CEPS欧洲政策研究中心-Social-Dialogue-Articulation-and-Effectiveness-_8211-CEPS_37页_769kb

报告摘要

Summary of the EESDA Country Report for Ireland

Core Content

The Enhancing the Effectiveness of Social Dialogue Articulation in Europe (EESDA) project aims to deepen understanding of how social dialogue functions across different levels in Europe, with a specific focus on Ireland. This report provides an in-depth analysis of the national and sectoral levels of social dialogue in Ireland, based on desk research and interviews with key stakeholders, including trade unions, employer organisations, and government representatives.

Social dialogue in Ireland is defined as the interaction between public and private actors to address economic and social issues. The report outlines the evolution of this system, highlighting its historical roots in the Anglo-Saxon model of industrial relations, which was characterised by low worker participation and a reliance on state regulation. The introduction of social partnership agreements in 1987 marked a significant shift towards a more structured and collaborative approach, involving the government, employers, and trade unions.

However, the 2008 financial crisis led to the collapse of the social partnership system, with the government rejecting negotiated adjustments and shifting to a unilateral policy approach. This resulted in a decentralisation of social dialogue, with increased focus on enterprise-level and, to a lesser extent, sectoral-level collective bargaining.

Main Views and Key Findings

Cross-Sectoral Level Analysis

Actors: The two main confederations are the ICTU (trade unions) and IBEC (employers), with the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) playing a key role in enforcing employment rights.
Topics: Key issues include skills and training, health and safety, and working conditions. While these are central to European-level dialogue, in Ireland, collective bargaining is seen as the most critical issue.
Outcomes: Social dialogue outcomes are largely non-binding and depend on the voluntarist model. However, there are instances where trade unions have influenced national legislation, such as the 2017 Employment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.
Interaction: Social dialogue is increasingly decentralised, with the WRC and LEEF being key platforms. The European Semester process is used, but its impact is limited due to the lack of binding agreements.
Effectiveness: Perceived effectiveness is tied to the presence of legislation and policy influence, particularly in the public sector where bipartite agreements still exist.

Sectoral Case Studies

Commerce (Sales Agents)

Actors: ICTU and IBEC are the main actors, with sectoral unions like MANDATE playing a role.
Topics: Focus on employment rights, pensions, and collective bargaining.
Outcomes: Limited formal outcomes, but some sectoral agreements have been made.
Interaction: Interaction is mainly through LEEF and NED, with a focus on consultation rather than negotiation.
Effectiveness: Perceived as limited, with a need for stronger legal frameworks to support outcomes.

Construction (Construction Workers)

Actors: ICTU and IBEC, with sectoral unions such as BATU and OPATSI involved.
Topics: Emphasis on working conditions, health and safety, and skills training.
Outcomes: Some Sectoral Employment Orders (SEO) have been established, particularly in areas like pay and pensions.
Interaction: Increased sectoral-level dialogue through the Joint Labour Committees and SEO.
Effectiveness: Improved in recent years due to renewed interest in sectoral-level collaboration.

Education (Teachers)

Actors: ICTU (SIPTU and TUI), with a focus on public sector engagement.
Topics: Include pay, working conditions, and social policy.
Outcomes: Bilateral agreements such as the Croke Park Agreement have been achieved.
Interaction: Strong public sector dialogue through ICTU public sector committees.
Effectiveness: Perceived as effective in shaping public sector policy, though less so in addressing broader social issues.

Healthcare (Nurses)

Actors: ICTU (INMO) and IBEC, with a focus on public sector representation.
Topics: Health and safety, working conditions, and employment rights.
Outcomes: Agreements such as the Croke Park Agreement and Public Service Agreement 2018–2020 have been reached.
Interaction: Bilateral and tripartite discussions with the government.
Effectiveness: High due to the institutional memory of social partnership and the presence of strong protections in the healthcare sector.

Key Information and Recommendations

Social Dialogue in Ireland has evolved from a centralised model to a decentralised one, especially after the financial crisis.
The European Semester and European-level dialogue are used, but binding outcomes are rare.
Collective bargaining is central to the effectiveness of social dialogue in Ireland, with a need for legal frameworks to support it.
Public sector social dialogue remains more structured and effective than private sector dialogue.
Stakeholder cooperation is essential for meaningful social dialogue, and there is a need for greater involvement of all social partners, including government and civil society, in the European Semester.
Sectoral-level agreements have shown some promise, particularly in construction and healthcare, but more legal backing and policy implementation are needed.

Conclusion

The report concludes that while social dialogue in Ireland has been weakened by the financial crisis, there are still opportunities for improvement. Strengthening legal frameworks, enhancing sectoral-level cooperation, and increasing European-level engagement could help revitalise the social dialogue process in Ireland. The public sector remains a key area for effective social dialogue, with the ICTU and IBEC playing central roles, while the private sector requires more structured mechanisms to ensure meaningful outcomes.

References and Abbreviations

The report includes a list of abbreviations for key organisations and institutions, such as ICTU, IBEC, WRC, and NESC, providing clarity on the actors involved in social dialogue in Ireland.

Policy Recommendations

Develop a European framework directive on collective bargaining to strengthen social dialogue in Ireland.
Increase the legal enforceability of social dialogue outcomes.
Enhance sectoral-level cooperation and institutional support for social dialogue.
Expand the role of the NESC and LEEF in shaping national and European-level policies.
Promote bilateral and tripartite agreements in the private sector to restore trust and collaboration.