European Social Policy Research Articles

THE COLLECTIVE INTEREST OF WORKERS IN EUROPEAN UNION LAW

The notion of the ‘collective interest of workers’, i.e. the interest of a group of workers, cannot be found in European Union labour law. Although collective representation and collective bargaining are important pillars of the European social model, this absence of the notion can be explained by the (ultra)liberal market philosophy of the European project, which favours an individualistic approach to labour relations and an irenic conception of collective labour relations. Nevertheless, the notion of ‘collective interest’ can be found in other contexts, referring to the interests of the members of an entity or the users of a service. This idea infuses the EU collective labour law. Actors defending the interests of a group of workers are recognised as legitimate actors, albeit partial and fluctuating. It appears that, without being named, the collective interest of workers was first established in the functioning of the ECSC and the EEC, which became the EC and then the EU. The role of trade unions was institutionalised: they were involved in the development of European social policy. It was only at a later stage that Community law, and then EU law, took up the interests of workers as a group within the company, in the context of the harmonisation of legislations on the prerogatives of their representatives.

LATE WORKING LIFE IN THE TRIPLE TRANSITION AND THE GLOBAL PERMACRISIS

Abstract Late working life faces multiple challenges in the triple transition of demographic, technological and environmental change and the global permacrisis. This contribution provides a conceptual framework for research on the significance of extended late work for the sustainability, equity, inclusion, and productivity of aging societies, based on an understanding of the three major long-term shifts as a complex triple transition with potentials and challenges for societies, economies, employers, and individuals. This triple transition is embedded in an ongoing and even accelerating societal and economic permacrisis with increased social risks and limited predictability, in which resilience – of economies, life-courses and welfare states - gains importance, while the dominant tetrad of sustainability, equity, inclusion and productivity remains on the European social and economic policy agenda. The presentation introduces a review of European policy reports on aging and late work and introduces results from the research programme EIWO (www.eiwoproject.org) based on Swedish register information and European survey data to illustrate trends and gaps in European late work, research, and policy. The presentation discusses age integration of life and work courses as a systematic strategy to promote quality of life as well as social sustainability, equity, inclusion and productivity and resilience. Participants will gain an understanding of the conceptualization and implementation of gerontological multi-level research on the macro- and micro-social relevance of late working life in the triple transition and the global permacrisis.

Reviving Social Europe: a critical assessment of EU social policy in the wake of multiple crises

The concept of "Social Europe" encompasses the European Union's social policy framework. This paper argues that the financial crisis of 2007-2009, the subsequent Euro crisis, and the ensuing austerity measures diverted significant attention away from Social Europe. This neglect led to declining living standards, reductions in public services, and the emergence of critical challenges such as the gig economy. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated these issues, prompting a renewed focus on Social Europe by EU institutions. This paper conducts a chronological analysis of recent legislative (acquis) and non-legislative (soft power) instruments implemented to address these challenges and assesses the prospects of Social Europe in the near term.

"Social question" in political philosophy of N.A. Berdyaev, S.N. Bulgakov and S.L. Frank: comparative analysis of concepts

The difference in organizational forms in social policy is caused by different economic and political reasons and different political and philosophical approaches to social problems. The hierarchy of values defines opinions on the social question and ideas about the appropriate architecture of social policy. The decisions that laid the foundations for social policy in Europe were made in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and their logic resembles the philosophy of the “Christian socialism” most. The purpose of the article is to identify and compare the attitude of Russian authors who were closest to Christian socialism towards the social question and their approaches to solving it. The key works of the authors on the social question were studied. The comparative historical approach, hermeneutics, discourse analysis, and institutional analysis were used. All authors tend to problematize both the social question and its' solutions, rather than offer their own proposals. All three talk about the importance of human internal development and criticize socialist ideas about environmental determinism and human renewal through mechanical reorganization of the economy. All authors moved from Marxism to its criticism, although Berdyaev's views shifted in his later works to the left, to the most radical position of the three thinkers, to the conviction that capitalism has to be abolished, which he blames for oppression and exploitation. Bulgakov sympathizes with the logic of economic organization in socialism, but considers it possible to change economic relations while maintaining the political system. Frank is convinced that limited social reforms within the framework of a market economy are sufficient to provide social support to those in need. Berdyaev and Bulgakov think that justice is the most important value, while Frank thinks that duty is. Berdyaev and Bulgakov follow the key arguments of Christian socialism, and Frank - those of liberal conservatism.

Up to the Task? Post-Pandemic European Social Policy

Up to the Task? Post-Pandemic European Social Policy

Child-related Social Policies in Europe during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract Looking at core features of child and family related spending and policy design, and covering five domains of policy, the paper offers new empirical evidence and an original perspective for better understanding how EU countries and the UK responded to the needs of children and families during the pandemic and how to classify responses in terms of child-centredness. The paper is driven by a concept of child-centredness to examine developments from March to December 2020 in five policy fields: income support, food assistance, early childcare and education services, school opening and support for parental care-giving. The analysis shows strong variation across countries in terms of how active they were and what fields they were active in. One very striking commonality, though, is that the most popular field of policy action was in resourcing parental care of children at home, through paid leaves usually. A related finding is that there was little prioritising of children for most kinds of actions. Thirdly, in terms of national patterning those countries that were generous spenders on this field of policy prior to the pandemic were most child-centred in their response and there are few if any exceptions to this.

The Future of Social Policy in Europe

Social policy in the European Union (EU) remains sidelined in the debates on the future of Europe. In the last decade, EU has faced numerous crises having significant repercussions for its social policies, including immigration waves, the Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic. As an area of direct concern to EU citizens, with its features on employment, education/training, non-discrimination and equality bearing crucial implications for their daily lives, social policy should be re-considered from an angle that encompasses the citizens’ perspective and effectively addresses the major challenges it faces in the new global order. The main objective of this study is to explore the implications of these challenges for EU social policy, which in turn, has a key role in shaping the future of the EU.

Taxation and the Polanyian forms of integration in socialist and postsocialist Hungary

AbstractReciprocity, redistribution, and (market) exchange were the “forms of integration” put forward by Karl Polanyi as a “special tool box” to investigate relations between economy and society where the principle of price‐forming markets is not (yet) dominant. Though intended as the basis for a comparative alternative to the universalist assumptions of mainstream (neoclassical) economics, Polanyi did not make significant use of these concepts to analyze the noncapitalist societies of his day. This article investigates his Hungarian homeland, which in four decades of socialism evolved from Stalinist central planning to a mixed economy in which (re)distribution was supplemented by the expansion of market exchange, with personal taxation playing a negligible role. The constellation of (re)distribution and market has changed significantly in the postsocialist (neoliberal) era, but Scandinavian‐type societal reciprocity has remained elusive. Long after admission to the European Union, Hungarian fiscal and social policy regimes are distinctive as the market form of integration combines with low taxation and political interventions to (re)distribute resources (including transfer income from the EU) to support the formation of a national bourgeoisie. Theoretically, the perspective of the socialist Karl Polanyi is contrasted with that of the liberal institutionalist economist János Kornai.

Regional inequalities and transnational solidarity in the European Union

Amid the eurocrisis, scholars and policy makers sought to establish an EU-wide layer of social policy, aiming to ensure common standards through the EU and to provide a degree of common social protection. While public support for European social policy has been extensively studied, we don't know how regional (i.e., subnational) inequalities relate to preferences for European social policy. We analyse the effect of regional differences in socio-economic and institutional contexts on public preferences for European social policy in general and support for European unemployment insurance in particular. Combining original survey data collected in 2018 in 12 European countries with regional-level economic and political indicators, we find that regional-level self-interest impacts individual preferences but that the effect is not always clear-cut. Contrary to expectations, people in richer regions are more supportive of EU social policy than people in poorer regions, while citizens of politically more autonomous regions tend to have a generally more positive view of EU social policy. A conjoint experiment on support for different policy variants of European unemployment insurance sheds light on these counterintuitive findings: Citizens in richer regions are indeed more supportive of EU-level social policy, but only when it has limited redistributive implications and instead affects standards; conversely citizens in poorer regions are willing to forego their opposition to EU social policy for redistributive programs.

Are European social spending policies effective in the fight against gender inequality?

ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to analyse the factors that influence a greater or lesser decrease in gender inequality, paying special attention to the role of social policy. To this end, a measure of inequality in the distribution of income between men and women has been developed and a panel of data has been estimated for 33 European countries and a time period of 15 years. The results show that income inequality in general, as measured by the Gini index, and gender inequality based on differences in the distribution of income between men and women are closely linked, and that retirement benefits and women’s educational attainment are the tools that most improve gender equity in income distribution.

Towards rebuilding collective bargaining? Poland in the face of contemporary challenges and changing European social policy

AbstractThe article examines the existing legal framework for collective bargaining in Poland with the situation, strategies and opinions of social partners and discusses the result – the coverage by collective agreements (approximately 12%). Next, de lege ferenda proposals and expectations for the future are put forward.

The financial, health, and social crisis in Europe. Developments and challenges from the Social Work perspective.

We conducted a descriptive documentary review study using a sequential design of the assessable indicators of European social policies developed between 2008 and 2019. The period between the 2008 financial crisis and the current COVID-19 health crisis was studied using Eurostat indicators to compare variables related to social risk and the governmental response offered by the sample countries to provide social protection. We attempted to understand the current crisis by examining the key social factors and potential connections with previous trends in the development of social policies in the European Union. On this basis, we identified effective strategies for managing the crisis. The data suggest that, in general, the European social protection model has not prevented the growth of inequality and social risk, thus calling for new ways and approaches to the design, implementation, and assessment of public policies to ensure their effectiveness. These new strategies involve re-envisioning social work as a key profession and discipline to promote social transformation.

What distinguishes radical right welfare chauvinism? Excluding different migrant groups from the welfare state

Literature posits that mainstream right-wing parties have adopted restrictive positions on immigrants’ entitlements to social rights to avoid losing votes to populist radical right-wing parties (PRRPs). Although studies recognize that this co-option is only partial, we know little about the remaining differences between PRRPs’ and mainstream right-wing parties’ welfare chauvinism strategies. This article fills this knowledge gap by comparing how mainstream and populist right-wing governments approach different migrant groups’ entitlements to social rights. The article combines an event history analysis of the Determinants of International Migration Policy database with a qualitative examination of the indexation of family benefits in selected European Countries to compare PRRPs’ and mainstream parties’ impact on the social rights of different migrant groups. The results reveal that the main difference between PRRPs and mainstream right-wing parties in Western Europe is the formers’ support for restrictions on intra-EU migrants’ entitlements to social benefits. This finding has important implications for the study of the European social policy agenda, as PRRPs’ increasing politicization of intra-EU migrants’ access to social rights may compromise the future of intra-European solidarity.

Redefining Vulnerability: A New Social “Philosophy” of European Union During COVID–19 Pandemic

Social policy is based, since its inception, on a certain “philosophy” regarding the desirable social model, encompassing religious, political and social values, as well as appropriate objectives and tools for protecting vulnerable target groups. This philosophy differs both geographically and historically. Thus, European social policies have a specific axiological foundation comparing to social models developed on other continents. Even if relatively stable, this foundation is continuously redefined and, therefore, the European social model is an evolving concept. Our paper analyses how social vulnerability and vulnerable groups are redefined within the European social policies, during Covid-19 pandemic. If in recent decades the European social policies have tried to implement more selective and means-tested social protection, the approach to social protection during the pandemic is different, there are indications of increasing the universalisation of social benefits for covering new vulnerabilities. In our analysis, the pandemic accentuated some pre-existing trends to redefine the predilect target groups and their social protection: larger decommodification, protection for atypical employment, social security schemes covering new risks, and instruments for a new work-life balance. At the same time, European social protection policies tend towards synergy with actions in the fields of digitalisation and ecology. Are these changes temporary or will they last even after the pandemic? Of course, it is difficult to make predictions, but we believe that some of them anticipate possible structural reforms of more humane, less biopolitical European social protection policies. Our analysis is based on data from social statistics, official documents and public speeches.

Analysis of the Composition and Trends in the European Union Labor Market Between 2010 and 2020

This article aims, through research methods such as quantitative and qualitative analysis (empirical and descriptive), as well as comparison and interpretation, to highlight the composition and trends in the EU labor market between 2010-2020, given the link and mutual conditioning between socio-economic phenomena and the labor market, as part of the realities and trends of European social policy. Thus, the aim was to identify the differences between the Member States of the European Union, but also compared to the EU average, by analyzing the performance and the degree of fulfillment of the indicators pre-established by public policies, as specific objectives of social policy, aiming to ensure an adequate and non-discriminatory framework so that all citizens have equal access to resources and opportunities.In order to present the trend in the evolution of employment, we analyzed the indicators regarding the active population, activity rates, employment rate, employed population, unemployment, unemployment rate, inactive population, but also the Job vacancy rate (annual average). Last but not least, we analyzed a delicate issue at the level of some member states of the European Union, highlighting both shortcomings in the transition from the education system to the labor market, as well as shortcomings in terms of employment of a category of population, namely NEET rate.

Trends in European Integration in the Field of Social Policy

This article traces the development of the European social policy from its minimalist role provided for in the Treaties of Rome, through the neoliberal orientation, especially in the financial crisis of 2008, to the trend towards a socio-investment perspective in response to the crisis caused by the Kovid19 pandemic. Current EU social policy applies a new approach that emphasizes the need to invest in education and training and the provision of quality social services throughout the life course of people - from early childhood to old age. It relies on the mutual enrichment of national and supranational forms of social protection.

Social policy and the judicial making of Europe: capital, social mobilisation and minority social influence

AbstractThis article puts forward a cohesive narrative to explain the contribution of European social policy to the judicial making of Europe. By making a case for the inclusion of social policy as part of the discourse on the constitutional practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union, together with focusing on a socio-legal deconstruction of four seminal social policy judgments of the Court (Defrenne II, Von Colson, Harz and Francovich), the article undertakes a systematic approach to tracing the contribution of the field, and more specifically of its labour and non-discrimination law strands. To formulate its socio-legal analysis, the article adopts an explanatory framework, which draws on Bourdieu’s concepts of capital and field, the theory of legal mobilisation and Moscovici’s minority social influence, and which is applied to the selected judgments as a case-study. The framework enables the analysis to shed light on the dynamics between stakeholders in the social dimension of the European legal field and to persuasively showcase how social policy case-law, despite its sui generis dynamics, merits to have a place in the conversations surrounding the transformation of Europe.

English ‘iron rod’ welfare versus Italian ‘colander’ welfare: understanding the intra-European mobility strategies of unaccompanied young migrants and refugees

The experiences of unaccompanied young migrants and refugees challenge the idea of a common European asylum policy but also show that traditional welfare typologies used to account for differences in welfare across states fail to account for the lived experiences of this group. They do not consider the shifting categorizations of young migrants in institutional terms, nor how the stratification of their social rights plays out over place and time. Moreover, current welfare typologies give inadequate attention to the increasing intersection of the labour market and opportunities for regularization, the relative importance and role of the state in the welfare mix, and the nexus of access to welfare and immigration enforcement. This article draws on qualitative longitudinal research in England and Italy to argue that rather than experiencing welfare through the lens of Liberal (England) versus Conservative or Mediterranean (Italy) regimes, unaccompanied young migrants and refugees in these countries are better understood as navigating different systems of ‘iron rod welfare’ and ‘colander welfare’. In England, the nexus between welfare and legal status is policed by an iron rod on one side of which exists a plethora of social rights, but on the other the risk of a proactive detention and deportation regime. In Italy, meanwhile, the holes of the colander denote gaps in protection but also possibilities to navigate alternative welfare strategies independently of the state. The ability to act independently of the state is an important but under-theorized capability for this population, for whom the state is a more ambiguous actor than is traditionally considered in European social policy.

The resilience of maternalism in European welfare states

ABSTRACT This article goes in search of contemporary maternalism in European social policy. It first undertakes a review of both the meaning and forms of maternalism querying how scholarship and policy framed maternalism in Europe and, secondly, assesses its significance in today’s European welfare state. The article argues that maternalism has been crowded out from the analysis of contemporary social policy by a host of other concepts and frameworks that downgrade gender equality. However, maternalism continues to have relevance and application in policy. It is a different – less explicit – maternalism as compared with the past. The maternalism that we see today is more implicit in the sense that it is the result of a new familialism which emphasises both women’s and men’s changed roles but in a gender-neutral framing. The ‘problem’ as policy sees it is to get men more involved and active in the rearing of their children and the main way of doing that is not through major redistributive or other structural change measures but through a mild set of incentives oriented to cultural change. At the same time, women are being repositioned more centrally between family and employment but they have to do both. Policy now tends to speak in gender-neutral terms or, when it does use gender-specific terms. These lack any radical purchase.

Income protection for self-employed and non-standard workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Based on original evidence from the European Social Policy Network (ESPN), the article investigates the extent to which self‐employed and non‐standard workers, who are less protected by “ordinary” social protection, were included in “extraordinary” income protection and job retention schemes during the COVID‐19 pandemic in the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom. When the crisis hit, countries quickly introduced unprecedented emergency income replacement measures for the self‐employed. Nevertheless, most of these schemes provided only basic support through lump sums and were, in some cases, subject to a variety of eligibility conditions. Non‐standard workers were in general included in job retention schemes, but substantial gaps remained in some countries. The article discusses how such gaps were addressed in five EU Member States. The article concludes by highlighting some policy pointers for better and more adequate “extraordinary” income protection for the self‐employed and non‐standard workers in times of crisis.