Transcript Flexicurity and transitional labour markets

Flexicurity and
transitional labour
markets
Jean-Claude Barbier
CNRS Université Paris1
Centre d’économie de la Sorbonne
[email protected]
International seminar Cicero Foundation, 11-12 October, 2007, Paris
1
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Outline





2
I – ‘Transitional labour markets’ and
‘flexicurity’:
* concepts
* marrying them?
II - Actual ‘flexicurity’ versus putative
strategies and the political debate: the
Danish and Dutch systems compared
III – Where does the gist of flexicurity lie?
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
TLM and Flexicurity (1 concepts)





3
TLM original assumptions (Günther Schmid
and Peter Auer): the theory
A) full employment is still possible
B) transitions (from various statuses on the
labour market) are not (equally) secured
C) in order for people to take (new) risks,
transitions should be secured collectively
D) this entails a mix of socialised and
market insured risks
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
TLM and Flexicurity (2 concepts)




4
Flexicurity, the broad view:
A balance between demands for
labour/employment flexibility and claims for
income/wage security
Too often implicit: the ‘balance’ is not a
‘mechanism’ nor an automatic ‘trade-off’
Real actors and real values, real politics
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Marrying TLM and
‘flexicurity’
Not an easy task:
 TLM theory entails sharing a (strong)
normative perspective

5
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Transitional labour markets
Günther Schmid’s four criteria of
« good » transitions:
 Freedom/autonomy
 Solidarity
 Effectiveness
 Efficiency

6
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Specification: labour market/social
protection risks and rights


Freedom/autonomy


Solidarity



Effectiveness


7
Efficiency
(risks, rights) Balance
society/individual =
reciprocal engagement
High socialisation of
risks/services/
redistribution
Quality full employment,
quality services
cost containment, good
public management
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Marrying TLM and
‘flexicurity’?

A marriage entails the clarification of
certain things

Can flexicurity match TLM basic
values (principles) ?
8
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Flexicurity = a polysemous
notion

Flexicurity as a
political slogan

9
Flexicurity as a
system of social
arrangements
(complementarities)
that produce a
balance [1]
Flexicurity as a
strategy [2]
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Flexicurity as a system [1]
Yielding a balance
 Identifying the balance: a sociological
task


10
=> identifying national cases:
Denmark and the Netherlands
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Identifying ‘flexicurity’: the
inductive way
- the Netherlands, Wet Flexibiliteit en
Sekerheid – 1999
 - Denmark with the successive
Rasmussen 1 (1993-2001) and
Rasmussen 2 (2002-now)
governments

11
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Danish and Dutch definitions
(1)

The canonical academic definition is
by T. Wilthagen (and colleagues):

« a degree of job, employment, income and
combination security that facilitates the labour market
careers and biographies of workers with a relatively
weak position and allows for enduring and high quality
labour market participation and social inclusion, while
at the same time providing a degree of numerical
(both external and internal), functionaland wage
flexibility that allows for labour markets’ (and individual
companies’) timely and adequate adjustment to
changing conditions in order to maintain and enhance
competitiveness and productivity » [quoted in
Employment in Europe 2006, p. 77]
12
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Danish and Dutch definitions
(2)



The canonical definition is by Per Kongshøj
Madsen (and colleagues)
=> ‘golden triangle’ [relatively loose
legislation on employment protection +
generous social safety net for the
unemployed + high (intensity) spending on
ALMP]
[quoted from EiE, 2006, p. 78]

Peculiarities: other factors outside the
‘triangle’ play a role: history,
macroeconomic policy
13
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
The ambiguous definition of
‘employment protection’
[Labour Law] (OECD 2004)
14
An evolving/elusive notion

Spotting differences in definitions
15
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Flexicurity, Joint employment
report, 2007 (EU)

Flexicurity should ease the transitions
between different stages of working life. The
internal and external components of
flexicurity should mutually reinforce one
another, so that at the same time the
modernisation of labour law, investment in
training and active labour markets, and the
provision of adequate social protection and
income security can take place in a context
of modern work organisation. Flexicurity
should also be conducive to addressing
precariousness, reducing segmentation on
the labour market, and combating
undeclared work. The social partners have
an important role to play here.
The EU Commission’s
recent definition

The Commission’s background document [20/4/07]

Flexible contractual arrangements (both from the perspective of the
employer
and the employee) through modern labour laws and work
organisations;
Active Labour Market Policies (ALMP) which effectively help people
to cope
with rapid change, unemployment spells and transitions to new
jobs;
Reliable and responsive lifelong learning (LLL) systems to ensure
the continual adaptability and employability of workers;
Modern Social Security systems which provide adequate income
support and
facilitate labour market mobility. This includes provisions that help
people
combine work with private and family responsibilities, such as
childcare.







17
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
More..
The definition of the expert group’s
interim report
 Almost identical + fifth element


18
« it is important to add, as a kind of
process variable: supportive and
productive social dialogue »
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
=>>Diversity of definitions
 Diversity
is here to stay in member
states
 The confusion between flexicurity as a
system [1] and as a strategy [2]
 =>
19
leads to controversy
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
A somehow contentious
notion: political debate
Under an apparent consensus (2007 sample):
- F. Müntefering: « ein Symbol » + « ein unechtes
Wort » [leichte Lösung, die es aber nicht gibt]
- John Monks, ETUC (Sevilla) [au plan européen, cela
devient un menu à la carte]
- Business Europe, de Buck [from a job preservation
mindset into a job creation mindset]
- Polish economists [choosing the ‘American model?’
M.-J Radło, Warsaw]
- Etc…
 Reluctance in certain ‘stakeholder’ groups
20
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
The potential ‘fit’ between
TLM and « flexicurity »
Two key elements at stake
 - strategies for ‘activating’ social
protection [Enhancing, Introducing

systematic links between social protection and
employment (labour force participation)]

21
- strategies for fostering the quality of
jobs and preventing/decreasing
segmentation and inequality
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
A trade-off? Who trades what
with whom?
Individual actors: interests, choices
 Collective actors: interests, choices,
etc.
 Macro-meso-micro dimensions
 Who benefits from what security (what
social protection)?
 Who benefits from what flexibility (not
only employment/labour flexibility?)

22
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Schmidt’s principles?

Freedom/autonomy

Solidarity

Effectiveness

Efficiency
23

Sociological indepth
understanding of
the social
arrangements
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Legitimacy of social
arrangements (1)
The ‘Danish arrangement’
 Universalistic approach (quality jobs)
 The weaker are protected
 Male-female difference is low
 long duration of unemployment
insurance
 Consistent « welfare reform »
 => mobility is high, secure and eased

24
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Flexibility,
hire and fire
‘activating’
policies
Generous
social
protection
Labour
market:
the
‘Golden
triangle’
The « Golden
triangle » and
its social
conditions
IR system
Norms, values
Social
conditions
‘Forlig’, 1899,
1933,…
25
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Legitimacy of social
arrangements (2)






26
The ‘Dutch arrangement’
Flexibility of working time
Labour ‘sharing’/Women labour market
participation (lower)
Social protection: Equal security for atypical
to typical (quality)
Various welfare reforms
Mobility and various types of flexible
employment
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Empirical commonalities
Social partners
 Negotiation
 Systemic consistency
 Public support = legitimacy


27
Consistent outcome= overall quality
employment
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
The French experience
[‘imitating Denmark’ 2005-2006]

Fragmentation of employment contracts
Innovation 2005: a new contract for
small firms (Contrat nouvelle
embauche – CNE) without
employment protection in the first year
 Innovation 2006: a similar one for the
young
 Inexistent negotiation => protest
 2007: new reforms looming

28
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
The gist of flexicurity






29
Flexicurity as a portemanteau concept
controversial notion and not only easy
tradeoffs
Systemic consistency
Public support linked to negotiation
Transitional labour market principles are
consistent with the Dutch and the Danish
arrangements
Not with many others (ex: the French
system as we know it)
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Appendix
30
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Benefits and employment:
some lessons
15-64 OCDE
(1999)
ER FTE
B
NoB/noE
total
F
55.5
24.2
20.4
100
D
58.9
22.4
18.8
100
Dk
69.7
23.1
7.2
100
UK
60.7
18.9
20.4
100
USA
67.0
13.7
19.3
100
31
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Dimensions of social citizenship
and the TLM criteria

TLM CRITERIA
Freedom/autonomy

Solidarity







32
Effectiveness
Efficiency
SOCIAL CITIZENSHIP
Freedom of choice.
Participation to the
formulation of programmes
Equality:
ages/genders/statuses
_____________________

Generosity/duration of
benefits; sanctions and
conditionality

Quality full employment,
quality of services
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Two recent (unfinished)
French reforms Unemployment insurance
(PARE) (2001 =>)







Freedom/Solidarity
Freedom of choice
Participation
Equality

Effectiveness/efficiency
Generosity/Sanctions
Quality (full
employment/services)






33
Resources not
sufficient?
Large social debate
Unequal access
Generosity
improved/sanctions
also
Is there an offer of
quality services?
Underemployment/segmentation
=> Next?
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Two recent (unfinished) French
reforms
RMI reform (on-going)







Freedom/Solidarity
Freedom of choice
Participation
Equality
Effectiveness/efficiency
Generosity/Sanctions
Quality (full
employment/services





34
Access to services de
facto limited
Limited social debate
Persisting inequalities:
the division between
insured and « assisted »
Unequal access to
services and to
mainstream
unemployment/ sanctions
low
=> next?
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Activation’s legacy

=>Activation is not entirely new: ‘old activation’

The Swedish legacy : the ‘50s: labour market policies
=> Gøsta Rehn’s concept

Programmes across Europe and the USA: from the
‘70s
‘workfare’ (USA, from the early seventies)
‘Insertion’ (France, from 1975)
‘Aktivering’ (Denmark, 1992-94)
The ‘New Deals’ in the UK (from 1997)




35
Barbier CNRS Université Paris 1 Panthéon
Sorbonne CES Matisse
Activation of social protection:
two ‘Beveridgean’ ideal-types
Liberal
Universalistic
The « problem »
(Major): targeted
assistance
caseloads (low flat
rate benefits)
(Minor): work ethic:
(generous benefits
for all)
Rules/Values
Self-reliance:Versus
‘Dependency’
Market
Balance individualsociety
Market and state
Solutions
Incentives+sanctions Activation Contract
/full employment
underemployment
Programmes
Welfare to work
services+ tax credits
Services+updated
benefits
Activation and existing
restructuring reforms: a sketch
Restructuring Re-com.
and activation
Participation to
the lab.
Market/work
incentives
Dk
Cost-cont.
Recal.
Control
expenditure for
working-age
New ideas,
programmes,
adapt to societal
demands
Flere i Arbejd
Efterløn
Aktivering
PES
Problems
Updating, work
ethics/ +cost
UK
Tax credits
WTW
Sickness Benefits
PES
Re-com
(incentives)
+ cost
Germany
Mini- MidiJobs/
Kombilohn
Early retirement
Hartz IV, BAA (H
III)
Fragmentation,
low employment
creation
France
PPE, minimum
incomes
reform
Early retirement
PES, PARE,
insertion
Funding reform
(social cont.)
Fragmentation,
low employment
creation