Tag

Bipartite

Apr 19
0

Enterprise Sustainability and HRM in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

By | Social dialogue

Abstract

This chapter looks at the specific challenges, expectations and opportunities small medium-sized enterprises in emerging countries face regarding enterprise sustainability in today’s worldwide economy characterized by the strong interconnection of supply chains. In its experience with small enterprises development in emerging countries, the International Labour Organization (ILO) has recognized that quality human resource management (HRM) and good workplace practices are a key determinant of enterprise performance and productivity, as well as in practice at the community, national or even international level. Based on the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda (ILO, Decent work, report of the ILO Director-General, 87th session of the International Labour Conference. ILO, Geneva, 1999), the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. ILO, Geneva, 1998) and the technical cooperation experience of ILO’s Job Creation and Enterprise Development Department, the HRM practices described here are intended to improve enterprise sustainability, understood in its economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Practical examples from the ILO’s practice demonstrate the implementation of labour rights in SMEs in emerging countries.

 

For the original source, please click here.

DOWNLOAD
Apr 18
0

High Performance Work Practices, Industrial Relations and Firm Propensity for Innovation

By | Italy, Social dialogue

Abstract

This paper examines the influence of high performance work practices (HPWPs) and industrial relations (IR) on firm propensity for product and process innovation. The authors distinguish between two styles of workplace governance – democratic and autocratic – based on whether the management is willing to cooperate with workers’ representatives, and two styles of IR – participatory or advocatory – based on the extent of their influence. The estimates carried out indicate that HPWPs always have a significant and positive effect on both product and process innovation, while IR has a positive effect only in respect of product innovation, and provided the style is of participatory type. An interpretation of the IR effects could be that process innovation makes workers feel insecure about their jobs, while product innovation represents the path that can better protect workers’ prospects in an uncertain and unstable competitive environment. In respect of the style of IR, the effect is positive when workers’ representatives adopt a participatory role; the effect is instead cancelled out when employing an advocatory role. Participatory style IR is very likely to contribute to creating a positive attitude towards change, with workers willing to share the adjustment costs (such as learning new competencies), while advocatory style IR generates, in the minds of managers, a perception of the risk that investments in product innovation may turn into sunk costs for the firm through a likely appropriation of quasi-rent by workers (‘hold-up problem’).
For the original source, please click here.
DOWNLOAD
Apr 18
0

Co‐determination, Efficiency and Productivity

By | Germany, Social dialogue
Abstract
We present the first panel estimates of the productivity effects of the unique German institution of parity, board-level co-determination. Although our data span two severe recessions when labour hoarding costs of co-determination are probably highest, and the panel is too short to capture the likely long-run benefits in terms of human capital formation and job satisfaction, we find positive productivity effects of the 1976 extension to parity co-determination in large firms. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2005.
For the original source, please click here.
DOWNLOAD
Apr 13
0

Disputes Resolution through Social Dialogue: Evidence from Nigerian Organizations

By | Nigeria, Social dialogue

Social dialogue tries to create an objective process of bargaining in order to protect the interest of the organization which includes employers, employees and the environment. It would be useful to examine in depth the relevant components of the social dialogue and how they have imparted positively to the development of harmonious industrial relations in the country. This study takes data from a 280 sample size drawn from a population of 500 employees selected from 10 companies in Lagos state. It found out a significant relationship between collective process and success. It was recommended that employers and employees along with the government should consistently engage in a social dialogue process to improve the working conditions of labor and industrial harmony in the country.

 

For the original source, please click here.

DOWNLOAD
Apr 13
0

Industrial Relations, Techno-Organizational Innovation and Firm Economic Performance

By | Italy, Social dialogue

Abstract

In the last decades the changes in firm’s organizational structures has attracted great interest because of their widespread diffusion. At the same time technological innovation, especially in the domain of ICT, has also experienced a rapid diffusion. Several works have tried to disentangle the linkage between innovation and its determinants as well as to uncover the relation between techno-organizational changes and firm economic performances. I likewise conduct an empirical investigation using original information collected through a questionnaire administered to union representatives of manufacturing firms with at least 20 employees located in a province of Northern Italy, Reggio Emilia. The phases of the analysis are two: at first, the aim is to uncover the relationship between a participative industrial relations regime, contractual flexibility and the propensity to innovate; secondly, I investigate on the existence of linkages between several innovation activities, namely technology, organization, ICT and training, on the one hand, and firm economic performance, on the other. The results can be summed up as follows. First, the participative aspects of the industrial relations system and contractual flexibility show a nexus mainly with two kinds of innovative spheres: organization and training. Second, firm performance is linked to all four innovation spheres. Since the regressions are also conducted in principal components, evidence of complementarities between innovation spheres is provided.

 

For the original source, please click here.

DOWNLOAD
Apr 13
0

Working Conditions and Social Dialogue

By | Belgium, Case-study, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Social dialogue, Spain

This report examines the link between working conditions and social dialogue, highlighting instances where social dialogue has had an impact on working conditions. The impact of social dialogue on working conditions is considered at all levels – national, sectoral, company and workplace levels. There is also a specific focus on occupational health and safety. The first section of the report maps existing research and administrative reports, highlighting the findings of surveys, both quantitative and qualitative, that have identified a link between social dialogue and working conditions. The second section looks at examples of social dialogue drawn from case studies that have had an impact on working conditions in a range of areas. Some examples of incomplete social dialogue are also presented, including possible reasons for the shortcomings. Finally, the report identifies potential lessons for the future in terms of factors that contribute to the success or failure of social dialogue.

The study was compiled on the basis of individual national reports submitted by the EIRO and EWCO correspondents. The text of each of these national reports is available below. The reports have not been edited or approved by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The national reports were drawn up in response to a questionnaire and should be read in conjunction with it.

 

For the original source, please click here.

DOWNLOAD
Mar 18
0

What is Social Dialogue?

By | Uncategorized

What is Social Dialogue?

Social dialogue is a consultation between trade unions, employers and the government about both, economic and social issues. The formal definition of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) is as follows: “all types of negotiation, consultation or simply exchange of information between, or among, representatives of governments, employers and employees, on issues of common interest relating to economic and social policy” (ILO, 2018). It is based on the right to collective bargaining agreement and on freedom of association. Social dialogue incorporates each country’s historical, cultural, economic and political setting. Therefore, social dialogue is adopted based on the local circumstances, being diverse in legal framework, practices, and traditions, the process might vary from country to country.

Although the accepted definition of social dialogue mentioned before is very broad, there are various characteristics that indicate what cannot be considered as a social dialogue:

  1. Social dialogue does not include general information sharing on working conditions between employers and their employees. For example, annual employee contract negotiations are considered standard business practice.
  2. Social dialogue requires a two-way interaction between parties involved. For example, if an employer proposes a new policy which requires employees to work a certain number of hours and they do not have the opportunity to respond to this request, there is no social dialogue.

For more information on social dialogue, also see Benefits of Social Dialogue, the Video Library and the Resource Library.

Typology of social dialogue (click here for more)

Social dialogue has many dimensions that vary depending on context. It is necessary to make a typology of a social dialogue to identify further actions to achieve a desired outcome. Figure 1 presents main dimensions: type of parties involved; a degree of institutionalization and degree of engagement. It is important to know these characteristics to understand which type of social dialogue would be successful in your specific context.


Figure 1. Characteristics of social dialogues

There can be several forms of a social dialogue. First, it can be either bipartite or tripartite. Bipartite dialogue involves labour and management or trade unions or companies. It also includes discussions, consultations and negotiations between employers and employees (or their representatives). Tripartite social dialogue includes the participation of the government officials and possibly other social parties, for example, to discuss policy area e.g. social protection, employment, or taxes. Second, social dialogue can have a different degree of initialization, by being institutionalized, incorporating policies and structures, or being informal, taking place based on a specific situation. Third, other characteristics of the social dialogue define the degree to which parties are engaged. They can either be directly engaged, for example, one-on-one dialogue or indirectly when an organization or person represents the interest of the involved parties.

Social dialogue can happen at the local, regional, national and multi-national levels. In addition, it can be at the enterprise, inter-sectoral, or sectoral levels. The nature of the outcome of a social dialogue can also vary, for example, be either binding or non-binding. There are several usual activities of social dialogue including consultations, negotiations and sharing of the information.

Different forms of social dialogue (click here for more)

Various types of social dialogue mentioned before can take different forms, therefore, achieve different outcomes. It is important to know different forms of Social Dialogue to achieve the desired outcome by taking relevant steps. Table 2 provides an overview of bipartite and tripartite dialogues and its typical respective parties involved; forms of governance; social dialogue; and outcomes. However, these forms depend on a business context, to determine which ones are more successful. Please note that these are examples of forms and thus non-exhaustive.

Table 2. Forms of social dialogue

Before starting a social dialogue, it is important to define the desired outcome(s) and to recognize steps to undertake to achieve it. However, as mentioned before, the steps depend on a business context. To learn more about social dialogue please refer to ILO.

Barriers for brands (click here for more)

Brands might recognize the following barriers when working on FoA and CB:

 

  • Little understanding of how unions operate and how a unionized workforce can benefit the suppliers’ business. Hence brands can feel insufficiently equipped to explain to their suppliers why it is so important and how their business could benefit.
  • A lack of knowledge about the labour issues in general, and the specific situation in the brands’ sourcing country. For example, a lack of understanding about the situation of existing (often splintered) unions and worker participation at suppliers level (e.g. due to lack of insight provided by audits).
  • Apprehension about stimulating union activity as unions have the reputation of organizing strikes or causing unrest. Also, apprehension to promote a union because they do not know their political affiliations.
  • Your suppliers’ factory owners/senior management might have negative mind sets about FoA and CB.
  • Lack of power at supplier level to be able to put issues on the agenda.
  • Not feeling mandated to discuss the issue, thinking that it is between supplier and their workers, none of my business.
  • Fear of extra workload, intensive engagement would require time.
  • Fear of increased costs to promote FoA/facilitate SD.
  • Fear of increased costs as an outcome of a CBA.
  • Not seeing the benefits of a functioning union and social dialogue at suppliers.
  • Believing consumers are not interested in the topic, not something we can communicate on as PR for brand (no PR value).
Feb 24
0

Examples of Social Dialogue in Indonesia (2004-15) and its Contribution to Development

By | Indonesia, Social dialogue

This study covers the development of social dialogue in Indonesia from the end of the Suharto regime, in 1998, until 2015 and more specifically during the period that goes from 2004 to 2015. It is aimed at analysing specific examples of social dialogue taking place in the period in question, and assessing how the results of this dialogue amongst social partners has contributed to socio-econonomic development in Indonesia. The purpose of the analysis is also to highlight the importance of the “conditions” in which social dialogue can flourish and can be effective for development. These conditions are based on the freedom of association, collective bargaining, the willingness of social partners to engage in dialogue, and the supporting role of the State. The latter are “enabling conditions” for social dialogue to be relevant for socio-economic development in every country. The current study focuses its analysis on specific positive past experiences. However, it has to be noted that unfortunately the situation in Indonesia has recently changed dramatically. The country is experiencing a severe drawback in terms of respect of fundamental labour rights, resulting in a disruption of social dialogue. The International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise was ratified by Indonesia straight after the fall of the Suharto regime, and important progress was made in the country in the years following the transition period. However, these rights are currently under threat as illustrated by the arbitrary arrests and detention of trade unionists, imprisonment and fines issued to workers taking part in peaceful strikes and an inadequate legislation on freedom of association for civil servants.1 Other setbacks to social dialogue, over the last year, are those related to the minimum wage setting process. Until October 2015, minimum wages were negotiated through social dialogue. This changed following the introduction of a new law to calculate minimum wages through a formula based on inflation and GDP growth. The new law has undermined negotiations, rendering them superfluous, and threatens the remarkable progress achieved in the past years. It has also lead to a number of protest actions by the Indonesian unions in a struggle to reinstall dialogue.2 This of course is undermining the positive achievements previously reached, putting at serious risk the whole developmental and democratic process in the country. This study has therefore to be taken in its specific context as a snapshot of what social dialogue can achieve with the good will of its actors.

 

1. See the Provisional Record of the Report of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the 105th Session of the International Labour Conference (2016) pp.50-55

2. The International Trade Union Confederation has recurrently manifested its support to the struggle of the Indonesian workers and has continuously denounced violations of their rights, reported in its Survey of Violations of Trade Union Rights.  As a result of the deterioration of rights, Indonesia has been downgraded, in the International Trade Union Confederation’s Survey of Violations of Trade Union Rights, from a rating of 4, which implies a situation of systematic violations of rights to a rating of 5, implying no guarantee of rights

To see the original document, click here.

DOWNLOAD
Jan 04
0

Social Dialogue in Morocco, Tunisia and Jordan: Regulations and Realities of Social Dialogue

By | Jordan, Morocco, Social dialogue, Tunisia

This report was commissioned by the Directorate General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion of the European Commission and carried out by the ITC-ILO. It is an input to the tripartite ad hoc work group on social dialogue, which was set up in the framework of co-operation on employment under the Union for the Mediterranean. The objective of the report is to provide a factual analysis of the present state of social dialogue in three selected countries: Morocco, Tunisia and Jordan. The report is based on desk research and interviews with high level actors in social dialogue, and external observers and academics.

DOWNLOAD