The EU and social policy

Download presentation
2019-07-12_EU_Social_Policies_Summer_school_KULeuven

The EU and social policy Frank Vandenbroucke University of Amsterdam Summer School KULeuven 12 July 2019 Inequality in Europe the USA compared US 1 4 EU27 3 2 0 9 8 7 6 5 Median income states (US ‘representative state’ = 1) Member States (EU MS’ European distribution: a moving scale Romania Denmark Top quintile 25% =>36% 123% =>125% 23% => 35% 132% =>132% 21% =>33% 139% =>136% 17% 28% 144% diversity welfare Input: expenditure on protection gross % GDP (2016) 35 30 25 20 15 10 FR FI DK AT BE SE IT NL GE GR UK PT ES SI LU CR PL CY HU CZ SK BG EE MT IE LT LV RO old age & survivors Sickness/Health Care Unemployment Disability Family/children Housing Social Inclusion n e c Other adm costs Output: two-dimensional map 24 22 18 16 14 44 49 54 59 64 69 Employment Rates 2016 (population 15-74) states: poverty Poverty risk threshold: “national” conception (SILC 2017) 000 AROP total population SILC 2017 threshold PPP performance dimension project according to founding fathers: belief convergence • integration would support simultaneous pursuit economic progress cohesion both within countries (through gradual development states) between upward across Union) Initial division labour: – development: supranational coordination security rights anti-discrimination: national sovereignty (in theory) machine worked… more or less… until 2004/2008 A tragic dilemma enlarged heterogeneous EU? Monthly minimum wages: disparity but East-West 500 2004 Reconciling openness domestic cohesion: political challenge Openness mobility must not exert downward pressure level (minimum wages entitlements assistance) Access benefits: general principle non-discrimination exception: posting workers We do see ‘benefit tourism’ Posting needed reform Transparency coverage wage regimes Minimum what governments can do: net disposable couple with children one minimum-wage earner 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 DE EL Net Gross Source: CSB/MIPI risks < 60 by work intensity household 70 50 40 Very high High Medium Low low Work 2004-06 Bron: Eurostat 2005-2007; year T refers observation T-1 except for Increasing inequality poverty: diagnosis lessons There is no one-size-fits-all explanation hence silver bullet tackle increasing inequalities need set complementary strategies instruments that improve employment perspectives households weak attachment labour market Improving our human capital requires child-centred investment strategy addresses opportunities should promote policies (Vandenbroucke Rinaldi) Division EU)? Design flaws EMU as an insurance union: vaccination metaphor Why are stabilization centralized monetary unions? Risk sharing (pooling) Externalities public good (vaccination) Vaccination: compulsory requirements) subsidized (re-insurance) requirements effective stabilisation capacity: sufficiently generous unemployment benefits notably short-term; sufficient rates benefit schemes; segmentation leaves part force poorly insured; proliferation relations integrated into insurance; activation unemployed individuals; budgetary buffers times so automatic stabilisers their bad These principles become fortiori imperative if Eurozone be equipped re-insurance systems: institutional moral hazard EMU: needs common standards resilient shared flexibility Labour institutions deliver (effective collective bargaining) Cluster adequate capacity MS: insured against unemployment; systems individuals  Convergence some key features Pillar Rights Gothenburg Summit 17 November How Rights? Clear priorities Credible roadmap combining… legislation Policy benchmarking Funding (tangible MS) Mainstreaming fiscal surveillance Semester Completing union Union systemic functions (e g fair corporate taxation …) guide substantive via objectives leaving ways means basis operational definition ‘the model’ cooperate explicit purpose pursuing pan-European based reciprocity Resources (1) Addressing Global Inequality: Is Part Equation? in: Diamond (ed) Crisis Globalization: Democracy Capitalism Twenty-First Century I B Tauris London New York pp 235-258 (download www frankvandenbroucke uva nl) 2) puzzles paradoxes Boone Marc; Deneckere Gita Tollebeek Jo (eds ) End Postwar Future - Essays Ian Buruma Verhandelingen van de KVAB voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten Nieuwe reeks 31 Uitgeverij Peeters 2017; download nl 3) Rinaldi In: Vision Consortium ): Redesigning Ways forward Gütersloh http://www vision-europe-summit eu/ (2) 4) cross-border Sticking may yield better practical results everybody Tribune Notre Institut Jacques Delors June 5) Barnard De Baere after Cambridge: Cambridge Press September https://doi org/10 1017/9781108235174 (Introductory chapter Open item 263) 6) Commission Recommendation COM(2017) 2600 final 7) Rights: from promise delivery –Introduction ‘European (ESU) forum debate’ EuroVisions December 2018 + other contributions this debate: euvisions frankvandenbroucke_uva

Domestic social cohesion and cross-border mobility: a tragic dilemma?

Download presentation
2019-07-03_Summer-course_CoE

Domestic social cohesion and cross-border mobility: a tragic dilemma? Summer Course College of Europe 3 July 2019 Frank Vandenbroucke University Amsterdam www frankvandenbroucke uva nl • Historical perspective Mobility migration: facts on labour mobility Intra-EU principles policies EU integration the national welfare states The European Pillar Social Rights dimension project according to founding fathers: belief in convergence would support simultaneous pursuit economic progress both within countries (through gradual development states) between upward across Union) Initial division labour: – development: supranational coordination security rights & anti-discrimination: sovereignty (in theory) machine worked… more or less… until 2004/2008 Source: Lefebvre Pestieau A dilemma enlarged heterogeneous EU? US 1 4 EU27 2 0 9 8 7 6 5 Median income (US ‘representative state’ = 1) Member States (EU MS’ Romania Denmark Top quintile 32% 133% 30% 140% 28% 145% 23% 152% 500 000 BG RO LV LT SK EE PL HU CZ PT SI ES MT GR UK IE BE FR NL LU GE CR 2004 PPP We must distinguish: internal external debate framed ‘rights’ ‘consequences’: fairness terms consequences for sending receiving economically active non-active short-term long-term impacts individual as whole migration 90 80 70 60 50 40 EU28 30 20 10 Native-born EU-15 EU-10 EU-3 TCN Netherlands Italy Belgium How can we justify free movement? 2) non-discriminatory access benefits those who move? 3) difference citizens application (1) (2) sense ‘earned’ citizenship? movement non-discrimination (for workers)? citizenship ↄ formal equality employment opportunities An integrated market services needs ‘posting’ ‘free workers’ be fair Non-discrimination justifies sustains principle that do not tolerate competition different systems one territory I argue two complementary logics apply legitimately with regard if they are applied conjointly: Economically have right take up borders basis ‘earn’ all State where work including protection against involuntary inactivity (unemployment illness) citizen cannot simply rely any his (or her) choice: nationality determines which is first foremost responsible Under carefully delineated conditions another he has no bond allowed say citizen’s create an ‘unreasonable burden’ its state (these substantiate absence real link host was exercised solely order benefit from state’s assistance) In contrast it ‘unreasonable’ provide adequate whatever causes their vulnerability dependence Fair rights) ‘balancing act’ implies coherent regulatory agenda: Enforcement Posting exception ‘normal rule’ Transparency coverage minimum wage Industrial relations trade union action (Viking Laval) Directive measures facilitate exercise conferred workers context freedom (Directive 2014/54) Seasonal Workers’ (2014/36) Intra-Corporate Transferees (2014/66) Professional Qualifications (2013/55) Posting: (2014); Revision (2018) Labour Authority “posted worker” employee sent by employer carry out service temporary contract intra-group posting hiring through agency example provider may win country send employees there contract) Posted mobile remain only temporarily integrate go seek employed entitled equal treatment nationals working other tax ) Even though posted still company subject law set core force rates pay; maximum periods rest periods; paid annual leave; agencies; health safety hygiene at work; men women However does whenever applicable worker accordance rules favourable than result 2014 adopted aim strengthen practical addressing issues related fraud circumvention inspections monitoring joint liability subcontracting chains exchange information June 2018 revision Workers adopted; main changes: mandatory elements remuneration (instead “minimum pay”); accommodation allowances reimbursement expenses during assignment; postings (longer 12 18 months) extended transposed into laws 2020 Road transport: ‘Lex Specialis’ Council position: December EP April 2019: Clear drivers’ pay times Three-day limit cabotage operations Fewer but better controls roadside checks Adopted 13 2019; tasks: improving employers obligations cases coordination; supporting member enforcement relevant Union facilitating concerted inspections; cooperation tackling undeclared assisting authorities resolving disputes; without prejudice competences Administrative Commission Coordination Security Systems ELA will enhance violations exploitation able report them cooperate concerned It also carrying-out tackle irregularities These place either request agree ELA’s suggestion Follow-up taken level requires Fairness consequences): long- term common interest ‘brain overflow’ rather waste’ Valorisation human capital hindered segmented markets intergenerational inadequate education training institutions Minimum wages what governments do: net disposable couple children minimum-wage earner 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 AT FI DE DK IT EL Net Gross CSB/MIPI household Very high intensity High Medium Low low Work 2004-06 2016 Bron: Eurostat SILC 2005-2007; 2017 year T refers observation T-1 except Division policy EU)? Design flaws Why stabilization instruments centralized monetary unions? Risk sharing (pooling) Externalities public good (vaccination) Vaccination: compulsory (minimum requirements) subsidized (re-insurance) requirements effective stabilisation capacity: sufficiently generous unemployment notably short-term; sufficient schemes; segmentation leaves part poorly insured; proliferation insurance; activation unemployed individuals; budgetary buffers so automatic stabilisers bad become fortiori imperative Eurozone equipped re-insurance insurance systems: institutional moral hazard shared conception flexibility deliver (effective collective bargaining) Cluster capacity MS: insured unemployment; individuals  Convergence some key features Gothenburg Summit 17 November priorities Credible roadmap combining… legislation Policy benchmarking Funding (tangible MS) Mainstreaming fiscal surveillance Semester Completing EMU systemic functions (e g corporate taxation …) guide substantive via general standards objectives leaving ways means operational definition ‘the model’ explicit purpose pursuing pan-European based reciprocity Resources: see Outline References presentation Addressing Global Inequality: Is Part Equation? in: Diamond (ed) Crisis Globalization: Democracy Capitalism Inequality Twenty-First Century B Tauris London New York pp 235-258 (download nl) L’État-Providence en Performance et dumping Cepremap Éditions Rue d’Ulm 2012 ESDE ‘Mobility EU: Opportunities challenges’ Chapter II Employment Developments 2015 4) union: puzzles paradoxes perspectives Boone Marc; Deneckere Gita Tollebeek Jo (eds End Postwar Future – Essays Ian Buruma Verhandelingen van de KVAB voor Wetenschappen Kunsten Nieuwe reeks 31 Uitgeverij Peeters 2017; download 5) Rinaldi inequalities challenge In: Vision Consortium ): Redesigning Ways forward Gütersloh (http://www vision-europe-summit eu/) 6) Sticking yield results everybody Tribune Notre Institut Jacques Delors 7) Barnard De Baere after Cambridge: Cambridge Press September https://doi org/10 1017/9781108235174 (Introductory chapter Open Access item 263) 8) Recommendation COM(2017) 2600 final 9) Rights: promise delivery –Introduction ‘European (ESU) forum debate’ EuroVisions + contributions this debate: http://www euvisions eu/ frankvandenbroucke_uva

en_GB
nl_NL