The transformation of industrial relations in Romania at the micro level

Subsequent to the collapse of the communist regime in 1989, Romania has undergone political and economic changes which have determined radical changes in industrial relations (IR). Nevertheless, ten years after the fall of the communist regime, the old and new elements still exist side by side, although labour legislation and an institutional framework similar to those in developed countries has been adopted. It appears that communist legacies, such as the specific economic and political context which exists in Romania, the lack of experience of all the actors involved in IR and also the current international context have all had an important impact on the emerging IR system in Romania. Nevertheless, there has been very little empirical research into how the IR system works in practice and how terms and conditions of employment are established and implemented at company level. The aim of this paper is, firstly, to present a new perspective on Crouch’s exchange theory of IR (1993) and, secondly, to use this approach to analyse empirical findings regarding the changes which have occurred in IR at the company level in Romania since 1989. The empirical findings will be presented for each of the six categories investigated, analysing the development of IR since 1989. After that, a synthesis of the findings will be presented in an attempt to answer the research questions indicated in the next section

Overview of industrial relations in Romania

Industrial relations (IR) have been rather extensively investigated in many eastern European countries in the last 15 years, but there is still very limited information about Romania. This article presents an overview of the main IR institutions, concerning both the legal framework as well as their operation in practice, in Romania. It examines the role of the state, employers associations, trade unions and collective bargaining from a historical perspective. In the final part, the changes that have occurred after 1989 in these selected parameters are discussed in the broader eastern European context. The study is based on primary data collected in 2000 and 2001 which aimed to identify what has changed since 1989 regarding the IR actors (i.e. state, employers associations and trade unions) and the relations between them. Seven officials from national institutions were interviewed: a government representative involved in the establishing of the Labour Code; two officials from employers associations; two trade union officials; the secretary of the Economic and Social Council; and the representative in Romania of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). An ILO official responsible for the activities of employers associations throughout central and eastern European countries was also interviewed. In addition, 25 (one-to-one) interviews were conducted in a total of fifteen companies which were studied during the research. Thirteen interviewees were managers or employers (three employers, three top managers, three human resource managers and four line managers), while twelve were employees (four shop stewards, seven employees and an unemployed person). Hence, data triangulation is used to ensure the reliability of the empirical evidenc

Collective Bargaining in Eastern Europe: Case Study Evidence from Romania

This article compares collective bargaining practices in Romania after 1989 with those in continental Western Europe. It focuses on the structures, processes and outcomes of collective bargaining in four large chemical companies; comparisons are also made with other Eastern European countries. Unexpectedly, the findings point to an increase in state intervention in establishing terms and conditions of employment after 1989. The development of collective bargaining in Romania appears to follow a nation-specific path, with the continuance of certain pre-1989 features, such as unclear boundaries between trade unions and management

Collective bargaining practices in Eastern Europe: case study evidence from Romania

"Trotz einer Vielzahl von Studien über die Entwicklungen der Tarifverhandlungen in Osteuropa in den letzten Jahren herrscht Uneinigkeit darüber, inwieweit die osteuropäischen Verhandlungspraktiken mit den westeuropäischen übereinstimmen. Dieses Papier trägt zu dieser Debatte bei, indem es die Ergebnisse empirischer Analysen von Tarifverhandlungen in Rumänien auf der theoretischen Grundlage des akteurzentrierten Institutionalismus analysiert. Die Untersuchung konzentriert sich auf vier Großunternehmen der chemischen Industrie. Es werden Vergleiche zu anderen Ländern gezogen, um die Entwicklungen in den rumänischen Fallbeispielen hervorzuheben. Unvorhergesehenerweise zeigen die Untersuchungsergebnisse, dass nach 1989 staatliche Eingriffe in der Bestimmung der Arbeitsbedingungen zugenommen haben. Dies ist auf die neuen Aufgaben des Staates zurückzuführen, die dieser während des Transformationsprozesses im Bereich der Beschäftigungssicherung übernommen hat. Die Studie zeigt einen merklichen Anstieg der Einflussnahme des Topmanagements auf Tarif- und Arbeitsbedingungen, während Gewerkschaften im Bereich der Sozialleistungen in großen Unternehmen einen weiterhin großen Einfluss ausüben. Die Ergebnisse deuten auf eine Weiterführung bestimmter Praktiken hin, die vor 1989 üblich waren, wie zum Beispiel die starke staatliche Intervention sowie die begrenzte Unabhängigkeit der Gewerkschaften vom Management. Dieses Working Paper trägt zum besseren Verständnis des institutionellen Wandels im Rahmen des Wechsels von einer Zentral- zu einer Marktwirtschaft bei." [Autorenreferat]"There are several studies on recent developments in collective bargaining in Eastern Europe, but there is still a debate about the extent to which collective bargaining practices resemble those in continental Western Europe. This paper aims to contribute to this debate, by examining primary data on collective bargaining practices in Romania using an actor-centred institutionalist approach. It focuses on collective bargaining in four large chemical companies. Comparisons are made to other countries in order to highlight the developments in Romanian cases. Unexpectedly, the study's findings point to an increase in state intervention in establishing the terms and conditions of employment after 1989, due to the state’s new roles during the transformation process that affected job security. The study suggests a considerable increase in the influence of top managers in determining pay and working conditions, while trade unions retained the considerable influence over social benefits in large companies. The findings show continuance of certain pre-1989 practices, such as a persistence of high state intervention and a limited independence of the trade unions from the management. This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of institutional changes in the context of a shift from a centrally planned economy to a market-based economy." [author's abstract

Strategic unionism in Eastern Europe: the case of Romania

"Mit dem Wechsel von Zentralwirtschaft zu Marktwirtschaft mussten Gewerkschaften in osteuropäischen Ländern entscheiden, wie sie sich in den industriellen Beziehungen positionieren. Dieses Working Paper fragt, ob und warum Gewerkschaften sich strategisch für ein kooperationsorientiertes oder konfliktorientiertes Verhalten gegenüber den Arbeitgebern entschieden haben. Gegenstand der Untersuchung sind dabei die Beziehungen zwischen Arbeitgebern und Gewerkschaften auf nationaler, sektoraler und Unternehmensebene in Rumänien. Konflikthafte und kooperative Beziehungen zwischen Arbeitgebern und Gewerkschaften entwickelten sich nach 1989 parallel zueinander, mit einer höheren Tendenz zur Kooperation. Die Studie zeigt, dass nicht nur ein ideologisches Erbe und überkommene Institutionen, sondern auch die anfangs entschiedene Teilnahme an der makroökonomischen Transformation für die Entscheidung der Gewerkschaften zur Kooperation mit den Arbeitgebern ausschlaggebend waren. Die weit verbreitete Ansicht, dass Gewerkschaften in Osteuropa schwach sind, wird bestätigt. Gleichzeitig wird jedoch gezeigt, dass sie es in der Hand haben, ihre eigene Zukunft offensiv zu gestalten, vorausgesetzt, es gelingt ihnen, ihre Mitglieder zu mobilisieren. Darüber hinaus müssen Gewerkschaftsführungen fähig und willig sein, sowohl Konflikt als auch Kooperation in ihren Beziehungen zu den Arbeitgebern nutzen können. Der Vergleich der Ergebnisse aus Rumänien mit anderen osteuropäischen Ländern spiegelt den Stand der Transformation in Rumänien wider und zeichnet ebenso einen erweiterten Anwendungsbereich des der Studie zugrunde liegenden theoretischen Ansatzes." [Autorenreferat]"The shift from centrally planned economies to market-oriented economic models presented trade unions in Eastern European countries with crucial choices in relation to their roles as industrial relations actors. This paper investigates whether (and why) unions have chosen adversarial and/or co-operative relationships with the employers, based on a strategic choice conceptual framework. It focuses on trade union relations with employers at national, sectoral and company levels in Romania. It is argued that adversarial and co-operative relations between unions and employers developed simultaneously after 1989, but co-operation was the prevalent approach. Evidence suggests that ideological legacies, former institutions and the initial decision to participate in the macroeconomic transformation played a key role in shaping unions' choices towards co-operation with employers. Although this paper confirms the widespread view that labour is rather weak in Eastern Europe, it indicates that unions can be proactive and shape their own future if they have the capacity to mobilise their members and union leaders have the skills and willingness to use both conflict and co-operation in their relationships with employers. The comparison of evidence from Romania with other Eastern European countries reflects on the stage of Romanian transformation and also illustrates a wider possible applicability of the theoretical framework employed for the study." [author's abstract

Trade union rights in Romania

In the general context of decreasing power of labour movement and the radical economic transformation towards market economy after the collapse of communism in 1989, it is hardly surprising that trade unions in Romania face a series of challenges to protect and enforce their rights. The existing legislative framework concerning trade union rights is largely acceptable, but there are many problems regarding its enforcement and implementation. In addition, the macro-economic recession since the reintroduction of capitalism (a decrease of about 25% of GDP), corruption and also the lack of experience of trade unions have had a negative impact on trade union rights

Social dialogue during the economic crisis: the survival of collective bargaining in the manufacturing sector in Romania

In their seminal book on the models of eastern European capitalism, Bohle and Greskovits (2012) argue that Romania has a special type of neoliberal society with weak state institutions, a high degree of centralisation and collective bargaining coverage and relatively high mobilisation power on the part of the trade unions. Before the 2008 crisis, Romania had a comprehensive system of industrial relations with widespread collective bargaining at national, sectoral and establishment levels. The legal system supported the development of bipartite and tripartite consultation and negotiation between trade unions, employers and the government (Trif 2010). However, this system was radically altered by the government after the crisis, despite opposition from trade unions and the largest employers’ associations (Ciutacu 2012). The legal changes led to the implosion of trade unions’ fundamental rights to bargain collectively, to form trade unions and to take industrial action. As a result, cross-sectoral collective agreements ceased to exist and very few multi-employer collective agreements were concluded after the new labour code was adopted in 2011. The crisis was used as a pretext by the centre-right government to reform the industrial relations system, with the support of the ‘Troika’, comprising the European Union (EU), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Central Bank (ECB)

Dialogul social în timpul crizei economice: supravietuierea negocierilor colective in sectorul industrial din Romania

În influenta lor lucrare asupra modelelor capitalismului est-european, Bohle şi Greskovits (2012) consideră că România constituie un tip special de societate neo-liberală cu instituţii statale slabe, cu un nivel ridicat de centralizare şi de acoperire prin negociere colectivă, precum şi cu o putere de mobilizare sindicală relativ ridicată. Anterior crizei care a debutat în 2008, România a avut un sistem cuprinzător de relaţii sindicale, cu un grad ridicat de răspândire a procesului de negociere colectivă la nivel naţional, sectorial şi pe unitate; sistemul legislativ susţinea dezvoltarea consultărilor şi a negocierilor bi- şi tripartite, între sindicate, angajatori şi autorităţile guvernamentale (Trif, 2010). Totuşi, Guvernul a schimbat radical acest sistem după criză, în ciuda opoziţiei manifestate de către sindicate şi de cele mai importante asociaţii patronale (Ciutacu, 2012). Modificările legislative au condus la anularea drepturilor fundamentale ale sindicatelor la negociere colectivă, subminând dreptul de a constitui sindicate şi de a trece la acţiune sindicală. În consecinţă, contractele colective intersectoriale au încetat să existe şi s-au încheiat foarte puţine contracte colective pe grup de unităţi după adoptarea, în 2011, a noii legislaţii privind relaţiile de muncă. Guvernarea de centru-dreapta a folosit criza ca pretext pentru a reforma sistemul relaţiilor de muncă, beneficiind de sprijinul „Troicăi” alcătuită din Uniunea Europeană (UE), Fondul Monetar Internaţional (FMI) şi Banca Centrală Europeană (BCE

Austerity and collective bargaining in Romania national report – Romania

In their seminal book on the models of eastern European capitalism, Bohle and Greskovits (2012) argue that Romania has a special type of neo-liberal society with weak state institutions, high centralisation and coverage of collective bargaining and relatively high mobilisation power of trade unions. Before the 2008 crisis, Romania had a comprehensive system of industrial relations with widespread collective bargaining at national, sectoral and establishment levels; the legal system supported the development of bi-partite and tripartite consultation and negotiation between trade unions, employers and the Government (Trif, 2010). However, this system was radically altered by the Government after the crisis, despite opposition from trade unions and the largest employers’ associations (Ciutacu, 2012). The legal changes led to the implosion of trade unions’ fundamental rights to bargain collectively, to form trade unions and to take industrial action. As a result, cross-sectoral collective agreements ceased to exist and very few multi-employer collective agreements were concluded after the new labour law was adopted in 2011. The crisis was used as a pretext by the centre-right government to reform the industrial relations system, with the support of the Troika of the European Union (EU), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Central Bank (ECB