Seminar: Flexicurity and

Labour Market Inclusion (Services)

Copenhagen 2 October 2008

2

Table of contents

1. Programme 2. Summary of Seminar 3. Policy Briefing on Flexicurity 4. SOLIDAR Position on Labour Law Reforms and Flexicurity 5. Annex Responsible Editor: Conny Reuter Text: David Andrés-Viñas & Mathias Maucher Layout and editing: Abigail Goundry Produced by SOLIDAR February 2009 www.solidar.org

3

1. Programme

09.00 Opening of the seminar Claus Larsen-Jensen, Director, FIC Conny Reuter, General Secretary, SOLIDAR

Bjarne Høpner, Chairman, Copenhagen Region Trade Union 3F LPSF (Transport, Postal, Dock and Service Workers)

09.30 The challenges on the European labour market Thomas Janson, Consultant, ETUC – The trade union angle Lars Michael Engsted, Policy Co-ordinator “European Emploment Strategy”, D2 (European Employment Strategy, CSR, Local Development), DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, European Commission Debate 11.00 The Danish social welfare and labour market model What is the real content of the original Danish flexicurity model? – A flexible labour market

needs strong social partners! Bent Greve, Professor at Roskilde University Centre, RUC – Overview on the model

Kristian Weise, Consultant, Danish Trade Union Confederation, LO Niels Trampe, Head of Department, Danish Employers Association, DA Vibe Westh, Senior Consultant, Danish Ministry of Employment Questions and debate 13.00 Lunch break 14.00 The European labour market models Speakers from SOLIDAR member organisations represented at the seminar Austria – Verena Fabris, Volkshilfe Österreich, Austria The Netherlands – André Hudepohl, Humanitas, The Netherlands Germany: Experiences with the introduction of public procurement in the field of labour market integration and vocational training – Mathias Maucher, SOLIDAR Reporting back from a seminar on Flexicurity Missions – David Andrés-Viñas, SOLIDAR 16.30 Debate 17.30 Closing of the seminar

4

2. Summary of Seminar

On 2 October 2008, SOLIDAR organised the seminar: ‘Flexicurity – a labour market model for Europe?’ together with Danish member Fagligt Internationalt Center (FIC). The aims of the seminar were to discuss the labour market reform under flexicurity, allowing SOLIDAR to this update its position, as well as to make SOLIDAR better known in Denmark. The seminar was organised in four sessions:

1. An opening where representatives of the host organisations gave brief introductions to the topic of the seminar.

2. The main lines and current state of the flexicurity debate at European level were sketched out and discussed.

3. A Danish panel informed of and exchanged on how flexicurity is seen in its “country of origin”. 4. The discourses, policy processes and experiences with implementing flexicurity models and

labour market reform in selected Member States were examined, involving SOLIDAR members. SESSION 1 Claus Larsen-Jensen (FIC) was the first speaker to open the seminar, setting the scene and objectives of the seminar. He embedded the policy process around flexicurity into debates on the European Economic and Social Model. The FIC director introduced flexicurity as a multi-dimensional comprehensive model of labour market (re-)organisation, combining a high degree of flexibility and mobility on the labour market with a constant ability for both companies and employees to make adaptations to better face changes due to a high level of social security, active labour market policy, a broad set of ‘on-the job’ and ‘off-the job’ measures of vocational qualification and lifelong learning. He suggested that the Danish model of flexicurity could be used as a source of inspiration when implementing other countries’ pathways to labour market reform, recalling some good results it has been producing. In this context Claus mentioned the low levels of unemployment, low levels of social conflict and strong involvement of social partners in designing and implementing labour market policies and regulation; incentives to work towards negotiated forms of labour market reform, involving employers’ associations and trade unions, at national, sectoral and enterprise level, with the aim of attaining a high level of re-activeness and adaptability to challenges of a globalised economy. Conny Reuter, Secretary General of SOLIDAR, warned that “flexicurity is being presented by many as an all encompassing model and a cure-all solution, also for disadvantaged and vulnerable persons and groups”. He also elaborated on various elements of the SOLIDAR position on flexicurity (see chapter 4). Conny stressed that ”only with strong social policies is flexibility possible, and not the other way around. Only a full-fledged application of the flexicurity concept would allow to gain support from workers and employees and to build up confidence in labour market reforms resulting from negotiations by social partners”, on all levels and in an enabling framework set by governments and public authorities. As social NGOs endeavour to strengthen the social and citizenship dimension of Europe in policy and legal terms and to refocus the revised Lisbon Strategy on the goals of social protection, social inclusion and social cohesion as well as sustainable development, he developed on how to best coordinate and implement flexicurity-based policies along the set of requirements set by SOLIDAR and the Social Platform1. Last but not least, Bjarne Høpner, the Chairman of the Copenhagen Region Trade Union 3F LPSF and host of the seminar, introduced the history and main fields of activity of his organisation and welcomed participants.

1 See http://cms.horus.be/files/99907/MediaArchive/Policies/Employment/EN%20Final%20%20Flexicurity.pdf

5

SESSION 2 The first panel brought together a representative from DG Employment Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities and a representative of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC). Thomas Janson (ETUC) stated that the flexicurity strategy should be “focused on quality jobs and developing strong welfare systems to promote flexibility”. The importance of trade unions and social dialogue as key elements to improve workers’ sense of flexibility and security was also highlighted (Slides 8 to 9), as well as warning against implementing a “cheap version of flexicurity, with a focus on reducing job protection without investing in a social welfare system” as this would be ”a clear recipe for less flexible and secure labour markets”. Lars Michael Engsted (DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities) elaborated on the importance of flexicurity as it “has become a cornerstone in refocusing the Lisbon Strategy since 2005”. He underlined that the European Commission, building on a broad stakeholder consultation, adopted a set of common principles on flexicurity in December 2007 (Slides 1 to 6) as well as a flexicurity strategy with integrated components and national pathways in order to provide Member States with implementation guidelines. Lars stressed that “much depended now on how the Member States implement the common principles on flexicurity” (Slide 11), warning against “a certain reform fatigue”. In the Q&A section, Conny Reuter underlined that ”flexicurity is an interesting principle, however, what it is important is the final result: how many people we bring back to the labour market with decent working and living conditions”. SESSION 3 A panel composed of Danish stakeholders formed the second panel of the seminar. Vibe Westh, representing the national government (Slides 23 to 26), Kristian Weise from the Danish Trade Union Confederation (Slides 16 to 22), Niels Trampe from the Employers’ Association and Bent Greve from the academic world (Slides 12 to 15) presented the ‘real content’, and current and future challenges of the ‘original Danish flexicurity model.’ Showing a striking degree of agreement around core issues, the four speakers coincided around the general idea of the Danish model; namely a flexible labour market, with high security, and strong social partners and social trust (Slides 16, 24, 25 and 26). SESSION 4 In the third panel, representatives from SOLIDAR member organisations Volkshilfe Österreich (Austria) and Humanitas (The Netherlands) presented the situation of labour market reform in their home countries, highlighting the different starting points to call for flexicurity strategies adapted to national realities. Verena Fabris, representing Volkshilfe, presented the Austrian situation where the average unemployment benefits are rather low compared to other European countries. The current government is setting up even stricter conditions to receive unemployment benefits, which implies that “in Austria being unemployed often means living at a risk of poverty”. Verena stressed that ”Austria’s labour market is highly flexible. It is now time to work on the more neglected security dimension of flexicurity” (Slides 27 and 28). André Hudepohl from Humanitas explained how the Dutch labour market is rather inflexible as it is very difficult to put an end to a work contract. “Electoral interest and a trade unions’ strategy focused on protecting jobs, rather than creating new employment, hinders the implementation of a flexicurity strategy” (Slides 29 and 30). In the same vein and referring to an example from Germany, the consequences of introducing public procurement in the field of labour market services were put forward from a social NGO’s perspective by Mathias Maucher from SOLIDAR’s Secretariat (Slides 31 and 32)2. A report by David Andrés-Viñas from SOLIDAR’s Secretariat on a conference “Mission for Flexicurity” organised at the end of September 2008 in Brussels by the European Commission rounded up the seminar (Slides 33 and 34).

2 See SOLIDAR Weekly Round Up article “Social Services in the field of Employment Services and Vocational Training (21.11.2008), http://www.solidar.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=13958&thebloc=19556, and conference documentation (in French), p. 57-74 + 97-98, http://cms.horus.be/files/99931/Newsletter/Actes_Colloque_Formation_Continue_SSIG.pdf

6

3. Policy Briefing on Flexicurity

This section is organised along thematic issues to make the whole flexicurity process more understandable. Section 1: Introduction to the concept of flexicurity Section 2: Exploration of elements promoting security and social dialogue in Danish model of flexicurity. Section 3: Flexicurity strategy at a European level. Section 4: Social policy implications of flexicurity. 1. What is flexicurity? Security + Flexibility = Flexicurity Flexicurity is an integrated strategy to enhance, at the same time, flexibility and security in the labour market3

The European Commission’s definition of Flexicurity is a political strategy to simultaneously enhance the flexibility of labour markets, work organisation and labour relations, and security (employment security and social security) (Slide 10).

What is it for? It is an appropriate response to globalisation As a consequence of global labour markets (relocation, restructuration, competition with low-wage countries, pressures on wages by low-skilled workers), as well as social and demographic changes, the financial equilibrium of social protection schemes and solidarity between generations is endangered in Europe: - Flexicurity can improve the very functioning of the labour markets and reduce structural

unemployment and segmentation - Flexicurity, being supportive to adaptability and building on negotiated solutions involving both

employers and employees at national, sectoral/branch and enterprise level, can be an effective response to globalisation’s requirement of ever more adaptable enterprises and workers

Denmark represents the best example of the positive consequences of implementing a fully-fledged flexicurity model: - Workers and employees face the exposure to a globalised labour market as a challenge, not a

threat, knowing that they have to improve their skills, working methods, etc. - Employers are in favour of a flexicurity system with high taxes and strong trade unions because it

produces motivated workers who are willing to take on responsibilities, which translates into high competitiveness on world markets.

What is its purpose? Flexicurity as a means to an end, not an end in itself Flexicurity has become central to the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy, but flexicurity should not be understood as an objective in itself, but only as a methodology. It should not lead to neglecting other goals of the Lisbon Strategy, in particular social cohesion and sustainable development which have both been sidelined in recent years. The Modernisation of the Labour Market = growth and jobs only?

The Flexicurity strategy: has a strong emphasis on ‘modernising’ labour markets to enable Europe to remain competitive is embedded within the Lisbon Strategy, so it is affected by goals set out under this framework

which currently are growth and jobs has an excessive focus on the flexibility side which is a clear risk for workers

3 European Commission (2007) ‘Towards Common Principles of Flexicurity: More and better jobs through flexibility and security’ [COM(2007)359], 27 June 2007, p. 10, http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/publications/2007/ke7807284_en.pdf

7

SOLIDAR believes flexicurity is an interesting approach as long as measures under the ‘security’ pillar are set up on an equal footing with the flexibility of enterprises and the workforce. What is important is therefore the final outcome of the strategy: how many people are brought back to the labour market under decent working and living conditions.

Promote Social Europe = quality jobs, decent work and decent life SOLIDAR calls to not disconnect realities from flexicurity; this is not only a labour market topic, but a question of the European Social Model as well:

- The final aim of flexicurity should be to generate better-working labour markets to allow Europe to compete in a globalised economy, but on the basis of quality jobs and decent working and living conditions

- What is needed is a flexicurity concept that clearly helps to resist low-quality and low wage pressures, and a balanced approach to maintain Europe’s core values and further develop a more Social Europe

2. Best practice example: Denmark - Security and social dialogue Denmark has always been pointed out as the best example of the positive consequences of applying a flexicurity model. The two most remarkable elements of the Danish model are a strong social security system and the key role that social partners and social dialogue play. Strong social security systems The flexibility of the Danish model is often highlighted as its most remarkable element and the main reason for success, but the Danish labour market is not more liberal/flexible than those of countries such as the United Kingdom or Ireland. It is security that makes the Danish model outstanding: social security, investment in education (vocational training, lifelong learning, informal education) and active labour market policies (ALMP) to support the readiness of workers for job mobility

- Social security to provide workers with safety nets and to create confidence in their employability, no additional pressures or risks in case of unemployment

- Studies show a direct relation between the level and comprehensiveness of social security schemes, and readiness for adaptability/flexibility and level of employment (Slide 18)

SOLIDAR is critical about those flexicurity models underestimating the importance of welfare states and the key role of social dialogue and social partnership as necessary preconditions to provide workers with security and enable the flexicurity model to work. Key role of social partners and other stakeholders (Slides 23, 24 and 26) “It takes three to tango”: Social dialogue and social trust are key for developing a successful flexicurity strategy:

- Governments should not design everything with legislation: much should be decided amongst social partners, at sectoral and enterprise level, to foster a strong partnership and sense of ownership. This is to avoid “shadow of hierarchy” with the State playing a leading role, and other stakeholders less able to influence the design of the flexicurity strategy, e.g. in France.

o Role of social partners must be central during the whole flexicurity process: strategy design, implementation and assessment

o Social partners to define the balance between flexibility and security, open to revisions in the face of new challenges

- Situation in Denmark: o Flexicurity model developed in cooperation, within a climate of consensus and trust

8

o Hardly no labour legislation, compared to other countries such as Sweden or Germany determining aspect is collective bargaining; flexicurity is “negotiated flexicurity”

o Low government involvement ensures greater stability of main decisions of social partners in cooperation with government

- Workers and employees taking responsibility for their own adaptation to globalisation, focus on comprehensive as well as mid- and long-term stable solutions, not short-term gains.

For example during the last collective bargaining process, Danish Trade Unions asked to devote only part of requested improvements to an increase in wages, leaving an important share to be invested in education channelled through a collective fund to ensure all workers have access to lifelong learning.

SOLIDAR advocates for a multi-stakeholders approach in Europe and at a national level: as representatives of the most vulnerable sectors of the society, social NGOs have to be involved in the whole process, and not only in the design of the policies. For example, SOLIDAR has been actively involved in the public consultation procedure undertaken at European level, but few national NGOs have been invited to participate in the implementation process of flexicurity at a national level. 3. Flexicurity Strategy at EU level (Slides 1 to 6) The European Commission launched a public consultation on flexicurity in 2006 with an active participation of social NGOs to develop a coordinated flexicurity strategy at European level. In December 2007, the Council adopted the European Commission’s Communication “Towards common principles of flexicurity: More and better jobs through flexibility and security”4. From the 8 common principles agreed, four national pathways and a four-component flexicurity strategy were developed to provide Member States with guidelines to implement the flexicurity strategy. A public initiative ‘Mission for flexicurity’ was launched by the European Commission at the beginning of 2008 to facilitate the implementation process and to learn from common experiences in a mutual learning framework. The main contribution of this Mission was be a report assessing the implementation of flexicurity submitted to the EPSCO (Ministers of Labour & Employment) Council on 17 December 2008. Member States are expected to report back on the implementation of the common principles in the framework of National Reform Programmes 2008-2010 related to the Lisbon Strategy.

SOLIDAR supports an OMC-like framework as it can be an open door for social partners and other social stakeholders to influence processes at a national level. Much depends, however, on power relations and quality of social dialogue and tripartite arrangements

No one-size-fits-all model The Danish model is not for direct imitation, but for inspiration, in particular the “security” strand and the role of social partnership. No flexicurity blueprint provided by the EU: Member States were provided with 8 common principles for flexicurity and guidelines to facilitate the implementation of flexicurity, but they must define their own strategy based on the individual country’s situation.

4 Ibid.

9

Components of the flexicurity strategy Components:

i. Flexible & reliable contractual arrangements ii. Effective Active Labour Market Policies iii. Comprehensive life-long learning (LLL) iv. Modern Social Security Systems

i. Flexible and reliable contractual arrangements

- Flexible and reliable contractual arrangements both for employers and workers, and for “insiders” and “outsiders” of the labour market

o Spain, the main goal of its flexicurity strategy is to increase the reliability of working contracts and reduce the share of fixed-term contract, without affecting overall flexibility.

ii. Effective Active Labour Market Policies (ALMP)

- Crucial importance of investing in ALMP - ALMP approach should not be to create jobs, but employability: focus on skills that are likely

to be required in the future to increase the adaptability and ability to meet challenges of the labour market

o Denmark: motivated and qualified workers thanks to investment in ALMP o Poland: Flexicurity strategy centred in increasing efficiency of ALMP with elderly as

specific target

iii. Comprehensive lifelong learning (LLL) - Lifelong learning including vocational training and professional training - Level of education influences labour market participation focus needs to be on the whole

chain of education - European Commission position: investment in education is most appropriate way to reduce

inequalities, with lifelong learning as a preventive tool, guaranteeing basic level of education. o In Austria, in the framework of flexicurity implementation, entitlement to vocational

training and LLL was considerably reduced in 2007. Moreover, current education system are not able to break vicious circle of qualification deficits

o Finland: Flexicurity strategy focused on achieving a comprehensive reform of its adult education and training systems

SOLIDAR stresses the importance of equality of access to LLL, as some sectors still face discrimination and have fewer possibilities to access to training services, e.g. women, migrant population…

iv. Modern Social Security Systems

- Component of the flexicurity strategy gaining less attention, despite the direct relation between social security and adaptability/flexibility

- Welfare systems are the key factor: promoting flexibility and competitiveness in the labour market, providing people with opportunities to be more flexible, rather than forcing them to be flexible

- European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) stresses the need of social security and labour market protection, and denounces attempts of balancing up lighter labour protection with lifelong learning

o France: Flexicurity strategy’s goal is to secure career trajectories, by ensuring social rights in periods of professional transition

10

Implementation of Flexicurity “A paper is grateful”, however the most important step is not the design of the strategy, but its implementation

- Current EU strategy presents important problems and implementation gaps, as can be exemplified with regard to posted workers, not least due to 2008 European Court of Justice rulings on the application of the Posting of Workers Directive.

- Many Member States have good legislation, but flexicurity is not working because they are failing to implement them, for example, Slovenia is failing to implement its flexicurity strategy because of the lack of social trust.

- Greater focus should be placed on how to implement, and not only on deciding instruments

SOLIDAR is in line with the ETUC’s position: that flexicurity costs and must cost, as a successful strategy requires the involvement of governments in terms of investment, e.g. active labour market policies and life-long learning (Slide 20). 4.Social policy dimension: Flexicurity as an all encompassing concept? Because of its cross-cutting nature, Flexicurity has become a central element of the Lisbon Strategy involving a high number of policies, e.g. competitiveness, active inclusion / labour market insertion…

- A broad definition and ample common principles comprise a multitude of factors that need to be balanced and could include almost anything: gender equality, social dialogue, life-long learning, reforms of individual and collective labour law, social trust…

The Commission advocates for flexicurity to become a strategy for the whole workforce and to be included as part of a Social Agenda, since it is necessary to adapt labour markets to current challenges in order to maintain the European Social Model

- The Commission acknowledges that it cannot cover everything, but flexicurity is essentially understood as an overarching concept that also goes through all guidelines of the European Employment Strategy

- The actual impact of the flexicurity strategy depends on how Member States implement the 8 common principles

SOLIDAR warns against the dangers of framing flexicurity as an overarching concept: - Flexicurity cannot be the answer to everything when Social Europe is at stake - Flexicurity should not have a discrimination effect, a special emphasis is required towards

the socially more vulnerable persons Targeting specific groups Certain social groups have not benefited from recent economic growth and job creation and are unlikely to do so under the flexicurity model, as they encounter almost impossible barriers to access social services, training, lifelong learning…This includes early school leavers, disabled people, migrants…

SOLIDAR calls for a firm recognition of all discriminations to be addressed with targeted and ‘muscled’ measures SOLIDAR advocates for a strong link between flexicurity and active inclusion and a coordination of the common principles endorsed by the European Commission for both policy fields, in particular covering those dealing with labour market inclusion and (social) services of general interest

a. Gender equality - Labour markets systematically demand more flexibility from women compared to men, e.g.

higher incidence of fixed term and part-term contract; caring obligations…

SOLIDAR calls for a stronger emphasis on gender equality to ensure that rather than putting a greater

11

demand of the flexibility on women, flexicurity provides everybody with a real possibility to combine life and work, as a crucial aspect to achieve equality:

- Flexibility should not add additional burdens and equality in wages is required - Flexible working times to support reconciling work and family life - Leave systems and high-quality affordable care services

b. Migrant population integration into labour market

- Emphasis required on ensuring the integration of migrant population, in particular undocumented migrants

o They are highly flexible, but have no security at all o They are not considered or represented in the consultation process that defined the

EU flexicurity strategy - Denmark: migrants’ integration is one of the most problematic issues, as its flexicurity model

is unable to fully address it

SOLIDAR underlines the need to place a special focus on those most vulnerable, regardless of their legal condition.

Inclusive Labour Market The Flexicurity strategy should not only be about creating new jobs, but about creating decent working conditions and quality jobs. Issues such as minimum income, working hours and working conditions, reducing precarious jobs…are currently not correctly addressed under the flexicurity strategy.

12

4. SOLIDAR Position on Labour Law Reforms and Flexicurity

The flexicurity debate is based on the assumption that when flexibility and security are combined,

this can profit both employers and workers by promoting growth and jobs. In this debate, the Danish Model is always presented as a flexicurity success story, but a close analysis of the specific circumstances in the Nordic countries is not often given; namely broad welfare provisions and strong social security, active labour and educational policies and a long tradition of social dialogue.

Without the necessary pillars of Nordic flexicurity in place, the flexicurity model will only create more

precarious work. Flexicurity needs to be an inclusive force and not create further disaggregated labour markets. Reforms in employment should aim at improving rights for those in precarious employment, without reducing existing rights.

Labour markets are changing and more and more people in Europe are working under precarious

working conditions: part-time or short-term contracts or in the informal economy. These types of employment are accompanied by limited workers’ rights, less social protection and security. The primary challenge for labour law in the 21st century is how to create circumstances in which employment fosters more inclusive societies. Strengthening growth and competitiveness can never be an end in itself, but only a means to contributing to the well-being of individuals and the society as a whole.

For SOLIDAR, labour law is about efficiently protecting individual and collective rights and

promoting fundamental values. Labour law needs to be inclusive and not create further disaggregated labour markets. Active labour market policies that are not discriminatory and interventionist need to be promoted. What is needed is a set of measures that actively address inequalities in the labour market, eliminating discrimination in recruitment procedures, ensuring access to promotion and training. In coordination with social protection systems, labour law should support active policies bringing people in precarious situations and far from the labour market back into employment.

All people active in the labour market, irrespective of their employment status must be reached.

Policies and measures devised within Member States should, however, be respectful of a set of orientations and requirements in order not to benefit only or principally those in stable employment or with jobs needing high professional skills. Labour law should support active labour market policies particularly bringing the people in precarious situations and far from the labour market back into employment. SOLIDAR supports the EU’s role as a promoter of exchange of experiences on successful policies and related institutional framework conditions, building on common principles or guidelines insofar as they take due account of the requirements set out above.

Attention should be paid to the use of concepts such as internal and external flexicurity, i.e.

enterprise flexicurity and labour market flexicurity, because internal flexicurity can also be associated to and oriented towards the erosion of rights and rules within enterprises.

Flexibility in the labour market has been increasing over the last few years, and now it is time to put

in place the necessary measures to guarantee workers’ rights in all forms of employment, as well as the necessary accompanying measures, such as investment in education and training and services of general interest.

Discussing flexicurity solely from the point of view of “modernising” labour law without taking the

essential elements of investment in social services and services of general interest and education and training into account, as well as not analysing the context of strong social dialogue like in

13

Denmark, means that the concept will fail from the start. Equal access to training and lifelong learning for all needs to be ensured through labour law. One element of ensuring that flexible working time arrangements do not hamper the conditions of the employee is to guarantee that parental leave, career breaks and part-time employment should be included when calculating pension and insurance entitlements.

The fundamental pillars of decent work are in place in Europe: anti-discrimination directives and

the principle of gender equality, the right of every citizen to healthcare and social services, labour laws. This also holds true for social dialogue involving employers and trade unions. The concept of decent work needs to be a clear point of reference in the debate on the reform of labour law and the use of terminology such as ‘good work’ and ‘quality work’ only lead to confusion.

Labour law must be better enforced and it must fight effectively against disguised employment

and undeclared work. Labour law must strengthen the role of labour inspection in its primary duty of protecting workers and not enforcing immigration law. European initiatives on labour law will remain ineffective if the national level does not reinforce supervision and enforce the securing of individual and collective workers’ rights. Fundamental rights of all workers, regardless or their status or nationality must be guaranteed. This protection must include undocumented migrants.

SOLIDAR puts forward important elements of labour law reform and flexicurity concepts

oriented towards those in employment or in need of labour market inclusion: ° Vocational training and lifelong learning are crucial, and are a precondition to promoting the

reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as within the context of social cohesion policies. Equal access to training and lifelong learning for all needs to be ensured through labour law. SOLIDAR would welcome not only recognition of the added-value of skills acquired outside the labour market but also from outside the formal education and training system.

° SOLIDAR recalls the need of a set of measures to directly address inequalities and discrimination, e.g. eliminating discrimination in recruitment procedures, ensuring access to promotion and training being paramount. Even with adequate levels of training, young, older workers, women, disabled people, lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual people or ethnic minorities face greater prejudices, stereotyping and discrimination as they are not treated equally in the recruitment process, job advancement, access to training or earnings.

° Since various forms of discrimination affect in particular disadvantaged groups, such as people with disabilities or migrants, SOLIDAR calls for a rapid and comprehensive implementation of the Article 13 directives on combating discrimination in employment across Europe, to give new impetus and legal backing for measures actively addressing inequalities and causes of open and hidden discriminations.

In the context of the debates around the Green Paper, it is important to note that there were labour

law initiatives blocked in the decision-making process of the European Union during 2007 and 2008 (temporary work agency directive) or still currently pending (portability of supplementary pension rights directive; working time directive). Rather than discussing new initiatives on how to make room for more flexibility in the labour market, the fact that these initiatives - that aim at improving the situation of workers in Europe - are blocked needs to be actively addressed to reinforce the credibility of the EU concerning the reform of labour law.

14

5. Annex – List of slides

*The slides are referred to in sections 2 and 3 of this report. Flexicurity Strategy and Policy Process at European Level (David Andrés-Viñas, Social Policy Intern, SOLIDAR) 1: European Commission - Rationale for promoting flexicurity 2: Policy process at European level - Main steps (2006-2008) 3: Policy process at European level - Contributions from social NGO 4: European Commission - Common principles of flexicurity (2007) 5: European Commission - Flexicurity Strategy (2008) (I) 6: European Commission - Flexicurity Strategy (2008) (II) Selected Slides of Speakers at Seminar 7: Working life in Europe (Thomas Janson) 8: Social dialogue can promote internal flexibility (Thomas Janson) 9: Trade unions central in change (Thomas Janson) 10: Flexicurity – The definition (Lars Michael Engsted) 11: Common principles of flexicurity (Lars Michel Engsted) 12: What is flexibility (Bent Greve) 13: The security angle (Bent Greve) 14: Is flexicurity for all? (Bent Greve) 15: Conclusion (Bent Greve) 16: Flexicurity in Denmark – a golden triangle ... in the right framework (Kristian Weise) 17: Social dialogue and strong social partners (Kristian Weise) 18: Economic security and employment (Kristian Weise) 19: Active Labour Market Policies (Kristian Weise) 20: ALMP spending on one person – in comparison (Kristian Weise) 21: What can be learnt from the Danish experiences? (I) (Kristian Weise) 22: What can be learnt from the Danish experiences? (II) (Kristian Weise) 23: The “Golden Triangle” of Flexicurity (Vibe Westh) 24: The Danish Flexicurity model (Vibe Westh) 25: The role of social dialogue (Vibe Westh) 26: Social dialogue and social trust is key (Vibe Westh) 27: Flexicurity in Austria (Verena Fabris) 28: Security in Austria (Verena Fabris) 29: Conflict (André Hudepohl) 30: Compromise (André Hudepohl) 31: Public procurement and labour market inclusion services in Germany (I) (Mathias Maucher) 32: Public procurement and labour market inclusion services in Germany (II) (Mathias Maucher) 33: Examples for implementation of flexicurity principles by Member States (I) (David Andrés-Viñas) 34: Examples for implementation of flexicurity principles by Member States (II) (David Andrés-Viñas)

1

European Commission -Rationale for promoting flexicurity

Rationale:• Improves the very functioning of the labour markets and

reduces structural unemployment and segmentation

• An effective response to the requirements of globalisation for ever more adaptability of enterprisesglobalisation for ever more adaptability of enterprisesand workers

Definition (European Commission)• A political strategy to enhance, at the same time,

flexibility of labour markets, work organisation and labour relations, and security – employment security and social security

Policy process at European level -Main steps (2006-2008)

• Public consultation on flexicurity launched by the Commission started in 2006 with active participation of Social NGOs

• Commission Communication “Towards common principles of flexicurity” adopted by the Council end 2007

• ‘Mission for flexicurity’ initiative launched by the Commission beginning of 2008 • Main goal: facilitate implementation process• Main contribution: drafting a report to assess

implementation of common principles flexicurity for the December 2008 EPSCO-Council

Policy process at European level -Contributions from social NGO

• Social Platform• Reply to Green Paper “Modernising labour law to meet the

challenges of the 21 century”, COM (2006) 708final - “A labour law striving for an inclusive and prosperous society” (March 2007)

• Position Paper “Ten principles of Social NGOs - Using flexicurity as a chance to create trust in change by investing in social protection infrastructures and using participatory forms of democracy” (May 2007)

• SOLIDAR • Response Green Paper “Modernising labour law to meet the

challenges of the 21 century”, COM (2006) 708final (March 2007)

• Contribution to Europe’s social reality stocktaking exercise (February 2008)

• Response to the Commission consultation on active inclusion (February 2008)

• Key positions (September 2007, updated October 2008)

European Commission -Common principles of flexicurity (2007)

1. Reinforcing the implementation of the EU's strategy for Jobs and Growth and strengthening the European social models;

2. Striking a balance between rights and responsibilities;3. Adapting flexicurity to different circumstances, needs and

challenges of the Member States;4. Reducing the gap between those in non-standard, sometimes

precarious contractual arrangements on the one hand (so-called (gp'outsiders'), and those in permanent, full-time jobs on the other (the 'insiders');

5. Developing internal and external flexicurity, by helping employees move up the career ladder (internal) as well as across the job market (external);

6. Supporting gender equality and promoting equal opportunities for all;

7. Producing balanced policy packages to promote a climate of trust between social partners, public authorities and other stakeholders;

8. Ensuring a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of flexicurity policies, and contribution to sound and financially sustainable budgetary policies.

European Commission -Flexicurity Strategy (2008) (I)

Derived from the common principles:

• Different National Pathways:• Pathway 1: Contractual segmentation • Pathway 2: Lack of transition security • P th 3 Skill d t it• Pathway 3: Skills and opportunity gaps• Pathway 4: Long-term benefit recipients and informally

employed

• Flexicurity Components:1. Flexible and reliable contractual arrangements2. Comprehensive lifelong learning strategies3. Effective active labour market policies4. Modern social security systems

European Commission -Flexicurity Strategy (2008) (II)

• Missions on Flexicurity• Final Report for Employment and Social Policy Council

December 2008, highlighting the various policy approaches implemented in the Member States

• Thematic Review Seminar on ‘The Development ofThematic Review Seminar on The Development ofNational Flexicurity Policies in Response to Labour Market Challenges‘, 24 September 2008

• Continued monitoring, assessing and benchmarking at European and national level

• National Reform Programmes 2008-2010 (as part of the Lisbon Strategy)=> Member States also have to report back on implementation of common principles of flexicurity

Flexicurity Strategy and Policy Process at European Level

1 2

3 4

5 6

2

Working life in EuropeHow much (does) the management at your work allow you to influence decisions about the general

direction of your work?

60

70

80

Thomas Janson

0

10

20

30

40

50

Norway

Denmark

Sweden

Israe

l

Netherl

ands

Finlan

d

United

Kingdo

m

Irelan

d

Belgium

Luxe

mbourg

Switzerl

and

Slovenia Ita

ly

Austria

Hunga

ry

France

Portug

al

German

y

Poland

Greece

Spain

Czech

Rep

ublic

Little influence

Great influence

Source ESS

Social dialogue can promote internal flexibilityCorrelation between trade union representation at workplace and work time flexibility

70

80

90

100

esen

tatio

n or

sim

ilar

FIN

SWE

NOR

DKBEITFR

SL

Thomas Janson

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Share of persons having a high degree of work time flexibility

Shar

e of

wor

kpla

ces

with

trad

e un

ion

repr

e

Source ESS

NL

CHUK

IRE

ATLU

DE

CZ

PT

PLGR

HU

ES

Trade unions central in change Correlation between influence of decisions about the general direction of

your work and presence of trade union or similar organisation at work place

70

80

90

100

on o

rgan

isat

ion

or

SWE

DK

FIN

BE

SL

ITFR

Thomas Janson

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Share of respondets feeling that they have influence over the general direction of work

Shar

e of

wor

kpla

ces

with

trad

e un

i osi

mila

r

DKNL

IT

AT

FR

UK

IE

CH

LU

HU

PT

DE

PL

CZ

ES

GR

Source ESS

FlexicurityFlexicurity --The definitionThe definition

A political strategy to enhance, at the

European Commission

A political strategy to enhance, at thesame time, flexibility of labour markets, work organisation and labour relations, and security – employment security and

social security.

Lars Michael Engsted

Common principles of flexicurity1. Reinforcing the implementation of the EU's strategy for Jobs and

Growth and strengthening the European social models;2. Striking a balance between rights and responsibilities;3. Adapting flexicurity to different circumstances, needs and challenges

of the Member States;4. Reducing the gap between those in non-standard, sometimes

precarious contractual arrangements on the one hand (so-called 'outsiders') and those in permanent full-time jobs on the other (the

Lars Michael Engsted

European Commission

outsiders ), and those in permanent, full time jobs on the other (the'insiders');

5. Developing internal and external flexicurity, by helping employees move up the career ladder (internal) as well as across the job market (external);

6. Supporting gender equality and promoting equal opportunities for all;7. Producing balanced policy packages to promote a climate of trust

between social partners, public authorities and other stakeholders;8. Ensuring a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of flexicurity

policies, and contribution to sound and financially sustainable budgetary policies.

What is flexibility?

Quantitative flexibility

Qualitative Flexibility

Externalflexibility

Contract – types of employment

Home-work, part-contract

Bent Greve

flexibility of employmentcontracts

contract

InternalFlexibility

Working hours (how long, time at day, flexibility)

Work-organisation, job-rotation, multitasking.

Selected Slides of Speakers at Seminar

7 8

9 10

11 12

3

The security angle• Job-security – types of employment, employment

protection, training, high job-tenure in a specific job• Employment security – degree of certainty to remain in

at work, ALMP, life-long learning, employment subsidies• Income security – relation to protection of income in case

Bent Greve

y psickness, unemployment, maternity, unemployment benefits, minimum income, collective agreements

• Combination security – combine paid work with private life or social responsibilities, part-time pension, voluntary working time arrangement, leave schemes

Is flexicurity for all?

• Work-life balance• Leave systems • Working time flexibility

Bent Greve

• Day- care as an important element

Conclusion

• Flexicurity here to stay• Combine risk with security • Important to keep focus on ALMP

Bent Greve

• Life-long learning as a preventative aspect• Combine work and family life – gender

equality, life-course perspective• Possibilities of within the model to have

varieties

Flexicurity in Denmark: a golden triangle … in the right framework

Labour market flexibility

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

Unemployment insurance

Active labour market policy and life-long

learning

Social Dialogue & Collective Agreements

Social Dialogue and Strong Social Partners

High unionisation: above 75% since mid 1970s(1950: 58%, 1960: 62%, 1970: 64%, 1979: 80%, 1991:88%, 2000: 82%, 2007: 76%)

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

High level of employer organisation: around 55% of all private employers (100% of all public).

High level of collective bargaining coverage: 80% (100% in the public sector)

Almost no legislation on job security, wages and working conditions! General consensus very important.

Economic security and employment

FIJPAT

US UKNL SE

DK

70

75

80

empl

oym

ent r

ate

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

PL

ITHU

SKGRBEES

LT LVSI FREE

CZLU

DEIE

PT FI

50

55

60

65

0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

economic security index

y = 26.037x + 45.229R2 = 0.2793

13 14

15 16

17 18

4

Active Labour Market Policies

ALMP take consist of a number of measures in relation to both unemployed and employed persons who are looking for a job or wishing to undergo training or education, both in the private and public sector.

The active labour market policy has four overall objectives:

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

- to assist jobseekers in finding a job - to offer services to private and public employers who are looking for labour or wish to retain their workforce - to help persons who are receiving social assistance or start help to find a job quickly so that they will be able to support themselves and their families - to help persons who due to reduced working capacity have a special need for assistance in finding a job

ALMP spending on one person – in comparison

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

What can be learned from the Danish experiences? (I)

To face ‘change’ head on rather than to try to hide away from it. To be offensive rather than defensive.

To not focus too much on the rules that should ensure mobility,

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

but more on the ability for people to mobile. To create incentives rather take away rights and protection. And therefore not to focus too much on liberalising labour markets.

To not think that governments should design everything, but rather to leave much of this to the social partners themselves. They are the ones who will have to live with the rules and regulation, and should therefore have most influence on them.

What can be learned from the Danish experiences? (II)

To encourage the strength and autonomy of the social partners. To make sure that they can lift the responsibilities. Therefore, to create the right framework for employers’ and workers’ organisations to organise and to grow.

Kristian Weise

Landsorganisationen i Danmark

To remember that every country has its own characteristic. And therefore, that no country can fully copy the model of another country, but should rather develop its own model according to its own context. But of course also that inspiration always helps when doing this.

The “Golden Triangle” of Flexicurity

• A flexible labour market with a high level of external numerical flexibility indicated by high levels of worker flows in and out of employment

Vibe Westh

p yand unemployment

• A generous system of economic support for the unemployed

• Active labour market policies aimed at upgrading the skills of those unemployed, that are unable to return directly from unemployment to a new job

Flexible

Labour market

High flexibility

Many job openings:

• 800.000 job shifts per year

• 300.000 new jobs per year

• 300.000 jobs disappear each

The Danish Flexicurity model

Low employment protection in legislation:• easy to hire and fire• flexible regulation in collective agreements

Vibe Westh

Generous

benefit systemActive labour

market policy

(ALMP)

Qualification effect

Motivation effect

j ppyear

BenefitsHigh compensation for low-wage groups: 90 pct.

Duration: 4 years ½ year employment = 4 more years

Emphasis on upgrading of skills Right and duty to accept offers Test of availability

Activation:- average 20 %

- +12 months 32 %

19 20

21 22

23 24

5

The role of the social dialogue

• Social trust through social dialogue – an important prerequisite for the Danish flexicurity

model and the labour market success

Vibe Westh

• The trust among workers and employers • People trust the politicians and the social security

system• People trust they can find a new job• Companies trust their flexibility and opportunities

Social dialogue and social trust is key

• The Danish example:• Agreement on the common goal and vision

– A flexible labour market with competetive companies

Vibe Westh

A flexible labour market with competetive companiesand high degree of social protection

• Flexibility and security are not opposites – but are prerequisites

• Active labour market policy (rights and duties)• Responsible social partners are crucial for the

Danish flexicurity model

• Austria combines rather high labour market flexibility with an average level of social benefits, accompanied by active labour market policies and strong reliance on social partnership.

• Rather low job protection: employers can lay off employees to the end of each quarter year. Employers therefore take little risk in hiring staff

Flexicurity in AustriaVerena Fabris

staff.• There is relatively little need for employers to take recourse to fixed-

term contracts, the share of which is below average (9% in 2006 against 14.4% EU average).

Security in Austria

• Small unemployment benefits compared to other European countries:

• The average of the unemployment benefit in Europe is 70% of the last net income (Austria 55%)

• Longer duration of unemployment benefits in most of the

Verena Fabris

• Longer duration of unemployment benefits in most of theother EU member states

• No valorisation of unemployment benefits in Austria• more than 50% of the unemployment benefits are below

the „poverty line“ of 60% of the median income

Conflict:

Current conflicts regarding the proposals Committee Bakker:

• between labour unions

Conflict

• between labour unions

• between labour unions and employers

• between the political parties in this cabinet- (social democrats and christian democrats)

Around: Dismissal protection (“golden parachutes”)

André Hudepohl

Compromise:

Limit the ‘dismissal−fee’ on the level of a year income with a maximum of € 75.000, disregarding latest job-history (no more ‘golden parachutes’)

Compromise

golden parachutes )

Criticism:

• This is a temporarily solution (a “parking place”) for the political conflict. It pospones the debate how to tackle the real issues.

• The flexibility of, and participation in the labourmarket will not improve

André Hudepohl

25 26

27 28

29 30

6

Public procurement and labourmarket inclusion services in Germany (I)

• Consequences

º Organisations: Change of legal status; diversification of offerº Personnel: 1) Number: Reduction of staff; 2) Qualification/ certificates:

crowding out of or downgrading of qualified staff; 3) Work contract: strong increase of precarious work/fixed-term contracts (often for 1 year); 4) Remuneration: lowering of wage schedules and wage decreases for qualified staffstaff

º Discontinuation of service provision/change of provider º Local and regional dimension: 1) Knowledge about conditions and needs; 2)

Embeddedness in networks º Diversity of offer/providers and non-discrimination of small structures/locally

operating organisations due to size of tenders and centralisation of processesº Restructuration of co-operation and partnership in networks (local public

authorities, providers of vocational training, social NGOs, labour offices, etc.)º Quality criteria and their relative weight, stronger mid- and long-term

orientation of evaluation criteria

Mathias Maucher

Public procurement and labourmarket inclusion services in Germany (II)• Requests from social NGOs and political partiesº Non-application of public procurement in the field of labour market inclusion

measures for persons with disabilities; individual cases and needs; instrument (conceptually) inappropriate

º Quality-based competition taking into account specificities of services and their users/beneficiaries

º Alternatives: authorisation regime; restricted tenders; competitive dialogue

• Amendments of legal framework for public procurement (draft legislative proposal 2008)

º Taking up requirement of European directives of 2004º Explicit mentioning and acknowledgement of social clausesº Authorisation to define additional (in particular: social and environmental)

conditions in procurement procedures as long as included in selection and award criteria and connected to the aim of the measure tendered for

Mathias Maucher

Examples of implementation offlexicurity principles by Member States (I)

• Member States, grouped in different pathways, presented their implementation experiences

º Spain: pathway 1, focus on component 1, main p p y pgoal increase the reliability of working contracts, reduction of share of fixed-term contract, without affecting the flexibility

º Finland: pathway 3, focus on component 2,flexicurity strategy focused on achieving a comprehensive reform of its adult education and training systems

David Andrés-Viñas

Examples of implementation offlexicurity principles by Member States (II)

• Member states, grouped in different pathways, presented their implementation experiences

º Poland: pathway 4, focus on component 3, strategyp y p gycentred in increasing efficiency of ALMPs with elderly as specific target

º + involve social NGOs in implementation of flexicurity

º France: pathway 2, focus on component 4, focus on career trajectories, goal is to secure such trajectories, by ensuring social rights in periods of professional transitionDavid Andrés-Viñas

31 32

33 34