This document summarizes research on information and consultation practices across Europe five years after the implementation of the EU Directive on the subject. It finds that while I&C bodies have become more common in some countries, uptake remains low in others. Where they do exist, I&C bodies engage in a variety of information sharing and consultation practices, with the level of involvement varying significantly between countries and sectors. The relationship between I&C bodies and trade unions also differs between Member States. Overall implementation of the directive has been limited by its flexibility and lack of promotion by social partners in some countries.

1. Information and Consultation PracticeInformation and Consultation Practice
acrossacross
Europe five years after the EUEurope five years after the EU
DirectiveDirective
Christian WelzChristian Welz
Eurofound – European Foundation for the
Improvement of Living and Working Conditions
www.eurofound.europa.eu

2. TOCTOC
I. Methodology
II. Research objectives
III. Procedures for establishing I&C bodies
IV. Incidence of I&C bodies
V. I&C practice
VI. Relationship between I&C bodies and other
forms of employee voice
VII. Views of the social partners
VIII. Policy Pointers

3. I. MethodologyI. Methodology
• comparative analytical report of EIRO
• structured questionnaire
• 27 national reports & NO
• 1 overview report
University of Warwick (IRRU)
Mark Hall / John Purcell

4. II. Research objectivesII. Research objectives
• assess developments in employee information and
consultation (I&C) across the EU
• 5 years after the implementation of Directive
2002/14/EC
focus is on the extent &
practical experience of I&C rather than legal
implementation

5. III.III. Procedures for establishing I&C bodiesProcedures for establishing I&C bodies
• in some Member States (MS) I&C processes are
mandatory
e.g. AT, BE, FR, LU,NL
• in most cases I&C rights are dependent on
employees or trade unions (TUs) taking the
initiative to trigger the establishment of I&C
arrangements
BG, CZ, DE, ES, GR, HU, IE, IT, PL, SI, UK

6. III.III. Procedures for establishing I&C bodiesProcedures for establishing I&C bodies
• in a minority of MS constitutional provisions are
regulated solely by statute
BG, DE, GR, ES
• others rely on a combination of statutory
requirements and agreements at sectoral or
undertaking level
BE, NL > statute +
DK, NO, SE > CA ++
IE, UK

7. III.III. Procedures for establishing I&C bodiesProcedures for establishing I&C bodies
• in some MS there is only limited scope for
organisation or sector-specific variation
• while in others CA are the dominant regulatory
instrument

8. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• European Company Survey 2009
• based on interviews with 27,160 managers at the
establishment level in 30 countries with the results
weighted

9. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• asked about presence of
legally established or institutional forms of employee
representation at establishment level,
which can be a trade union representation and/or a
general works council type depending on the country

10. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• in many MS broad coverage of employee
representative arrangements will exceed the scope of
I&C bodies
especially the case where I&C bodies and TU
representatives exist
• baseline for inclusion of an establishment in the
survey was the employment of 10 + employees

11. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• directive applies either to establishments with 20+ or
enterprises over 50+ employees
the inclusion of small establishments below the
threshold will lead to an underestimate
• very smallest of establishments are more numerous
and much less likely to have forms of representative
participation

12. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
PT
GR
MT
CZ
AT
EE
UK
LT
DE
HU
IE
BG
EU
IT
PL
CY
LV
SK
SINL
RO
LU
FR
ES
BE
FIDK
SE
IV. Incidence: companies in %IV. Incidence: companies in %

13. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
PT
GR
MT
EE
CZ
UK
CY
LV
LT
HU
BG
AT
DE
SK
EU
IT
PL
SI
IE
ES
NL
RO
FR
LU
BE
SE
DK
FI
IV. Incidence: employees in %IV. Incidence: employees in %

14. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• company size matters
largest categories of establishments, whether with 500+
or 250 + employees
- are much more likely to have an I&C body
in the smallest establishments the coverage is low

15. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• sector matters
varying size distribution of enterprises is probably the
main explanation for this pattern
2. factor will be the rate of unionisation since I&C
arrangements are more likely in unionised companies
both factors combine in the public sector
- in IE > 40% of public sector enterprises
have partnership committees compared
with 16% in the private sector

16. IV. IncidenceIV. Incidence
• changes since transposition
countries with a stable pattern of I&C arrangements
(AT, BE, DK, DE, NL, NO, SE)
MS with a growing incidence of I&C arrangements
(EE, ES, FR, LU, PL, SK, SI, UK)
MS with declining incidence, or very low take up, of
I&C arrangements (BG, CY, CZ, GR, HU, IE, IT, LI,
MT, PT, RO)

17. V. I&C practiceV. I&C practice
• subject matter covered
rare for information exchange to be a near universal
practice
consultation (defined at its minimum as ‘social dialogue’)
is much less likely to take place
• frequency of meetings
practice can vary widely
often from once a month to once a year

18. V. I&C practiceV. I&C practice
• meetings without management
very little data
• special meetings
important feature of consultation since management
proposals cannot be expected to be delayed until the
next meeting of the I&C body
• confidential information
in most MS confidentiality rules to apply

19. V. I&C practiceV. I&C practice
• protections and facilities for representatives
seems to be universally accepted
access to training is less common and few MS make
reference to the provision of facilities such as offices,
telephones and IT
• use of legal sanctions
only 11 countries provided data
only a small number of complaints about I&C
arrangements are made to the judicial/government
authorities

20. VI.VI. Relationship between I&C bodies and otherRelationship between I&C bodies and other
forms of employee voiceforms of employee voice
• relationship between I&C bodies & TUs
high degree of TU influence over the I&C process
where TUs and I&C bodies coexist, CB rights are
assigned by law to TUs only, with I&C bodies restricted
to a consultative role
- formal separation of roles is blurred in a no. of MS
- scope for I&C bodies to become involved to some
degree in CB issues

21. VI.VI. Relationship between I&C bodies and otherRelationship between I&C bodies and other
forms of employee voiceforms of employee voice
• is consultation required by the collective
redundancies and transfer of undertakings
directives carried out via I&C bodies, trade unions
or other employee reps?
in most MS > via I&C bodies of 2002/14 directive
in a number of MS with works councils or similar bodies,
there is also scope for TU involvement
- e.g. BE, DK, EE, DE, NL, PT
- in the UK & IE consultation must be via TUs, or in
non union situations via elected employee reps

22. VI.VI. Relationship between I&C bodies and otherRelationship between I&C bodies and other
forms of employee voiceforms of employee voice
• relationship between I&C bodies & direct forms
of employee participation
relationship generally seen as being complementary
TU suspicion was highlighted by only two national
correspondents (ES, IE/ BE less than in the past)
employers’ use of direct means as a preferred alternative,
especially in smaller enterprises (BE, IE, NL)

23. VII.VII. Views of the social partners (SPs)Views of the social partners (SPs)
• general SP support for national I&C frameworks
particularly true of MS with ‘mature’ systems of I&C
• some employer organisations and TUs are not enthusiastic
about I&C
in BG, IE, MT and the UK
little employer interest in PT and RO
TU scepticism reported in IT
in PL ‘sceptical attitude of employers changed slowly’ and
TUs have begun to view works councils as ‘potentially useful
• in a minority of MS SP conducted a review of the national
I&C framework or were pressing for reform

24. VIII.VIII. Policy pointersPolicy pointers
• patchy evidence makes it difficult to provide a
measured assessment of I&C practice across Europe
 need for more comprehensive research
• directive’s flexibilities and lack of promotion of I&C
by SP in some MS
have limited the directive’s impact
underlines the EP’s resolution for the SP to take
‘proactive steps’ to influence national implementation

25. VIII.VIII. Policy pointersPolicy pointers
• some features in the ‘recast’ EWC Directive may
promote more robust I&C processes
particularly in MS with statutory I&C frameworks

26. Further informationFurther information
• http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/studies/tn10090
• New research project on ‘National Practices on
I&C’ launched in 2/2011.
• christian.welz@eurofound.europa.eu