Denmark: the long-lasting class compromise
| Date | 04 June 2018 |
| Published date | 04 June 2018 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-01-2017-0012 |
| Pages | 580-599 |
| Author | Jens Lind,Herman Knudsen |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations,Employment law |
Denmark: the long-lasting
class compromise
Jens Lind
Department of Sociology and Social Work, Aalborg University,
Aalborg, Denmark, and
Herman Knudsen
Institut for Samfundsudvikling og Planlægning,
Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to offer a critical examination of industrial relations in Denmark.
Design/methodology/approach –The approach is based upon available data and a mixture of Marxist
theory and systems theory. The theoretical position is discussed in relation to the academic discourses on the
main characteristics of Danish industrial relations and provides a review of the foundation and historical
development of the Danish system.
Findings –From this basis, it is analysed how the stagnation or decline has taken place in recent years
regarding representation of workers’interest as well as the ability of the Danish system to maintain its key
importance when challenged by decentralisation, decreasing union affiliation rates, cuts in unemployment
insurance and social dumping due to labour migration.
Originality/value –It is an original paper which offers a critical analysis of the institutional decline and
increasing inequality that are the result of the liberalist political-economic hegemony.
Keywords Labour market, Trade unions, Industrial relations, Collective bargaining
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction: theoretical basis and structure of the paper
This paper offers a critical examination of industrial relations in Denmark. The Danish
system is first and foremost characterised by the prominent role played by national trade
unions and employers’associations. Since the end of the nineteenth century central
agreements between the labour market parties and national collective agreements have been
the main instruments for regulating the employment relationship.
Theoretically, the paper departs from a combination of system’s theory (Dunlop, 1958)
and a Marxian understanding of class and power relationships (Hyman, 1975).
Within this frame a crucial question regards the balance between the different interests
within the system: Does the system actually yield advantages to all parties involved, are
genuine bargaining processes taking place, or is the system in practice completely
dominated by the employer class? A related question is how the relative positions of
strength between employers and workers develop over time: Do workers have the power, or
resources, to say no to wages and working conditions that fall below certain standards –or
are they in reality forced to accept what is offered by employers? The power relations
between employers and workers are influenced by a number of conditions that lie outside
the individual workplace, conditions such as the business cycle (the rate of unemployment),
globalisation (felt by workers as increased competition in the labour market), employment
Employee Relations
Vol. 40 No. 4, 2018
pp. 580-599
Emerald Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-01-2017-0012
Received 14 January 2017
Revised 15 September 2017
Accepted 15 September 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
© Jens Lind and Herman Knudsen. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published
under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute,
translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes),
subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be
seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
580
ER
40,4
and social protection policies (the existence or not of a welfare state) as well as the strength
of union and employer organisation (Hyman, 1975; Salamon, 1998; Standing, 1999).
A further theoretical inspiration has come from the literature on varieties of capitalism.
Within this understanding the industrial relations system of a particular country to an
important degree reflects the wider type of capitalism of that country. Considering the
distinction drawn by Hall and Soskice (2001), between “liberal market economies”and
“coordinated market economies”, Denmark fits well into the latter group. In a recent study
from the Eurofound (2016) Christian Welz and colleagues singled out five regimes of
industrial relations among the European Union member states. Denmark, together with the
other Nordic countries, is placed under the regime “organised corporatism”.
The structure of the paper is as follows. After the theoretical positioning done already in
this section, Section 2 deals briefly with academic discourses on the main characteristics of
Danish industrial relations. How has the Danish system been conceptualised, as “Danish
model”,as“flexicurity system”etc.? Section 3 provides an empirically based review of the
foundation and historical development of the Danish system. It is very much the story of the
system’s progression, but also of progress for workers –rising living standards as well as
acquisition of collective and individual rights in working life.
The British historian Eric Hobsbawn (1981) looked back at a period which he saw as
characterised by “the forward march of labour”, before he went on to discuss when and how
the forward march was halted (Hobsbawn, 1981). In a similar way, Section 3 of this paper
attempts to depict the forward march as experienced by Danish workers, not so much by
looking at the development of class consciousness and political attitudes as was the
yardstick used by Hobsbawn, but rather by focussing on the material conditions and rights
of workers. It is difficult to say when labour’s situation in Denmark stopped to be one
characterised by progress. In some respects progress continues, in other respects a retreat or
decline began already in the 1980s. This latter tendency is the theme of Section 4 in which
some of the major changes of the last decades are presented and discussed. Contrary to the
forward march documented in Section 3, Section 4 deals with, if not decline then at least
stagnation regarding the representation of workers’interests as well as the ability of the
Danish system to maintain its central position when challenged by decentralisation,
decreasing union affiliation rates, cuts in unemployment insurance and social dumping due
to labour migration. Finally, Section 5 contains the conclusion of the paper: the long-lasting
Danish class compromise governing Danish industrial relations is still in force, but it is so in
a form in which labour has a weaker position than in earlier periods.
2. Academic discourses on the nature of industrial relations in Denmark
One of the first scholars to draw attention to the particularities of the Danish industrial
relations system was Walter Galenson, an American Researcher who in 1952 published the
book The Danish System of Labor Relations: A Study in Industrial Peace. Galenson (1969)
identified as key features the strong role played by trade unions and employer associations
in regulating labour relations, notably in the form of collective bargaining, and a relatively
cooperative spirit and relatively harmonious relations between the parties. Government
regulation was found to be sparse, with legislation mainly aiming at facilitating the
institutions set up by the labour market parties themselves. Galenson found the Danish
system to be one of industrial peace. Not that conflicts were absent, but they were present to
a smaller degree and in a more controlled way than in the other countries.
Thesamemaincharacteristicsasthoseemphasised by Galenson, not least the prominent
position played by unions and employer associations and the centrality of collective bargaining,
have subsequently been highlighted by a number of Danish scholars (Due et al., 1993;
Jensen, 2007; Kristiansen, 2014). Due et al. (1993) used the term “the Danish model”as a core
concept aiming at catching the key features of Danish industrial relations, especially the
581
Long-lasting
class
compromise
To continue reading
Request your trial