Christophe Degryse

The Euro Crisis and Its Impact on National and European Social Policies

This critical working paper looks at the series of political choices, circumstances and windows of opportunity that have enabled one particular vision of the model of EU monetary union to gain acceptance. In the context of this model, political union is not considered an accessible way to manage the crisis, for the rescue of the euro is regarded as feasible only in a more competitive economy.

Monetary union and the stakes for democracy and social policy

The democratic and social aspects of the new European governance are not really separable. In the 1970s monetary union was seen as the successful culmination of political and social integration; subsequently, it was regarded as the trigger for such integration. Finally, the Maastricht Treaty opted for monetary union in the absence of political union, on a basis of rule-based governance for the public finances and with social policy playing the role of shock absorber. Since 2008 the crises in the euro area have shown that this route does not lead to increased convergence and their result has been to exacerbate the dismantling of social models. Today the question of political integration has come once again to the surface, albeit accompanied so far by scant democratic debate. The authors of this contribution consider that EMU will never be stable in the absence of real debate on the varying options and of a strengthening of the European social model.

Has European sectoral social dialogue improved since the establishment of SSDCs in 1998

This article looks at the way in which European sectoral social dialogue has developed over the past 20 years. It tries to determine whether the establishment of Sectoral Social Dialogue Committees in 1998 (SSDCs; currently 40) has affected the nature and/or quantity of texts adopted by these bodies. To this end, two periods are considered: 1990—1997 and 1998—2009. A first finding is that European sectoral social dialogue has burgeoned since the mid-1990s. The establishment of SSDCs therefore forms part of this expansion. Our main finding is that, whereas previously sectoral social dialogue was primarily geared towards ‘joint lobbying’ documents addressed to the European institutions, it now appears to be generating more documents that reflect ‘reciprocal commitments’. Yet this trend is really only perceptible from 2003 onwards, five years after the first SSDCs were established. The increased number of binding joint texts adopted can be explained by the Commission having undertaken more consultation (under Treaty Article 154) which opened a window of opportunity for the social partners to sign ‘agreements’. Cet article se penche sur l’évolution du dialogue social sectoriel européen depuis vingt ans. Il tente de voir si la création, en 1998, de Comités de dialogue social sectoriel (CDSS, il en existe actuellement 40) a eu un effet sur la nature et/ou sur la quantité de textes adoptés au sein de ces CDSS. A cette fin, deux périodes sont examinées: 1990—1997 et 1998-2009. Un premier constat est que le dialogue social sectoriel européen est en phase d’expansion depuis le milieu des années 1990. La création des CDSS s’inscrit donc dans le cadre de cette phase d’expansion. Mais le constat principal est que, alors que le dialogue social sectoriel était auparavant principalement orienté vers l’adoption de textes de « lobbying conjoint » adressés aux institutions européennes, il semble désormais commencer à produire plus de textes reflétant des « engagements réciproques ». Mais cette évolution n’est vraiment perceptible que depuis 2003, c’est-à-dire cinq ans après la création des premiers CDSS. Cet accroissement du nombre de textes conjoints contraignants peut s’expliquer par le fait que la Commission a lancé davantage de consultations (au titre de l’article 154 du traité), ce qui, pour les partenaires sociaux, a ouvert une fenêtre d’opportunité pour signer des « accords ». Dieser Beitrag befasst sich mit der Entwicklung des sektoralen sozialen Dialogs auf europäischer Ebene in den letzten zwanzig Jahren. Dabei gehen wir der Frage nach, ob die Einrichtung der Ausschüsse für den sektoralen sozialen Dialog im Jahr 1998 einen Einfluss auf das Wesen und/oder die Zahl (derzeit gibt es vierzig) der von diesen Ausschüssen angenommenen Texte hatte. Die Analyse, bei der zwei Zeiträume unterschieden werden — 1990 bis 1997 und 1998 bis 2009 — zeigt, dass der sektorale soziale Dialog auf europäischer Ebene sich seit Mitte der 90er Jahre stark ausgebreitet hat. Die Schaffung der Ausschüsse für den sektoralen Dialog ist somit Teil dieser Entwicklung. Als wichtigstes Ergebnis ist festzustellen, dass der sektorale soziale Dialog vor der Einführung der Ausschüsse hauptsächlich darauf ausgerichtet war, Dokumente für das ‘‘gemeinsame Lobbying’’ gegenüber den europäischen Institutionen zu erarbeiten, während er nun mehr Dokumente hervorzubringen scheint, die ‘‘gegenseitige Verpflichtungen’’ widerspiegeln. Dieser Trend ist jedoch erst ab 2003, also fünf Jahre nach der Einrichtung der ersten Ausschüsse für den sektoralen sozialen Dialog, zu beobachten. Dass die Zahl der verbindlichen gemeinsamen Texte zugenommen hat, ist darauf zurückzuführen, dass die Kommission mehr Verfahren zur Anhörung nach Artikel 154 des Vertrags durchgeführt hat, die den Sozialpartnern die Möglichkeit eröffnete, ‘‘Vereinbarungen’’ zu unterzeichnen.

Social Policies of the European Union

It is difficult to draw up an overall balance of the European Union (EU)’s social policies. Until the 1980s, Social Europe was characterized primarily by the adoption of social legislation designed to support the free movement of workers (health and safety, employment, and the coordination of social security systems), together with European funding of programmes targeting training, back-to-work schemes, mentoring or regional recovery. From the late 1980s onwards, the European Community entered into a long phase of revising its founding treaties. This is going hand-in-hand with a proliferation of topics and the increasing complexity of the processes linked with Social Europe. In addition to the work done in the legislative field and European funding, the following have been established: a European social dialogue structured both on a crosssector level and on a sector level, a ‘European Employment Strategy’ (EES), a host of ‘open methods of coordination’ targeting the voluntary convergence of retirement pension systems, anti-poverty policies, healthcare policies, immigration policies, policies targeting young people and childhood, and others (including areas where the EU has only marginal competences), even the creation of a new European globalization adjustment fund, linked to restructuring measures. In the first section of this article, we will attempt to present the new provisions contained in the revised Treaty of the European Union, which came