1. SOCIAL DIALOGUE IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES SECTOR IN EUROPE
Dr. Jane Lethbridge, Director, Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU), University of Greenwich, UK

2. To make recommendations to strengthen social dialogue
AIM
To critically assess the role of social dialogue in the social services sector in Europe
OBJECTIVES
To highlight some of the results of 22 national case studies of social dialogue in the social services sector in Europe
To make recommendations to strengthen social dialogue

3. SOCIAL SERVICES - DEFINITIONS
Long-term care for older people
Care and rehabilitation for people with disabilities
Child care
Other services to reach disadvantaged or excluded groups only included if have strong social dialogue sector
DEFINITION OF SOCIAL DIALOUGE
“A dialogue between employers and employees”

4. COUNTRY CASE STUDIES
Central/ Eastern Europe:
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia
Continental Europe
Austria, Belgium, France, Germany,Italy, The Netherlands,
Nordic region
Finland, Sweden
Southern Europe
Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal
UK & Ireland
UK, Scotland, Ireland

5. COUNTRY CASE STUDIES
Social dialogue in social services in Europe is under- researched
Difficulties in estimating the contribution of social services to social and economy – how to measure social value added?
Statistics about workforce often collected by different government departments so fragmented
Workforce often defined by occupation rather than sector
Large number of part time jobs in social services – often measured in full-time equivalents
Details of collective agreements – increasingly fragmented and difficult to access

6. MAIN TRENDS
Form of social services – changing from institutional to community and personalised care
Increasing focus on ‘enabling people to cope’ as compared to ‘doing things for people’
Funding of social services – major political issue – different solutions introduced - social insurance, care allowance, health and social care integration
Increased role of for-profit/not for profit private sector providers
Social services – an economic growth sector in some countries

7. Majority workers – women Part-time Use of migrant labour Low pay
LABOUR FORCE PROFILE
Majority workers – women
Part-time
Use of migrant labour
Low pay
Low status as caring not valued
Mainly poorly trained
Ageing workforce
Shortages of workers in many countries

8. SOCIAL DIALOGUE STRUCTURES
Well-defined social dialogue structures (from mid 20th century)
The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Belgium, France
Finland, Sweden, UK, Italy – (dialogue/ negotiations but term ‘social dialogue’ not used)
Newly established social dialogue structures (post-1990)
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia
Recently reformed social dialogue structures
France, Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal

9. REPRESENTATIVITY - EMPLOYERS
Several employers’ organisations covering social services
Germany, Poland, Belgium, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic
Some unified employers’ organisations
Austria, France, The Netherlands
No employers’ organisations
Bulgaria
Creation of new potential employers’ organisations
Spain

10. REPRESENTATIVITY – TRADE UNIONS
Single trade union
Germany, Czech Republic, France (groupings)
Several trade unions covering social services
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, UK

11. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS (1)
Social services sector coverage – by general collective agreements
Austria – collective agreement which covers health sector, social services, disability, child/youth & welfare services, labour market services
Finland – public social services comply with municipal service agreements
UK – covered by CA in NHS (health service) and local government but not private sector
Czech Republic – Collective Bargaining Act
Italy – National Collective Labour Agreements

12. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS (2)
Social services sector coverage – by specific sectoral collective agreements
The Netherlands – 3 CA s – disability care, childcare and older people care
Spain – CA for workers in elderly care (institutional and home care) and workers with people with disabilities
Bulgaria – CA at enterprise level with social services providers, municipal level for municipal employees, branch level for Agency of Social Assistance for employees under contract & union members
Poland – sectoral CA for municipal and county social services
Romania – Social assistance and childcare

13. Lithuania – Social services CA in 17 institutions
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS (3)
Social services sector coverage – by industry / enterprise collective agreements
Lithuania – Social services CA in 17 institutions
Poland – Sectoral agreement for local government social assistance but only few CAs
Italy – 9 in socio-charitable sector and 40 in social services sector
Czech Republic – 200 out of 2,500 social services providers have a CA

14. Basic coverage wages and some working conditions
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING – ISSUES COVERED
Basic coverage wages and some working conditions
Well developed collective agreements (CAs) cover employer/ employee relations, contracts, working hours, holidays and other absences, training, and trade union rights
Some CAs include organisational changes, work changes, redundancies

15. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING – AGE/ MATURITY OF AGREEMENTS
Collective bargaining arrangements of several countries over 50 years old, for example, Belgium, the Netherlands
Newly established systems in Central/ Eastern Europe
An established industrial relations system can inform the way in which relationships between employers and employees are managed.
Industrial relations systems - not static arrangements and are subject to change in recent decades – very important impact of austerity e.g. Greece, Poland, Portugal, Spain

16. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING COVERAGE (public, not-for- profit, for-profit)
Highest coverage 50% +
The Netherlands (100%), Austria (95%), Finland (84.7%),
Germany (52%)
20-49% coverage
Bulgaria 25%
Below 20%
Czech Republic, Poland

17. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING – ROLE OF STATE
Finland - government plays a role of looking after the ‘common good’ through employment laws, social policy reforms and tax relief
Belgium - government, as the public authority funding social enterprises, is involved in the tri-partite negotiations with employers and employees.
AUSTERITY
Spain, Greece – fundamental changes in labour legislation and move to company level bargaining
Poland - changes in Labour Code for flexible working hours – led to breakdown of social dialogue
Austria, Germany, The Netherlands, Bulgaria, Lithuania - budget cuts contribute to difficult negotiations

18. CONCLUSIONS
Social services sector – labour intensive sector so budget cuts affect workers
Increasing for profit- not for profit providers – response to personalisation of social services
Representativity of employers – limited
Representativity of workers – more extensive, often with more than 1 union
History of social dialogue establishes systems and procedures
Even in countries with national social dialogue structures social partners often excluded
Collective agreement coverage for social services – wide national variations in public sector and for-profit/ not for profit coverage lower
Increasing trend towards enterprise/ company level collective agreements where coverage is limited
Influence of austerity on collective bargaining – continues

19. RECOMMENDATIONS
Wide range of common problems facing the social services sector should be addressed through the development of social dialogue at European level
More research is needed to further understand how to support the development of social dialogue at different levels
New opportunities to promote reflection within the not-for-profit sector needed to identify employer responsibilities across Europe
More work is needed to develop systems of employer representativity
Support the creation of social dialogue pilots at national level to create effective dialogue between employers and employees
National governments and other stakeholders should commission research to explore how social services delivery could be restructured using new technology and new forms of organization.