Social Dialogue and co-determination in the area of Social Security by Prof. Dr. Heinz-Dietrich Steinmeyer

1. Social Dialogue and co-determination in the area of Social SecuritybyProf. Dr. Heinz-Dietrich Steinmeyer

2. Introduction • Social Dialogue has a long tradition in Europe and even a longer tradition in Germany • Already in the 1950s first efforts on the EEC level • Since then further developed by EEC and EU • Influence of social partners on politics and legislation of EU (European Social Committee) • Some form of institutionalised social dialogue in most EU countries

3. Introduction • In Germany in addition: - special tradition of co-determination and co-decision - result mainly of social and economic catastrophy at the end of World War II - to be found in business (Works Council, Co- determination on company level) in social security (self-administration of institutions) in politics - more or less informal and on a consultative basis

4. Introduction • Therefore to be distinguished between - tripartite social dialogue in the areas of social policy and economic policy - bipartite social dialogue and negotiations between unions and employers - bipartite or tripartite dialogue or co- determination in social security

5. EU Level • Social Dialogue in the sense of the EC Treaty: All forms of contacts concerning social issues between employees, employers and other people and institutions concerned or involved Official EU papers call social dialogue the center of the European social model

6. EU level • Generally in all cases of European legislation concerning the area of social policy the social partners are involved; they will be asked for comments in a very early stage • In EU Law also an institutionalised form of social dialogue – the Economic and Social Committee; is involved in the legislative process - consisting currently of 344 members from member states – certain number per country. - tripartite in another way: - employers/business - trade unions - „various interests“ – self-employed, consumers etc. - Mandatory consultative involvement

7. EU level Social partners under EU Law they even have a quasi-legislative role; they can agree on a directive and this will then put into EU law by European Council and European Parliament. The EU legislators may take it or leave it, i.e. they cannot be forced to accept it but they either may accept it as it is or reject it – but the final decision is still with the legislators

8. Consultative bodies im European countries • In a great number of European countries there are consulting bodies on the national level • Old and famous example: The Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands Main advisory body to the Dutch government and parliament on national and international social and economic policy - 11 representatives of employers - 11 representatives of employees - 11 independent experts (selected by government) Functions: - consult the government and parliament - executing certain laws - certain supervisory functions

9. Consultative bodies in European Countries • In France: Conseil Économique et Social (CES) - Advisory Assembly of 231 members - nine departments (among others Social Affairs and Labour) - in certain cases consultation process mandatory - Composed of 18 representative groups - among others trade unions, enterprises, farmers etc. - Manadatory referral - Consultation on its own initiative - 68 members appointed by government – the rest sent by the representative groups

10. Consultative bodies in European countries • In Spain: Economic and Social Council - Consisting of 60 members 1/3 Trade unions 1/3 Employers associations 1/3 other organisations plus 6 experts mostly designated by the groups but appointed by government - Functions – close to the French model

11. Consultative bodies in European countries • Tripartite system in Romania CES - 9 members appointed by government - 9 members trade unions - 9 members employers associations

12. Consultative bodies in European countries • Portugal – interesting combination of - general CES (Conselho Económico e Social) with delegates of the most representative organizations in society and economy and - a tripartite consultative body on social policy = Permanent Committee for Social Dialogue – involving social welfare policies with 4 representatives of the government, 4 of employer´s confederations and 4 of worker´s confederations

13. Consultative bodies in European countries • Austria – is a special case – similar to Germany • But with a more complex structure - There are three chambers - the Federal Economic Chamber - the Federal Chamber of Labour - the Chamber of Agriculture - In addition there is an Advisory Council for Economic and Social Affairs - and – last but not least – social partners maintain representatives in the social insurance institutions – organised as self- administering entities under public law

14. Consultative bodies in European countries • The Federal (and Province) Chamber of Labour - all employees are members - in each Austrian province a General Assembly is elected – like parliamentary elections - Participation in the legislative process by consultation - Services for members – among others legal assistance in labour law disputes • The Federal Economic Chamber - covering the business community

15. Consultative bodies in European countries • Representatives in the Social Security system - system is run by the social partners - state is limited to supervision

16. Consultative bodies in European countries Evaluation • All institutions only consultative • To be seen in most European countries - except United Kingdom – no wonder - and – strange enough – Germany 3. Usually representing the social partners 4. Sometimes also additional interests 5. Therefore usually the view of them 6. Very often not tripartite and if so – usually not joint official statements but presenting views.

17. Consultative bodies in European countries 7. Advantages: - corporatism results in negotiations and may produce more adequate results - consensual solutions avoid conflicts and collective labour disputes - Dutch experience with „Poldermodel“: – „All in all I´d say we are fairly happy with the council and it is an enrichment of our society“

18. Consultative bodies in European countries 8. Disadvantages - very often old boys network - those who are represented have influence – the others not - slows down legislative process - good ideas may end in bad compromises - Quoting Austrians „we have peace but we are always behind“ - Interests are not always really representative

19. Germany • Why no such institutions in Germany? - one major trade union system, i.e. vast majority are in trade unions organised in DGB (German Trade Union Association) – representative body was there - same applies in case of employers organisation - in practice government consults them in any legislation affecting their interests - Criticism: - mostly like concerning the other countries - unions loose membership – representative? - follow special interests – for example against increasing retirement age to 67 - argument: represent those who have work and not those who need work (unemployed)

20. Germany • And – the special story in Germany is Self-administration in social security All institutions are autonomous legal entities All are run by executives elected by a self-governing body – usually an assembly of the insured and the employers – equal numbers The assemblies as such are elected in „Social Elections“ every four years

21. Germany • Social Elections (Sozialwahl) mean that - employees and - employers may elect representatives for an assembly called „Verwaltungsrat“ (Administrative Assembly) The employers usually send in one list – practically no election The employee´s side – usually list election – competing trade unions and other organisations – sometimes no election like in case of employers

22. Germany • Function and role - social insurance institutions have a certain autonomy - in detail depends on the area of social insurance in pension insurance very limited decision on budget within limits in health insurance considerably - fixing the contribution rate - decision on budget - negotiating prices and services with health care providers - involved in fixing of prices for pharmaceuticals - competing with each other

23. Germany in industrial accident insurance - determining contribution rules - negotiating with providers - issuing regulations for the prevention of accidents - decisions on organisation and re-organisation within the limits set by law in unemployment insurance - tripartite bodies - setting rules for executing laws

24. Germany • Unofficial function: - institutionalized interests - providing expertise • Reforms in pension insurance strongly influenced by expertise of administrations and its officials • Ongoing reforms in industrial accident insurance - strong resistance against organisational reform trying to modernise the system – from 19th century to 21st century - trying to keep institutions as they are • Reforms in health insurance – usually a fight of government against institutionalised and organised interests – funds, physicians etc.

25. Germany • Advantages and disadvantages 1. Those affected and finance the system have influence 2. Perception – this is my system 3. But „social elections“ do not really function – people do not know why to vote 4. Members of the assemblies not always very engaged – just another honorary post; members of the assembly sometimes unprofessional

26. Conclusion • Nobody – and nothing – is perfect • Almost everything has pros and cons • Provides more social peace • Might ease legislative process • Increases affection towards the system • Parliament and government do not have to fix all details • Certain kind of division of power