EU multi-level trade policy: Neither coherent nor development-friendly

In this paper, we will endeavour to explain why EU trade politics is neither coherent with its development policy nor development-friendly. This becomes even more obvious when one looks at the numerous bilateral trade agreements already signed and still in the process of negotiation. While the EU views itself as a true believer in multilateral policy, it succeeded to negotiate more Preferential Trade Agreements than the US. Against this background it is to be shown in the following that Preferential Trade Agreements (PTA) including Bilateral Investment Treaties (BIT) deserves more attention, and that the new trade strategy of the European Community is mimicking the prevalent US approach to trade politics, and thus should come under attack from trade unions and civil society movements. Finally, this paper argues that although in principle PTAs can include labour-friendly provisions more easily than at the WTO level, trade unions’ more ambivalent attitude towards PTAs is justified. However, from a development point of view, trade unions from the industrialized countries need to change their reluctance towards a fundamental criticism of ongoing trade policy, be it US or European type

The past and future of the European Social Model

This paper should be understood as a modest contribution to an emerging debate about the conclusions from the crisis and the future of the European Social Model. Inspired by the writings of Karl Polanyi, the first section of the paper discusses the nature and some of the main characteristics of the European Social Model. In the second part we summarise major changes that have been introduced in the last three decades and which amount to an erosion of the ESM. Special attention in this process is paid to the role of the European Union. The third part of the paper then discusses a possible revitalisation of the ESM based on three major projects: the renewal of the European welfare states, the reconstruction and expansion of the public sector and the democratisation of the EU and of European societies

The theoretical debate about minimum wages

Over the past several decades minimum wages have steadily gained importance. In many cases this reflects the weakness of unions which have been unable to prevent very low wages compared to the national average wage in some segments of the labour market. Changes in minimum wages can affect employment, income distribution and price level. Empirical investigations in a large number of countries and historical periods show that there is no clear relationship between minimum wages and unemployment. However, there is a broad consensus that minimum wages change income distribution in favour of low-paid workers. Price level effects of minimum wages have not been in the centre of the empirical research. In principle, for the neoclassical paradigm minimum wages have negative employment effects. These iron law of neoclassical thinking came under discussion after negative employment effects of minimum wage increases in empirical studies were difficult to find. The monopsony case was a way out of the dilemma. However, it seems to lack sufficient relevance to draw general macroeconomic conclusions. In the Keynesian paradigm nominal wages become the nominal anchor for the price level. Minimum wages compress the wage structure and lead to a change in income distribution first of all within wage earners. Minimum wage policy should be in line with the following principles: a) Minimum wages must affect a sufficient number of employees, b) they should be adjusted frequently, c) they should increase at least according to trend productivity growth plus the target inflation rate of the central bank, d) they should increase at least in line with average wages because this is the only possibility to prevent an increase in the wage gap. As long as low wages are considered to be too low in comparison to average wages, minimum wages should increase faster than average wages. In a Keynesian perspective no relevant positive or negative employment effects resulting from changes in minimum wages can be expected

Die dezentrale Unternehmensorganisation - (k)ein Terrain für neue »Produktionsbündnisse«?

In vielen Unternehmen wird heute auf externe und interne Dezentralisierung gesetzt: Unter der Leitgröße »Flexibilisierung« kommen ganzheitliche Logistikkonzepte, EDV-gestützte Informations- und Fertigungssysteme und konsensorientierte Beteiligungsmodelle zum Einsatz. Der folgende Beitrag geht insbesondere der Frage nach, ob diese Entwicklungen die Gewerkschaften zu »aktivem CoManagement « und »Produktionsbündnissen« auf der betrieblichen Ebene zwingen. Vertreten wird hier die These, daß organisationsinterne und Legitimationsprobleme der Gewerkschaften durch eine »mikropolitische Anpassung« an neuere Unternehmensstrategien nicht zu lösen sind, daß weniger ein »neuer Realismus« der Gewerkschaftspolitik auf der Tagesordnung steht als eine »neue Unbescheidenheit« - das Projekt einer egalitären wie moralisch vertretbaren Modernisierung