Living up to the European Union concept of employee involvement

Living up to the European Union concept of employee involvement Employee involvement in management’s decision making has been a challenge for the European Community (EC) since its beginning. Already in view of the six founding countries the European Economic Community (EEC) was confronted with a significant degree of diversity between the different Member States. This diversity increased with every enlargement, in particular when in 1973 the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland became members and much later in 2004 when Central and Eastern European (CEE) States together with Malta and Cyprus were included. This diversity in the area of employee involvement in management’s decision‐making is well documented. Therefore, it may be sufficient for the purpose of this paper to only give some broad indications. There are countries, as for example Germany, Austria, the Netherlands or Luxembourg, which have systems with a dual structure where employee involvement in management’s decision‐making institutionally is separated from the trade unions, even if in actual practice the links between the two are significant. In other countries employee involvement is based on two pillars: both the trade unions and a body elected by all em ployees. This is the case in France, Greece, Portugal and Spain. In the Scandinavian countries employee in volvement is exclusively in the hands of the trade unions. In countries like Ireland and the U.K. employee involvement for a long time was more or less a taboo subject for the trade unions. The fear of being compromised in opposing measures through their industrial strength prevented them becoming integrated into the mechanism of decision‐making in companies. Only recently ‐ mainly due to the EU input ‐ this attitude is changing gradually. Italy has developed an interesting mixture of its own. Even if it may be possible ‐ as just indicated ‐ to discover or gani ‐ sational similarities between the systems of different countries, the still remaining differences should not be overlooked. It has to be added that in some countries employee involvement in manage ment’s deci sion‐making is exclusively based on legislation (as for example in Germany), in others exclusively on collective agreements (as for example in Scandinavia) and again in others on a mixture of both (as for example in Belgium). The subject matters for employee involvement are as different as the degree of participation, ranging from mere information to co‐determination. And only some countries know employee involvement in company boards whose systems again differ significantly from each other. In short, there is a wide spectrum of patterns of employee involvement in management’s decision‐making and some countries where such involvement is virtually unknown. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Managerial Law Emerald Publishing

Living up to the European Union concept of employee involvement

Managerial Law, Volume 47 (6): 17 – Dec 1, 2005

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/living-up-to-the-european-union-concept-of-employee-involvement-WPLhLbkaTy
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0309-0558
DOI
10.1108/03090550510771214
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Employee involvement in management’s decision making has been a challenge for the European Community (EC) since its beginning. Already in view of the six founding countries the European Economic Community (EEC) was confronted with a significant degree of diversity between the different Member States. This diversity increased with every enlargement, in particular when in 1973 the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland became members and much later in 2004 when Central and Eastern European (CEE) States together with Malta and Cyprus were included. This diversity in the area of employee involvement in management’s decision‐making is well documented. Therefore, it may be sufficient for the purpose of this paper to only give some broad indications. There are countries, as for example Germany, Austria, the Netherlands or Luxembourg, which have systems with a dual structure where employee involvement in management’s decision‐making institutionally is separated from the trade unions, even if in actual practice the links between the two are significant. In other countries employee involvement is based on two pillars: both the trade unions and a body elected by all em ployees. This is the case in France, Greece, Portugal and Spain. In the Scandinavian countries employee in volvement is exclusively in the hands of the trade unions. In countries like Ireland and the U.K. employee involvement for a long time was more or less a taboo subject for the trade unions. The fear of being compromised in opposing measures through their industrial strength prevented them becoming integrated into the mechanism of decision‐making in companies. Only recently ‐ mainly due to the EU input ‐ this attitude is changing gradually. Italy has developed an interesting mixture of its own. Even if it may be possible ‐ as just indicated ‐ to discover or gani ‐ sational similarities between the systems of different countries, the still remaining differences should not be overlooked. It has to be added that in some countries employee involvement in manage ment’s deci sion‐making is exclusively based on legislation (as for example in Germany), in others exclusively on collective agreements (as for example in Scandinavia) and again in others on a mixture of both (as for example in Belgium). The subject matters for employee involvement are as different as the degree of participation, ranging from mere information to co‐determination. And only some countries know employee involvement in company boards whose systems again differ significantly from each other. In short, there is a wide spectrum of patterns of employee involvement in management’s decision‐making and some countries where such involvement is virtually unknown.

Journal

Managerial LawEmerald Publishing

Published: Dec 1, 2005

Keywords: European Union; Employee involvement; European Community; Six founding countries; Trade unions

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off