Treaty text blocks major reform of social dialogue

Date: 14/05/1998

By Simon Coss

EUROPEAN Commission officials have conceded that it will not be possible to make fundamental changes to the EU's 'social dialogue' procedure between unions and employers without revising the Union's founding treaties.

Social Affairs Commissioner Pádraig Flynn is set to present a report to the full Commission next week on how social dialogue has been working since it was integrated into EU law by the 1992 Maastricht Treaty.

In recent years, the system has been criticised by representatives of small businesses on the grounds that they are not adequately represented in talks, by MEPs because there is no legal requirement for the European Parliament to be informed of how negotiations are progressing, and by governments who complain they do not have sufficient influence in the process.

But Flynn's aides say the Commissioner will not be able to tackle these fundamental issues in his forthcoming report, arguing that such changes can only be made by governments when the EU treaties are revised and updated.

The last opportunity to do this was during the Intergovernmental Conference which drew up the Amsterdam Treaty. "They had the opportunity to change the treaty and they didn't do it," said one official.

As he will not be able to tackle the underlying problems in the social dialogue, Flynn will instead content himself with presenting a progress report on how the system has evolved since Maastricht came into force.

He is expected to say that so-called 'sectoral' talks, where workers and employers meet to negotiate on pay and conditions on an industry-by-industry basis, have proved to be particularly successful.

This approach differs from the 'traditional' social dialogue where the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the private employers' confederation UNICE and the CEEP, representing public sector employers, try to thrash out across-the-board deals.

Flynn is also likely to suggest streamlining the social dialogue by reducing the number of EU institutional committees involved in the process. He will, for example, probably call for the standing committee on employment to be reformed.

The report is also likely to raise the issue of labour relations in the central and eastern European countries lining up to join the Union. Many are still in the process of transition from Soviet-style central planning to western-style market economies. In the past, few structures for employer-employee relations existed as both sides were considered to be working together for the good of the state.

"In some of these countries the social dialogue is really not very advanced," said a Commission expert.