Directive lessons from the Belgian Case

1. Directive lessons from the Belgian Case Yves De Weerdt Guy Van Gyes

2. Structure of the presentation • Demand side: main findings from (a) quantitative survey(s) • Supply side: main findings from qualitative survey • Implications for the debate on the directive

3. The particularity of work in SME’s: general survey evidence (WCS, ESS, …) • Compared to workers in large enterprises workers in SME’s: • Have lesser mental strain • Are more satisfied wit their working conditions • Have less chance for continued education • Do not have as much contact with their colleagues • Have lower wages • Do not have as much possibilities to discuss their work(ing environment) • Feel less secure about their future

4. Worker participation in SME’sA survey among ACV members

5. Research design • Postal survey, 3000 ACV members working in a SME • Actual situation of participation • Expectations about employee representation

7. Effects of legal treshold on trade union presence 50 Also applicable for non obliged representation forms!

8. Participation structures • Absence of legal employee representation not compensated by non trade union representation • Spread of direct participation practices: very limited

9. Participation practices/-processes • Operational participation: strongly connected to employment position and sector of employment • Strategic participation = problematic • Information flow = condition for influence • 43% never receives financial info • 37% never receives info on economic prospects • Mean perceived Influence: 2,12 / 10 • Positive effect of trade union presence • Large differences according to employment situation (bad for blue collars) and sector (non-profit !)

10. Main conclusions • Trade union presence has a positive effect on information and consultation of workers in SME’s • Legal treshold for representation structures is very important for chances of trade union presence • Workers in SME’s (ACV members) explicitly ask for a legal representative structure in their company: • - 79% thinks trade union representatives are preferable • - 80% finds rep’s should be protected against dismissal • - 88% prefers a system of democratically chosen rep’s

11. Trade union engagement in SME’s A qualitative exploration of 50 real life stories

13. Traditional thematics: safety,pay, etc. (Almost) no strategic participation/influence Reactive – collectivize problematic situations No real means of collective action Except for social inspection Trade union delegation: how & what?

14. Relation with HRM-practises Joint regulation Maximalist HRM High trust dynamics Formalised regulation Low us and them Unilateral regulation Minimalist HRM Low trust dynamics Informal regulation High them and us Benevolent autocracy Sophisticated HRM Exploitative autocracy Restrained autocracy Manipulative • Elements of joint regulation using a range of management initiated employee voice mechanisms • Employee = asset • Strong trust dynamics • Focus on informal, but also formal processes • Low us and theml • Managerial imposed rules • Employee = production factor • Low trust between parties • Regulation based on informal processes • Strong us and them • Management creates facade of joint regulation through limited superficial employee representation processes • Employee = prod-factor, but convinving more important than coercion • Limited trust • Surface appearance of formality • Mixed us and them feelings

15. Formation of a delegation most problematic in ‘exploitation autocracy’ en sophisticated HRM Still: impact biggest in sophist. HRM model, even without delegation present Relation with HRM-practises

16. Fact: Strong anti attitude in employer group Fact: no or little strategic participation Need for simpliciation of rep structures, for sensibilisation, and formation Change image of representation practices Administrative overload?? Positive arguments General conclusions

17. Conclusions for the debate on the directive • Very limited amount of ‘broad’ participation practices = economic democracy is far from reality => Participation gap at which directive aims is not imaginary • Worker participation and trade union presence very important for influence in strategic matters (cf. focus EU-richtlijn) • Legal framework (treshold) significantly increases distribution of participation practices

18. BUT • Spreading information is one thing, making sure the information is understood another • Are all players ready to deal with the implications of the directive then? • If representation that manages information flow is not general => risk of econo-democratic shortfall

19. Thank you for listening!

23. The particularity of work in SME’s