Flexibility and security: an asymmetrical relationship?
A basic ingredient of its success is the long-established acknowledgment, which nobody really ques-
tions, that labour market policy includes both economic and welfare political goals, and that these
goals are not mutually exclusive; thus ‘workfare’ and ‘welfare’ elements have always been comple-
mentary to each other (ibid.). Understanding the peculiar way of balancing these economic and social
considerations can provide a useful insight in explaining the Danish success. A lot of measures were
able to go through because the actors involved could always count on the rationality of the opposite
parties and the collectivist culture embedded in society (ibid.).
Overtime, Danish businesses and unions alike have been strongly opposed to any government
initiatives to introduce changes in the balance achieved between flexibility and security. However, the
consultative role of the social partners has been diminishing in recent years, whilst central administra-
tion is regaining power. Similarly, the disciplining elements of labour market policies and economic
considerations have been gaining a more prominent position at the expense of welfare and social
integration considerations. However, the institutional framework seems to be able to secure a certain
balancing of the two dimensions (ibid).
Spain developed its coordination mechanisms only recently. The strong state involvement in shap-
ing industrial relations, divided unions with weak collective bargaining capacity and low membership,
and the absence of a consensus culture have delayed the emergence of a process of tripartite regula-
tion of the labour market and welfare systems. As Royo (2007) points out, it was the relative failure of
government imposed labour market reforms in the second half of the 1980s and the first half of the
1990s, and continuous confrontations with the unions demanding higher wages, that convinced Span-
ish employers to develop a partnership approach with unions in order to address these shortcomings.
This increased cooperation among the social actors was also the result of a change in attitudes of
Spanish employers, who realised that, in order to adjust more flexibly to changing market conditions
and address the challenges of European integration, they needed the cooperation of workers and
unions in establishing social peace. They thus became willing to accept greater employment stability
in return for wage moderation and more internal flexibility at the workplace. Unions, on their part,
weakened by the collapse of social bargaining in 1986, were eager to extend their influence beyond
their shrinking core constituency and regain their capacity to influence policy making (ibid.).
Page • 65