The document discusses the role of social partners in continuing vocational training in Europe. It analyzes the European sectoral social dialogue, which includes 36 sectoral committees. These committees have produced over 300 joint texts to provide guidance to social partners and recommendations to European institutions. Implementation of these texts depends on voluntary uptake by national members and domestic institutional frameworks. The sectoral social dialogue involves complex coordination between multi-level actors across different countries and industries.

1. Dynamics of the European SectoralDynamics of the European Sectoral
Social DialogueSocial Dialogue
The role of social partners in CVT in Europe:The role of social partners in CVT in Europe:
reviewing practices and sharing challengesreviewing practices and sharing challenges
CEDEFOP, Thessaloniki: 9-10 February 2009
Christian WelzChristian Welz
European Foundation, DublinEuropean Foundation, Dublin

2. 19/04/15 2
OutlineOutline
I. Analytical framework
II. Institutional developments
III. Coordination of a multi-level
governance
IV. Implementation of texts
V. Conclusions

3. 19/04/15 3
I. Analytical frameworkI. Analytical framework

2 levels of analysis
 European institutions and actors

participants + interaction with the
European Commission
 relationship with the Member States

4. 19/04/15 4
I. Research questionsI. Research questions

recent developments in the ESSD

how do players act and interact
within ESSD committees
with national constituencies

implementation of texts

5. 19/04/15 5
l. Methodologyl. Methodology

combination of methods
 documentary search
 databases (OSE)
 ‘representativeness studies’
 interviews

45 semi-structured interviews

6. 19/04/15 6
II. Institutional developmentsII. Institutional developments

36 committees
 with increasing visibility

7. 19/04/15 7
36 Sectoral Social Dialogue Committees36 Sectoral Social Dialogue Committees
- Agriculture
- Audiovisual
- Banking
- Catering
- Chemical
industry
- Civil aviation
- Cleaning
Industry
- Commerce
-Construction
-Electricity
- Extractive
-Industry
-Football
- Footwear
- Furniture
- Gas
- Horeca
- Hospitals
- Inland Waterways
- Insurance
- Local and regional
Government
- Personal services
- Postal services
- Private security
- Railways
- Road transport
- Sea fisheries
- Sea Transport
- Shipbuilding
- Steel
- Sugar
- Tanning and leather
- Telecommunications
- Temporary agency work
- Textile and clothing
- Woodworking
requests:
- automotive industry
- non-ferrous metals
- cycling
- sports
test (08-10):
- public administration

8. 19/04/15 8
II. Institutional developmentsII. Institutional developments

more than 300 joint texts
 plethora of texts > growing in nos.
 majority of ‘common positions’ to
European institutions
 no clear trend towards more binding
agreements (2% only !)

9. 19/04/15 9
SSD: Number of documents per type (1999-2007)
6
33
31
46 53 127
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
agreements
Process-oriented text
Procedurals text
Joint opinions and tools
No subgroup Tools Declarations Joints opinions

10. 19/04/15 10
SSD:Number of documents bytopic (1999-2007)
2
3
5
9
3
7
12
6
11
22
13
2
2
4
5
1
10
9
4
9
12
20
14
14
10
1
4
12
10
6
5
4
5
11
28
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Working time
Sustainable development
Non-discrimination
CSR- Corporate social responsability
Employment
Enlargement
Working conditions
Soc. Aspects of Community pol.
Health and safety
Training
Social dialogue
Economic and/or sectoral pol.
1999-2001 2002-2004 2005-2007

11. 19/04/15 11
II. Joint textsII. Joint texts

2 broad categories of documents
 intended for the attention of European
or national public authorities (common
position)
 addressed to the social partners
themselves (reciprocal commitments)

12. 19/04/15 12
4
22
24
43
7
25
28
32
2
21
30
57
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Companies
European social partners
National organisations
European inst.& national
authorities
1999-2001 2002-2004 2005-2007

13. 19/04/15 13
III. Coordinating multi-level playersIII. Coordinating multi-level players

sectoral specificities prevail

growing interaction
 between sectoral and cross-sectoral
social dialogue

e.g. telework, violence at workplace
 between sectors (crystalline sylica)

14. 19/04/15 14
III. Coordinating multi-level playersIII. Coordinating multi-level players

coordination with national members
 heterogeneity of perimeters

e.g. NACE demarcation
 heterogeneity of roles

social partners vs. trade associations

15. 19/04/15 15
III. Coordinating multi-level playersIII. Coordinating multi-level players

national players’ commitment in ESSD
 various degrees of participation

centre / periphery / absent

issues at stake

opportunities and constraints
 human and financial resources
 national IR context

16. 19/04/15 16
IV. Implementation of textsIV. Implementation of texts

implementation in MS
 “EU peak organisations have no power or authority to
enforce compliance…” (Keller 2003)

process-oriented texts
 implementation on a voluntary basis

depend on
 nature of text
 national legal framework
 maturity and level of experience in ESSD

17. 19/04/15 17
IV. Implementation of textsIV. Implementation of texts

categories of practical follow-up techniques
1) written survey among members
2) annual/periodic reports
3) task forces/working groups/plenary meetings
4) agreement on good practices
5) conferences/websites
6) new texts/new initiatives

18. 19/04/15 18
IV. Implementation of textsIV. Implementation of texts

follow-up procedures > problematic
 lack of regular and systematic monitoring
 lack of information on impact in MS
 patchy information

> patchy implementation?
 yet: mutual learning and informal contacts

19. 19/04/15 19
V. ConclusionsV. Conclusions

from a quantitative perspective:
 less than 2% of the texts adopted
are agreements with binding effect
only some texts are expected to have
measurable impact at national level

20. 19/04/15 20
V. ConclusionsV. Conclusions

each sector has its own specific dynamics
 defining a common interest not only
represents a difficulty between trade unions
and employers
 also involves much intra-organisational
negotiation

21. 19/04/15 21
V. ConclusionsV. Conclusions

implementation of texts relies on
 the EU peak organisations
 the goodwill of the national members
 domestic institutional framework is a key
dimension for implementation at national
level (path dependency)

22. 19/04/15 22
V. ConclusionsV. Conclusions

growing interaction both between
 the cross-industry and the sectoral level
 and among sectors themselves

complex level linkages between the EU and
national level

23. 19/04/15 23
V. ConclusionsV. Conclusions

dynamics at play are complex, multiple and opaque

dynamics differ from the traditional sector-level collective
bargaining in the MS
 multi-level/multi-actor
 close cooperation with the EU institutions
 numerous coordination processes
 subtle forms of mutual learning

there is a multiplicity of activities and high degree of
vitality

24. 19/04/15 24

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelatio

christian.welz@eurofound.europa.eu
Further informationFurther information