Abstract
AbstractThe paper’s main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical framework used is linked to the varieties of unionism and to the debate on the tendency towards the international homogenization or heterogenization of collective bargaining between the European Union countries. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility.
Highlights
There is a consensus in the socioeconomics literature that the Great Recession (GR) has introduced heterogeneous transformations on the industrial relations over the European Union (EU) countries, has not changed the long-term tendency of decentralization, declining union density and reducing union wage bargaining power
This paper focuses on the GR effects over the collective bargaining in the EU countries through the internal flexibility
This study aimed to analyze the effects of the GR on the internal flexibility of the EU countries, focusing the analysis on five countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, and the UK) and three sectors of economic activity
Summary
There is a consensus in the socioeconomics literature that the Great Recession (GR) has introduced heterogeneous transformations on the industrial relations over the European Union (EU) countries, has not changed the long-term tendency of decentralization, declining union density and reducing union wage bargaining power. Related to the determinants of those responses, Glassner et al (2011) and Carley and Marginson (2011) argue that the intensity of the crisis did not affect the cross-country incidence of crisis-response agreements, because measures related to short-time work and/or temporary lay-offs are instruments that existed in many countries before the crisis (such as Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands). They have not been developed during the crisis.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
