Presentation of the draft intermediary expert report CEEP Project: Social Services in European Cross-Industry Social Dialogue – Towards a strong and deeper involvement 2nd Round Table Meeting, Vilnius 18 December 2018 Presentation of the draft intermediary expert report Eckhard Voss

Contents Overview of the research Provision of SSGIs in the six countries Challenges, SSGIs are facing in the six countries Role of social dialogue at cross-industry and sectoral level

Scope of the project Social Services of General Interest: EU Commission: “Social services of general interest are those that respond to the needs of vulnerable citizens, and are based on the principles of solidarity and equal access. They can be both of an economic or non-economic nature. Examples include social security schemes, employment services and social housing.” NACE Code Description 85.59 Other education n.e.c. 86.1 Hospital activities 86.9 Other human health activities 87.1 Residential nursing care activities 87.2 Residential care activities for mental retardation, mental health and substance abuse 87.3 Residential care activities for the elderly and disabled 87.9 Other residential care activities 88.1 Social work activities without accommodation for the elderly and disabled 88.91 Child day-care activities 88.99 Other social work activities without accommodation n.e.c.

SSGIs: Share of employment Share of employment in human health and social work sectors in total employment, 2013 (%)

Level and type of social service provision Level of service provision Very diverse and reflecting the service specificities, national welfare state tradition, public administration traditions and size of the country Most services are regulated at national level and provided at local or regional level, sometimes directly falling within the competences of LRG Role of public and private providers Public service provision: plays a role in the provision of all SSGIs, specific public-private mix differs from country to country and sector to sector Private, not-for profit service provision: Strong role in care related activities in all countries Private, for-profit provision: dominates medical and dental practices and plays an increasing role in areas where public provision is not sufficient Trends: private, for-profit providers playing an increasing role (e.g. residential care, homecare, childcare)

Level and type of social service provision Important role of LRG, namely municipalities and communities for the provision of social services such as family welfare, nursing homes, health protection SSGIs are organised at local government level (mayor or county general directorates for social assistance) and delivered by public or private organisations Health sector: highly centralised systems, ongoing reforms (Cyprus) and emerging private hospitals in specific fields, addressing higher income groups Private service provision: relatively unregulated environment …

Challenges Investments in social protection, education and healthcare Poverty and fighting social exclusion Severe material deprivation, coverage and effectiveness of social benefits Labour market integration of specific groups Tackling child poverty, family support Adequate housing Quality and efficiency of health care and medical services Adequate access to curative or preventive health care Ability to address demographic and other challenges Adequate, affordable and quality long-term care Investments in new technologies, e-health and medicine Integration or health and social care provision Residential care activities for elderly and disabled Lack of capacities, understaffing, qualification, working conditions, etc. Education and training, adult learning Investments, equal access and opportunities, etc.

Employers in SSGI Mapping of organisations and actors reveals lack of employer organisations in SSGIs National governments, ministries, local and regional authorities are the main counterparts of trade unions when it comes to bargaining Three types of providers, associations, professional organisations and bodies were identified: Public organisations and bodies representing municipal authority providers; sub-sector, e.g. older people, people with disabilities, childcare. Not-for-profit: faith-based organisations; volunteering organisations, e.g. in the field of child care, community care, etc. For-profit: Types of service e.g. associations of private hospitals, nursing homes, kindergartens; residential care for the elderly. Social Enterprises: seem to not play a significant role.

Social Dialogue – Overall features and trends Also due to late accession to EU, ‘Social Dialogue’ is a relatively new/less known concept in all six countries Transformation process, EU accession as well as 2008 crisis has triggered tripartite consultation and agreements Collective bargaining and social dialogue in some countries addressed by legal/institutional change (e.g. new labour code 2017 in LT, abolishment of OET in HU, reform of trade union representativeness criteria in RO in 2011) Key problem of bipartite social dialogue is weakness of social partners in terms of organisational strength and capacities, representativeness and legitimacy This is particularly striking at sector/branch level Against this, collective bargaining at best is taking place at company level

Social dialogue indicators Social Partners organisational density Collective Bargaining (bargaining coverage public sector) Bulgaria EO: 50 TU: 17 30 Cyprus EO: 62 TU: 45 52 Hungary EO: 40 TU: 10 23 (35) Lithuania EO: 14 N.a. (10) Malta EO: 60 TU: 52 61 (100) Romania 36

Tripartite Social Dialogue Country National level Sectoral level Regional, local Bulgaria National Council for Triparite Cooperation Under umbrella of respective ministries At district and municipal level Cyprus Labour Advisory Board, Economic Consultative Committee Under umbrella of respective ministries, e.g. social security committee Hungary After abolition of National Reconciliation Council in 2011, four tripartite advisory bodies have been created, including National Interest Reconciliation Council for the Public Sector Under umbrella of respective ministries, e.g. Social Sector Interest Reconciliation Foum Lithuania Tripartite Council Tripartite councils in municipalities Malta Malta Council for Economic and Social Development Gozo Regional Committee Romania Social and Economic Council National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue 2017 Ministry for Public Consultation and Social Dialogue established Permanent and ad-hoc social dialogue committees under umbrella of different ministries Social dialogue committees at prefectual, regional and local level

Bipartite Social Dialogue and bargaining Country Actors and collective bargaining Bulgaria Trade unions and government, municipalities Municipal CLAs, e.g. education, healthcare, social care, nurseries, Cyprus SSGIs represented by cross-sectoral employer organisation OEB OEB affiliates in the sector (e.g. tertiary education, pre-school child education, private hospitals) not involved in collective bargaining or dialogue with unions Hungary Some actors identified (hospitals, child protection) but not involved in collective bargaining No collective agreements at sector level Fragmented system of collective bargaining and bargaining outcomes in the public sectors, if any, between trade unions and local authorities (e.g. nursery employees) Lithuania SSGIs not represented by employer organisations Collective agreements signed with respective Ministries, e.g. hospital activies (2017), education (2017), residential care activities or the agreement of May 2018 on social services Malta No sector level bargaining in SSGIs MEA affiliates in sectors such as health and professional serives Romania Sector level bargaining made very difficult by Social Dialogue Act 2011, very restrictive representativeness criteria

Issues to discuss Representation of SSGIs is fragmented and reflects diversity of service provision types and levels Experience of six focus countries reflects general patterns of social dialogue in the respective countries Organisational domains of trade unions and employers do not correspond to each other Sectoral social dialogue therefore is difficult to organise in national frameworks where there is not tradition of SSGIs Against this there certainly is a need to strengthen the representation of SSGIs in cross-sectoral social dialogue Is there a need of cross-sectoral social dialogue in SSGIs?