Search results

Describes two‐way dialogue, between each side of industry, is a key element in social policy. Proposes to analyse and comment on some of the social dialogue, in particular both the role and significance of this notion in the soon‐to‐be enlarged Europe. Acknowledges that the ten candidate countries that join on 1 May 2004 must build a social dialogue and negotiate and conclude collective agreements.

This article aims to analyse the development of the concept of social dialogue in the UK as it has been encouraged by the European Union vision of social democracy. The starting points for the discussion are articles 27 and 28 of the Character of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on information and consultation and collective bargaining and collective agreements, respectively.

The European context for developments is followed by a historical sketch of the topics included in the discussion. Analysis and evaluation is then presented of the evolving concept of social partnership and the traditional forms of “social dialogue” in the UK – collective bargaining and collective agreements; trade union recognition for collective bargaining; disclosure of information for collective bargaining purpose. Some former collective bargaining systems are also included in the analysis.

The focus of the discussion is the influence of European law on information and consultation in three discreet areas – the transfer of undertakings; collective redundancies and health and safety at work. The general conclusion is that the discreet notions of social dialogue which emanate from the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union spell good laws, good governance and effective democracy.

The article analyses the development of the concept of social dialogue.

The purpose of this paper is to examine European Union (EU) industrial relations in their development over time. It describes and analyzes their main constituent parts, which are deployed along four interlinked institutional dimensions: tripartite concertation; cross-industry social dialogue; sectoral social dialogue; and employee representation and negotiation at the transnational company level. The focus lies strictly on the emerging EU layer of industrial relations, which is common to the different Member States and not on comparative European industrial relations.

The paper is conceptual in nature. It considers the differences and mutually interdependent legal and political processes, policies and institutions between EU industrial relations and national industrial relations.

The findings substantiate that EU industrial relations constitute an incomplete but perfectly traceable transnational reality distinct from industrial relations in the Member States. EU industrial relations are not to supersede but to supplement national industrial relations. Neither the EU institutional framework nor the European social partners have the mandate, legitimation or desire to perform a more ambitious role.

More empirically oriented research would further support the findings in the paper.

The paper presents a conceptual review based on a comprehensive and critical reading of the literature on EU industrial relations. It also puts labor strategies at the forefront of the analysis in corporate relocation.

To explore social dialogue over vocational education and training in Europe, comparing the role of the social partners in different national training systems and different industrial relations contexts.

A survey of European member states (EU15 before enlargement) and two EFTA countries addressed to the national agencies or ministries responsible for vocational education and training and representing the contacts of the CEDEFOP Refernet network, supplemented by a literature review and discussions with the social partners at European level.

Throughout Europe the social partners have a formal role in developing vocational training policy and are involved in implementation, particularly at sector and local levels. While the structures of participation vary according to the degree of state regulation and the locus of training, social partner involvement is extensive irrespective of the nature of the regulatory framework.

Only 13 countries responded to the survey and respondents were not always aware of workplace developments. The gaps were addressed through the literature and discussions but inevitably the study is not comprehensive.

Valuable information for those seeking to identify common and good practice in social dialogue to improve the quality and relevance of vocational training.

A useful baseline study of the role of the social partners in vocational education and training in Europe.

EU social policy is perhaps the most controversial aspect of European integration yet, despite all the political clashes on the matter, concepts like “social Europe” or “social dimension” remain ill‐defined and imprecise terms. Intends to outline and clarify in detail the debate about whether or not the European Union should have competence with regard to labour market affairs. A key message is that social policy has been controversial because it has become embroiled in the debate about the future political direction of the EU. In particular, three contrasting political models –symbiotic integration, integrative federalism and neo‐liberalism – have been put forward as organizing principles for the EU and each has a coherent view of what form social policy should take at the European level. It is the clash between these three models that has caused EU social policy to be so contestable and intractable.

The purpose of this paper is to question the status of trade unions on corporate social responsibility (CSR) today in the European Union (EU). How do they go from being social partners to a full‐fledged stakeholder status? The paper examines this question both from the point of view of stakeholder theory and from a field study in three different European countries.

The methodology is qualitative, i.e. based on a series of face‐to‐face interviews conducted in three different European countries (France, Germany, the UK) with different stakeholders, union representatives, non‐governmental organizations, experts, employers' associations.

The main findings are: inadequacy between stakeholder theory and the reality of European trade unionism and the CSR debate; trade unions are not “natural” stakeholders, rather “stake‐seekers”; the national business approach is relevant, in that national differences account for major differences among the three countries studied; and the European and global implications of trade unions into CSR help them gain full stakeholder status.

The sample is a bit limited; it would be interesting to enlarge the scope of European countries. Also, it would also be relevant to interview shop‐floor members to analyze the gap between union officials and rank and file members.

This paper can help unions consider CSR in a better way, so as to integrate CSR issues into their agenda.

The status of trade unions in the CSR debate has largely been overlooked, whereas their role in European countries is quite important.

There has been very little previous research on trade unions and CSR. The cross‐cultural dimension of this research and the EU dimension add value to the paper.

This chapter explores the notion of the European Social Model (ESM) and examines the EU-level social policy reforms that have taken place since the 1950s. ESM is taken to be distinct from but intimately related to the web and patchwork of rules explored in this volume. After sketching out the development of ESM since the 1950s, up to and including its near-death experience in the context of the Great Recession and the EU's turn to austerity, the chapter considers the social and political consequences of the EU's lurch to austerity as well as the consequences this might have for the web and patchwork of rules. The chapter ultimately reflects on whether another ESM might be possible in the context of the EU's response to the economic and social consequences following the onset of COVID-19, particularly in the context of the EU's Next Generation EU programme whereby the EU provides financial assistance directly to the regions worst affected by the pandemic.

Analyses the UNI‐Europa Graphical Sector (UEGS) agreement on European co‐ordination of collective bargaining initially made in 1999. Explains the purpose of the agreement, its objectives, its main components, the principles underpinning it and the mechanisms by which it is reviewed. Provides empirical data on the extent to which graphical trade unions (all affiliated to the UEGS throughout Europe, in their 2000 collective bargaining round with graphical employers, were able to make accommodations consistent with the spirit of the co‐ordination of collective bargaining agreement. The research is based on official publications of UEGS, the Minutes of its Collective Bargaining Committee, the reports of its annual general meetings and attendance at its Annual Collective Bargaining Conference for Negotiators.

Purpose – This chapter provides a theoretical and conceptual overview of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). It is written as a descriptive document to enhance the understanding of CSR within the context of international business.Design/methodology/approach – This chapter is built based on an extensive literature review.Findings – This chapter contains six subsections. The first subsection looks at the concept of CSR, and it highlights the possible role of CSR in mitigating the negative consequences of globalisation. The second subsection looks at the evolution of CSR since the 1990s. The third section looks at ethics theories. The fourth section looks at political theories to explain CSR. The fifth section looks at the business case for CSR. And finally the sixth section looks at specific CSR initiatives.Practical implications – This chapter provides a response to the necessity for this analysis that arises from the effects of CSR actions in international business.Originality/value of chapter – This chapter provides a summary of the conceptual and theoretical framework of CSR. It could be used as a teaching tool for undergraduate and masters’ courses on either international business or corporate social responsibility.