15.2.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/153

1.1

The Committee highlights the fact that participation and involvement are essential in order to develop, shape and implement policy changes and structural reforms properly.

The Committee emphasises that:

1.2

The Committee emphasises the importance of stronger European economic governance, to make monetary union work better and in the interests of all. However, there is a pressing need to draw lessons from reality. Social and civil dialogue are essential in this respect, covering economic issues and the public finances as well as social cohesion.

1.3

The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal for a scoreboard and benchmarking in relation to employment, as well as the monitoring of national job plans in a structured way. The European social partners should be closely involved in establishing the scoreboard and benchmarks, as well as the criteria for evaluating the national job plans.

1.4

In relation to wage-setting, the Committee points out to the Commission that wages and wage bargaining come within the remit of the social partners, as is indeed laid down in the EU Treaty.

1.5

The Committee therefore calls on European policy makers to embed social dialogue and participation in the structure of the various policy processes that form part of the Europe 2020 process. Experience on the ground shows that the focus has shifted from the national to the European level, weakening the role and quality of social consultation and participation at national level.

1.6

In the context of the European Semester, the Committee proposes that the European social partners (through the European social dialogue) and organised civil society should be involved at an early stage in the preparation of the Annual Growth Survey. Such involvement is also urgently needed in relation to establishing the priorities for the employment policy guidelines and the broad economic policy guidelines.

2.1

On 30 May, the European Commission issued a communication on Action for stability, growth and jobs (COM(2012) 299). The communication comes at a critical stage in the European Semester, which begins with the Annual Growth Survey produced by the Commission and ends with the country-specific recommendations approved by the European Council.

2.2

At the request of the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee agreed to produce an opinion on the Communication on Action for stability, growth and jobs. This opinion focuses on a specific aspect, in particular on the common responsibility of the social partners and organised civil society and on the contribution they can provide. The EESC underlines the role they can play in formulating and applying policies to relaunch economic growth, create more and better jobs and restore financial stability.

In this opinion, and following an analysis of certain policy fields, the Committee intends to make recommendations as to how the social partners and the representatives of organised civil society can play a greater, better, decisive role in the European Semester. As a next step, the Committee will produce an opinion on the Annual Growth Survey 2013 in which all major policy areas brought up by the Commission will be analysed.

2.3

The Committee notes first of all that the Commission communication refers to the role of the social partners and organised civil society in relation to only three subjects, namely human capital, pay and the general issue of ‘change’ (see further point 4.1). In this respect, the Committee wishes to emphasise at once that social and civil dialogue cover many other areas and issues, including innovation, economic reform, industrial policy, sustainable development, entrepreneurship, more and better jobs, combating poverty and social protection. In this opinion, the Committee will therefore begin by highlighting the importance of social and civil dialogue (see section 3), before examining the three specific areas in which the Commission communication refers expressly to the role of consultation and dialogue (section 4). In the final section, the Committee makes further suggestions on how to embed consultation and participation in the structure of the Europe 2020 policy agenda.

3.1

The Committee stresses that participation and involvement are not a luxury: they are essential in order to develop, shape and implement policy changes and structural reforms properly.

3.2

The Committee specifically points out to the Commission, the European Council and other policy makers at both European and national level that social and civil dialogue must be strictly observed. This is not about making fine-sounding pronouncements about the importance of participation and then implementing the policy that was planned in the first place, without taking account of the contribution and proposals of the social actors on the ground. That sort of behaviour leads to a loss of social capital and trust, ultimately resulting in a breakdown in both economic and social communication.

3.3

The ‘horizontal clause’ (Article 9 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) is also relevant in this respect. That clause requires the European Union to take account of specific social criteria and objectives in defining and implementing its policies and activities. Specifically, those are the promotion of a high level of employment, adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, a high level of education and training and a high level of protection of health. Participation of social actors in policy is a logical and necessary consequence of the horizontal clause.

4.1

The Committee notes that in three places, the Commission communication points to the importance and the role of the social partners and of organised civil society. The Committee is referring specifically to the following passages from the communication:

4.2

First of all, the Committee welcomes the Commission's decision to involve the social partners and social organisations, at least in the three specific areas mentioned above. However, the Committee wishes to make the following comments.

4.3

The Committee emphasises the importance of stronger European economic governance, to make monetary union work better and in the interests of all. However, there is a pressing need to draw lessons from reality. If a particular economic policy is holding back growth and various European economies are back in recession, threatening both stability (since deficits and debt ratios remain high) and social cohesion (with high and growing unemployment), policy makers must take that seriously and must change policy course. Social dialogue helps produce a better policy supported by the society at large, rather than stubbornly persisting, against one's better judgement, with a policy that has proved to have harmful consequences for the economy, public finances and social cohesion.

4.4

The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal for a scoreboard and benchmarking in relation to employment, as well as the monitoring of national job plans in a structured way. The European social partners should be closely involved in establishing the scoreboard and benchmarks, as well as the criteria for evaluating the national job plans.

4.5

The third area in which the Commission specifically mentions the role and involvement of social actors and the social partners concerns pay, in relation to which, in the words of the Commission, the social partners should be ‘consulted’ on the reform of wage-setting systems. In this respect, the Committee wishes to draw the Commission's attention to the fact that in many Member States, not only wages and wage-bargaining, but even the wage-setting system itself, come within the autonomous remit of the social partners, which negotiate and conclude collective agreements in this respect. This autonomous negotiation role of the social partners cannot be reduced to mere consultation. Nor can the right to take part in dialogue be restricted to a mere advisory role. Indeed, the autonomy of the social partners and of social dialogue is confirmed in Articles 152 and 153(5) TFEU, which, among other things, state the principle that the EU must respect the national systems of industrial relations. In this context, ‘consultation’ of the social partners in relation to, for example, reforms to indexation mechanisms is wholly inadequate and even inappropriate, particularly where, in the relevant national model of social dialogue, such indexation mechanisms are negotiated and agreed by the social partners themselves by way of collective agreements.

On the substance of this issue, the Committee wonders whether the Commission is not attributing rather too much importance to the role played by downward adjustments of wages. Closer analysis of the country-specific recommendations that accompany the Commission communication shows that, of the 17 Member States that have received Commission recommendations concerning pay, 16 of them have recommendations aimed at reducing wage growth, whether by reforming indexation, limiting minimum wages, decentralising wage bargaining or increasing the flexibility of the lowest wages. However, the imbalances that characterise European monetary union are primarily structural and are mainly linked to the fact that globalisation has different effects on different members of the monetary union (Footnote: Reference to IMF Working Paper 12/236, External Imbalances in the Euro Area, 2012). The fact remains that the competition with low-wage countries cannot be won by reducing wages.

5.1

Finally, the Committee calls on European policy makers to embed social dialogue and the idea of social participation in the structure of the various policy processes. Experience on the ground shows that for a number of reasons, not least the institutional reforms that the Commission keeps making to these policy processes, European decision-making is having more and more impact on consultation and social participation at national level. In this context, the Committee finds it absolutely unacceptable for consultation and social participation at national level to be reduced to a sham, by hollowing out national traditions of consultation or even disregarding them altogether (there is a problem of the timing that must be taken into account in relation to consultation procedures, and the drafting of reform programmes is centralised in the hands of national bodies that have little or no link with social and participatory dialogue).

5.2

In line with the timetable of the European Semester, the Committee makes the following proposals: