size fits all’ model simply doesn’t work. A number of European “The ‘one countries have both highly interventionist policies and a strong record on employment generation and unemployment. The evidence is that two quite distinctive models work particularly well. First, the Anglo-Saxon model (including the UK) with its lower unemployment benefits, light touch employment protection, weaker trade unions and more limited collective bargaining. Secondly, the Scandinavian/flexicurity model (including Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Finland and Sweden) which is characterised by strong collective bargaining, high levels of employment protection and generous unemployment benefits accompanied by stringent job-search requirements and available for limited durations.” while both models achieve similar results in terms of employment and “Yet unemployment rates, some Anglo-Saxon countries have experienced considerable economic turbulence in the last two decades and an especially deep recession in 2008–09. Moreover, the flexicurity model is much more successful when it comes to social outcomes and the Anglo-Saxon model is characterised by high earnings inequality and higher levels of in-work poverty. In both the US and the UK, for example, both poverty and inequality have risen sharply from the late 1970s following the adoption of more policies. The flexicurity countries have achieved, in contrast, high employment and good growth rates with much lower levels of wage inequality and in-work poverty.” the strength of the evidence, and the persistence of economic volatility, “Given Britain should start planning moves towards the flexicurity model. Measures should include: Development of a new understanding of the positive contribution that unions • can make to workplaces and to workplace prosperity, allowing the trade union movement to play a more central role in the major issues of political economy. Fairer employment protection legislation to reduce job insecurity and • inequality.” 4.11 The Touch Stone publication also identifies that domestic and international evidence indicates also that trade unions have no significant negative consequences for labour market outcomes, and have positive effects in promoting workplace cohesion and social justice. 4.12 Congress notes with concern that the Department has not to date considered the burdens on the trade union movement, that are genuine, not rhetorical, in Northern Ireland. 4.13 Employment laws introduced from 1980 onwards have unjustly burdened unions with regulations that greatly restrict our ability to perform our function and impose significant costs e.g. the requirement to use postal ballots as outlined in the following examples:
“The ‘one size fits all’ model simply doesn’t work. A number of European countries have both highly interventionist policies and a strong record on employment generation and unemployment. The evidence is that two quite distinctive models work particularly well. First, the Anglo-Saxon model (including the UK) with its lower unemployment benefits, light touch employment protection, weaker trade unions and more limited collective bargaining. Secondly, the Scandinavian/flexicurity model (including Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Finland and Sweden) which is characterised by strong collective bargaining, high levels of employment protection and generous unemployment benefits accompanied by stringent job-search requirements and available for limited durations.” “Yet while both models achieve similar results in terms of employment and unemployment rates, some Anglo-Saxon countries have experienced considerable economic turbulence in the last two decades and an especially deep recession in 2008–09. Moreover, the flexicurity model is much more successful when it comes to social outcomes and the Anglo-Saxon model is characterised by high earnings inequality and higher levels of in-work poverty. In both the US and the UK, for example, both poverty and inequality have risen sharply from the late 1970s following the adoption of more policies. The flexicurity countries have achieved, in contrast, high employment and good growth rates with much lower levels of wage inequality and in-work poverty.” “Given the strength of the evidence, and the persistence of economic volatility, Britain should start planning moves towards the flexicurity model. Measures should include: • Development of a new understanding of the positive contribution that unions can make to workplaces and to workplace prosperity, allowing the trade union movement to play a more central role in the major issues of political economy. • Fairer employment protection legislation to reduce job insecurity and inequality.” 4.11 The Touch Stone publication also identifies that domestic and international evidence indicates also that trade unions have no significant negative consequences for labour market outcomes, and have positive effects in promoting workplace cohesion and social justice. 4.12 Congress notes with concern that the Department has not to date considered the burdens on the trade union movement, that are genuine, not rhetorical, in Northern Ireland. 4.13 Employment laws introduced from 1980 onwards have unjustly burdened unions with regulations that greatly restrict our ability to perform our function and impose significant costs e.g. the requirement to use postal ballots as outlined in the following examples:
nic_ictu_response_to_del_employment_law_review_nov_2013.docx