Aliki Mouriki
8.2. Social dialogue and the representativity crisis:
who represents the precarious workforce and the
“outsiders”?
Can there be win-win solutions in the context of labour market reforms? This implies that not
only large companies and the “insiders” benefit from the deal but all the stakeholders as well: the
“outsiders”, small firms and society at large.
Gathering support in favour of far reaching reforms presupposes a broad coalition of heteroge-
neous forces that will result from a process of social consultation. As the European Commission has
put it (2007b, p.18), “the active involvement of social partners is key to ensure that fl exicurity delivers benefits for
all (...). Integrated flexicurity policies are often found in countries where the dialogue —and above all the trust- between
socialpartners, and between socialpartners andpublic authorities, has played an important role”.
Perhaps the most fundamental challenge in the social dialogue process is to persuade the rep-
resentatives of divergent and often conflicting interests to sit around the same table and contem-
plate the prospect of mutual concessions. Workers’ representatives have to be convinced that labour
market reforms, and especially enhancing flexibility can be mutually beneficial and will not put into
jeopardy basic employment and welfare rights, including decent pay and working conditions, whilst
employers’ representatives must be reassured that their concessions will be cost-effective and sustain-
able, and will not harm their competitiveness in the long run. Social partners’ organizations need also
to overcome their internal divisions and contradictions. Unions, in particular, need to address the se-
curity needs of the flexible workforce too, perhaps at the expense of the “insiders”. Otherwise, they
risk seeing their membership shrink even further and their influence diminish.
The precise content of the flexicurity agenda and the best ways of implementing it is a good
starting point for the social partners to engage in a meaningful dialogue, the scope of which will ulti-
mately depend on their genuine willingness to seek present day solutions to urgent problems. If there
is no such thing as a common agenda, whether it is called “flexicurity” or “labour market reform”, or
“Lisbon strategy”, or just “response to the crisis” (as seems to be the case in the Southern European
countries), one needs to be devised before it is too late to influence the course of events.
Page • 102