Humanize work and increase profitability?

Eurofound — European Foundation For The Improvement Of Living And Working Conditions

Description

Direct participation in organizational change viewed by the social partners in Europe
Working conditions

Sujets

• Competitiveness
• Workers' control
• Sociologie, société et politique

Informations

• Publié par: EUROFOUND-EUROPEAN-FOUNDATION-FOR-THE-IMPROVEMENT-OF-LIVING-AND-WORKING-CONDITIO
• Nombre de lectures: 19
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 4 Mo

Extrait

European Foundation
for the Improvement of
Living and Working Conditions
Humanize Work
and
Increase Profitability?
Direct participation in
organisational change
viewed by the social
partners in Europe
Loughlinstown House,
Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland Humanize Work
and
Increase Profitability?
Direct participation in organisational change
viewed by the social partners in Europe
EF/95/21/EN • * • European Foundation
k Cri • for the Improvement of
• JL • * Living and Working Conditions
Humanize Work
and
Increase Profitability?
Direct participation in organisational change
viewed by the social partners in Europe
by
Ida Regalia
Loughlinstown House, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland
Tel: ( + 353) 1 282 6888 Fax: ( + 353) 1 282 6456 Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1995
ISBN 92-827-5086-8
© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 1995
For rights of translation or reproduction, applications should be made to the Director,
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions,
Loughlinstown House, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Printed in Ireland CONTENTS
Summary 1
1. Introduction 11
2 Research Problems and Methodology3
2.1 Direct Participation: the EPOC Definition
2.2 DP as a Positive-Sum Game?4
2.3 General Assumptions and Open Questions5
2.4 The Adopted Methodology8
3 Defining and Understanding Direct Participation 2
3.1 Understanding DP: the Employers'Organisations
3.2g DP: the Trade Unions 29
3.3 Commenting the EPOC Definition 33
3.4 Aims of DP in the View of the Social Partners6
4. The Tssue of Regulation 45
4.1 Existing Patterns for Regulating Workplace Participation 4
4.2e social partner position on regulation 54
4.3 Wich kind of regulation?8
5. Diffusion and Relevance of DP 61
5.1n of DP: A Quantitative Appraisal
5.2n of DP: The Most Widespread Forms6
5.3 The Introduction of DP
5.4e importance of DP on the policy agenda 7
6. The Impact of DP 77
6.1et of DP: the Economic Effects
6.2e Impact of DP: Social Effects 81
6.3 Thet of DP: Organisational Effects4
6.4e Impact of DP: Effects on Representative Participation and 86
Industrial Relations
7. Activities and Prospects 93
7.1. Past and Present Initiatives on DP
7.2. Contacts and Agreements Between the Partners6
7.3. Prospects for the Future8
8 Conclusions 101
8.1 Expected and unexpected results
8.2 Common trends and logics of differentiation 103
8.3 Expectations for the future and open questions5
References7
Annexes 11
1 Schedule of Questions
2 Synoptic Tables9 Foreword
The 1990s have seen a strong revival of the debate on work organisation,
optimal use of human resources and direct participation of employees. The
MIT-study on "lean production" suggested that the competitive advantage
of Japanese car manufacturers was mainly based on their superior work
organisation and strong involvement of employees in all key areas of activity
of a company: design, planning, effective quality management and
permanent improvement programmes combined with a lifetime employment
guarantee, were key features of "lean production" in Japan.
The reaction in Europe was almost immediate. The Social Partners and
governments in most European countries started a national debate; on the
European level then Commission and some sectoral trade unions
organised conferences and workshops. The debate was further advanced,
as Europe was slipping at the beginning of the 1990s into its worst post war
recession, demonstrating the need for structural adjustment.
However, many question remain still unanswered. What is the diffusion of
different forms of direct participation in Europe? How does the European
experiments on directn e.g. in France (group d'expression),
Sweden (Volvo experiments on group work) and Germany (Humanisierung
der Arbeitslebens) compare with the Japanese approach? What are the
interrelations between increased competitiveness based on new forms of
work organisation and the quality of working life? Do these new
developments only represent a new rationalisation strategy with negative
impact on employment? To what extent does direct participation diminish
the influence of employee representatives and trade unions on the Company
level?
In order to fill this information and discussion gap the European Foundation
initiated the EPOC project (Employee direct Participation in Organisational
Change). The objective is to provide information and stimulate debate
between the Social Partners and the European Union institutions. Within
this informal consultation, the possibilities for this topic to be included in the
agenda of the 'European Social Dialogue" could be explored and the extent
the European Commission might support progress in organisational change
ofn business in programmes of vocational training. The final aim
of the Foundation would be to assist the different parties in developing
forms of organisational change which would enhance competitiveness,
working conditions and the appropriate participation of employees.
VII The objective of this study is to describe and analyse the perception of
direct participation in organisational change by representatives of
organisations of social partners in Europe. Nearly 200 interviews have been
conducted in the 15 countries of European Union. The investigation throws
some light on the ways in which both sides of industry in Europe approach
an uncertain and controversial topic beyond the easy rhetoric of common
sense.
Dr. Hubert Krieger
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions
VIII