Negative Social Dialogue versus Positive Social Dialogue
| DOI | 10.1023/A:1011949705679 |
| Published date | 01 June 2001 |
| Date | 01 June 2001 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
European Journal
of
Social Security, Volume 3/2, 87-105, 2001.
©Kluwer Law International (KLI). Printed in the Netherlands.
CELlNE LAFOUCRlERE*
Negative Social Dialogue versus Positive
Social Dialogue
87
Abstract: This paper draws upon research exploring progress in achieving the
'adaptability pillar' of the 1997 European Employment Strategy. Using two nation-
al case studies, France and Belgium, it explores two highly different traditions and
conceptions of social partnership, introducing ideas of 'negative' and 'positive'
social dialogue, and arguing for the necessity of the latter for attaining significant
progress. The paper highlights the value of such a typology as a useful analytical
tool in the continuing development of social partnership and a healthy European
Employment Strategy.
'There is nothing more difficult to devise, where success is less assured and imple-
mentation more difficult to achieve, than the creation of a new system' (Machiavelli,
The Prince, 1563).
1. INTRODUCTION
In 1997, the Maastricht Treaty was revised and gave way to the new Treaty of
Amsterdam. During these revisions, the social dimension of the European Union
seemed to be given special attention. Social protocol - which had previously been
merely annexed to the Treaty - became fully integrated and, perhaps more impor-
tantly, there was an unprecedented emphasis on employment policy. IThe latter rep-
resented a considerable leap forwardtowards a more 'Social Europe' and an indica-
tion that European Union concerns were extending beyond the purely economic and
financial. Relatively high unemployment rates had been causing great anxiety, and
it was clear that the social problems underpinning the foundations of the Union
could no longer be ignored. Member States had deemed unemployment to be a mat-
ter of common concern, and there was agreement about co-operation in the social
policy domain and the reaching of a viable European employment rate. This agree-
ment led to the creation of a European Employment Strategy (EES) at the
*Independent Researcher for the European Trade Union Institute, Group ESC Toulouse
(CREER), 20, Bid Lascrosses BP-701O, 31068, Toulouse-Cedex 7, France. E-mail:
c.lafoucriere@esc-toulouse.fr
Title VIII - Treaty
of
Maastricht - New Title introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam.
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SECURITY
88
Luxembourg Employment Summit, comprising four central 'pillars': employability,
entrepreneurship, adaptability and gender equality. The goal of adaptability aims to
satisfy the need for a re-organization
of
the concept
of
work. Growth in the use
of
new technologies and changing demand for labour in light
of
the processes of glob-
alization increasingly mean that a 'Fordist' conception
of
labour relations is no
longer valid. New and rapidly changing needs on the part
of
both employers and
employees are creating a demand for the adaptation
of
employment contracts and for
life-long learning. The adaptability pillar is a response to the challenging need for
change. However, it embraces some extremely ambitious and diverse concepts,
sometimes leading to a degree
of
confusion for the social partners.
This paper focuses on the adaptability pillar and on the progress that has been
made in two Member States: France and Belgium.
It
is very interesting, four years
after the Luxembourg Summit, to ask whether the EES was created mainly in order
to silence those who had started to express their concerns about the state
of
European employment, or whether it is a genuine policy which Member States are
quite willing to follow, and apply to their National Action Plans (NAPs). The paper
uses the concepts
of
'negative' and 'positive' social dialogue in order to highlight the
importance
of
well-functioning social partnerships.
2.
THE
ADAPTABILITY
PILLAR
The adaptability pillar is a vast, yet somewhatambiguous project.
It
comprises three
main strands:
The need for a re-articulation
of
the concept
of
work
Since the end
of
the last World War, the notion
of
work has been based on the
assumption of a hierarchical top-down organization, with high degrees
of
speciali-
zation and simple, often repetitive jobs. This 'Fordist' conception
oflabour
has been
highly beneficial for the countries
of
Europe, where mass production brought about
economic productivity and prosperity. However, in the last twenty years, new tech-
nologies have been developing rapidly in Europe and different ways
of
working have
been evolving, meaning traditional methods of labour organization generally no
longer apply, their limitations becoming increasingly evident.? The changing needs
of
the labour market have meant that space must be made for elements such as cus-
tomization and 'just-in-time' methods
of
production. Changes in production meth-
ods have accompanied demographic change. The gender gap is closing and the
labour force evolving. However, as the Commission has argued, 'The system does
not give sufficient room for processes
of
upgrading and innovation'.3The labour
2 COM (97) 128 Final.
3 COM (97) 128 Final.
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SECURITY
To continue reading
Request your trial