Joining European social dialogue
As the Treaty of Maastricht increased the relevance of social dialogue in EU law, many organisations sought to join ETUC, UNICE and CEEP as European social partners. Some of them—such as the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UEAPME) and the Confédération Européenne des Cadres—had attempted to participate in the Val Duchesse process from the outset, though without success. After Maastricht, other organisations from both sides of industry, including Eurocommerce, Eurochambers, the European Confederation of Independent Trade Unions, also requested participation in social dialogue. They argued that the three major social partner organisations alone could not adequately represent their members’ interests. In response, the European Commission established representativity criteria at the end of 1993 that determined which organisations were to be consulted as European social partner in the preparation of EU legislation on social policy. However, recognition for the purpose of consultation did not necessarily mean an organisation’s inclusion in European collective bargaining: first, the three Val Duchesse social partners themselves, then the Commission considered that the mutual recognition of social partners at their own discretion preconditioned participation in bargaining.
Click images to enlarge →
Request for participation by UEAPME / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
Letter from Confédération française de l'encadrement - Confédération générale des cadres to UNICE’s president Carlos Ferrer, 19 May 1992 / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
Letter from CESI representatives to Commissioner Papandreou, 29 June 1992 / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
A changing scenario
While new organisations tried to join social dialogue, its contents were still being defined. At the Social Dialogue Summit held at the Palais d’Egmont in July 1992, Commissioner for Social Affairs Vasso Papandreou proposed expanding the agenda to topics such as the environment, social exclusion, or immigration. However, in the following months, discussions became increasingly focused on the European institutions’ response to the then worsening economic situation and rising unemployment across the EU. Within this context, the Commission published a White Paper on “Growth, Competitiveness and Employment” in December 1993, following consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, including the Val Duchesse social partners. As new challenges began to dominate the European political agenda, both European institutions and social partners adapted their understanding of “Social Europe” and started to move their focus towards employment policy in the EU.
Framework agreements
Notwithstanding their different strategies, the social partners operationalized the revised social policy competences via negotiations that led to cross-industry framework agreements. These covered topics such as parental leave (1995), part-time work (1997) and fixed-term contracts (1999). All three agreements were subsequently implemented by Council directives, thereby becoming a part of EU law to be applied across the EU. In following years, the social partners also signed a series of “autonomous” agreements—meaning that they took responsibility for implementation at national, sectoral and enterprise levels, without recourse to EU legislation or policy. These agreements addressed issues such as telework (2002), work-related stress (2004), harassment and violence at work (2007), and digitalisation (2020).
← Click images to enlarge
Framework Agreements on Part-Time Work, 1997 / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
Framework Agreements on Parental Leave 1996 / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
Framework Agreements on Telework 2002 / European Trade Union Institute (Brussels), Jean Lapeyre archive.
Foundations and futures
Between 1984 and 1994, the social partners institutionalized their role within the political and constitutional architecture of the EC/EU. From the early steps of social dialogue to the drafting of the agreement that was almost entirely annexed to the Treaty of Maastricht and ultimately incorporated into EU primary law through the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam, they carved out a space to influence policymaking and represent the interests of workers and employers. This trajectory demonstrates that European integration is not just the story of European institutions, but also of the many organisations and individuals who have contributed to this collective project. Today, at a time when many observe a retreat in social rights, reflecting on the meaning of Social Europe through its history reminds us that a Europe with a social ambition remains work in progress much like the process of European integration itself.
We conclude with some stimulating reflections from Emilio Gabaglio. As President of Sindnova, he was a partner in our ShaPE project team. As ETUC General Secretary, he was a central protagonist in the new roles accorded to the social partners in Maastricht. In this interview, he reminds us that the long history of European integration is a resource we should keep mining to consider how Social Europe should be reshaped to meet new challenges. He recalls that the predecessor to the 1957 Treaty of Rome setting up the EEC, the European Coal and Steel Treaty, had a much stronger imprint of worker involvement from which the Rome Treaty retreated. As we face new challenges of war, environment and climate, and democracy, the roles the social partners can play merits sustained and historically informed reflection.
Source: Interview of Emilio Gabaglio by Jacopo Cellini on 8 June 2012.
Image Source: UNICE Conference ‘’The SME Conference on Entrepreneurship’’, 1999. Photo: Unknown author / HAEU, ETUC-37-I.5.
Emilio Gabaglio (IT)
ETUC Secretary General 1991 - 2003
This website requires Javascript to be Activated to work Correctly