social partnership among business, labor and the state in candidate countries. This paper reveals four major venues for change: (1) emphasis on a new philosophy of social dialogue as social governance; (2) broadening the scope of participants in social dialogue; (3) development of autonomous and multi-level social dialogue among the organizations of employees and employers; and (4) capacity building for participation of the social partners in EU-level social dialogue.

Mit der voranschreitenden Ost-Erweiterung der EU sahen einige Verfechter des europäischen Sozialmodels die europäischen Erweiterung als ,,Trojanisches Pferd" gegen die Europäisierung und für die Amerikanisierung Europas. Als Antwort empfahlen die EU die Stärkung der sozialen Partnerschaft zwischen den Betrieben, den Arbeitskräften und dem Staat in den Kandidatenländern. Dieser Beitrag zeigt vier bedeutende Arten von Veränderungen: (1) die Betonung einer neuen Philosophie des sozialen Dialoges als soziale Governance; (2) die Erweiterung der Teilnehmer im sozialem Dialog; (3) die Entwicklung von autonomen und mehrstufigen Sozialen Dialogen zwischen den Organisationen von Arbeitsnehmern und Arbeitsgebern; und (4) die Entwicklung der Aufnahmefähigkeit für die Beteiligung der Sozialpartner am Sozialen Dialog auf Ebene der EU.

Key words: social partnership; social dialogue; Eastern enlargement of the European Union

The European social model, varieties of capitalism and EU enlargement

Central to the debate on Europe's integration is the clash between conflicting notions of state and individual, or of the role to be played by regulation and by the market. An interpretive framework that gives the relationship between the state and socio-economic interests a central place has distinguished three major variants of contemporary capitalism: corporatism as practiced in most of Western Europe; Anglo-Saxon style neoliberalism, and Japanese statism (Katzenstein 1978; Hart 1992; Esping-Andersen 1990).1 That widely used typology of capitalist variants underscores how governments, labor, and business are linked differently and can have varying roles in state governance and market processes, with labor marginalized and the state playing only an indirect part in the neo-liberal United States, governments actively engineering economic development in Asia, and strong interventionist states incorporating policy inputs from labor and business in most of western Europe.

Based on this typology, a distinct, continental European "Social Model" has been discussed for decades, in contrast mainly to the Anglo-Saxon neo-liberal model of privatization, liberalization and globalization, where the market is an end itself. The European social model is thus rooted in the view that markets are always socially and politically embedded; it envisages economic success as being built on deep social foundations. It is a vision of society that implies full employment, good quality jobs, equal opportunities, social protection for all, social inclusion, and involving citizens in the decisions that affect them. The EU's official point of view of the European social model reflects the following common principles: Europe's success must not exclude anyone; solidarity is linked to economic success; there is neither dilemma nor a contradiction between economic and social progress; and the welfare state is not a luxury, a product of economic development, but a factor of production.

Under the European social model, companies are seen as social entities and political bargaining between the interest groups of capital and labor is accepted. Social partnership, collective bargaining and workers' protection are seen as crucial factors in promoting innovation, productivity and competitiveness. Social dialogues among employers, unions, and governments at the European level-though much criticized-have scored some real chievements. Millions of EU citizens are benefiting from expanded parental leave and improved rights for part-time workers as a result of agreements negotiated between the Union of Industrial and Employers1 Confederations in Europe (UNICE), the Euro-level organization representing European employers, and the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC).

However, with the rise of neo-liberalism since the 1980s and the decline of Keynesian economic policies-the backbone of the European social modelWestern Europeans found that government money was no longer available for traditional welfare policies, and their leaders engaged in serious debates over the future of the highly praised, consensus-based European social model. The challenge to the European social model is seen as coming from both its own inability to respond to current problems, as well as from international pressures such as globalization but also the eastward enlargement of the EU.