Social partner involvement in the 2002 NAP

This feature examines social partner involvement in Finland's 2002 National Action Plan (NAP) for employment. It is one of a set of similar features for all the EU Member States, written in response to a questionnaire

This feature outlines how Finnish social partner organisations have been involved in Finland's 2002 National Action Plan (NAP) on employment. Under the European employment strategy, each year the EU Member States draw up NAPs in response to the annual Employment Guidelines.

Similar features on social partner involvement in the 2002 NAPs have been drawn up by the European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO) national centres in all the EU Member States, in response to a questionnaire. Details on the background to this exercise, and the questionnaire used, can be found at TN0206102F. Readers are advised to refer to the questionnaire in conjunction with this feature.

Procedural aspects

The government consulted the following parties on the 2002 NAP:

• the tripartite Advisory Committee for Labour Policy;

• employers' organisations and other business organisations - the Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers (Teollisuuden ja Työnantajain Keskusliitto, TT), Employers' Confederation of Service Industries (Palvelutyönantajat, PT), Commission for Local Authority Employers (Kunnallinen Työmarkkinalaitos, KT), Federation of Finnish Enterprises (Suomen Yrittäjät, SY), Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners (Maataloustuottajain Keskusliitto, MTK) and Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities (Suomen Kuntaliitto);

• trade union confederations - the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (Suomen Ammattiliittojen Keskusjärjestö, SAK), Finnish Confederation of Salaried Employees (Toimihenkilökeskusjärjestö, STTK) and Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals (Akateemisten Toimihenkilöiden Keskusjärjestö, AKAVA); and

• the Ministries of Labour, Finance, Trade and Industry, Interior Affairs, Education, and Social and Health Affairs

The European Commission's proposals for the 2002 Employment Guidelines, recommendations to the Member States and Joint Employment Report (EU0109236F) were sent to the Finnish social partners and ministries in September 2001. The Ministry of Labour coordinated the Finnish position on the Commission's 'employment package' with the social partners in a normal tripartite procedure during the autumn.

The Ministry of Labour started cooperation on the preparation of the Finnish 2002 NAP with the social partners and other ministries in January 2002. The starting points of, and preparation plan for, the NAP were discussed with the social partners and other ministries in the Advisory Committee for Labour Policy on 16 January. The Committee appointed a group - chaired by the Ministry of Labour and including social partner representatives - to conduct an in-depth consideration of the NAP.

The Ministry of Labour then appointed a working group of five ministries to draw up a preliminary draft of the NAP. The group started its work in the end of January. The draft was sent to the Advisory Committee for Labour Policy's NAP group (see above) for consideration in mid-March. The group held two meetings, after which the final NAP was considered in the Advisory Committee on 17 April.

These institutionalised cooperation procedures meant that all organisations had enough time to react to the NAP.

With regard to the extent to which the social partners' views are represented in the NAP, the PT employers' organisation thought that the partners' commonly accepted views were observed quite well in the document. The TT employers' organisation felt that its views were integrated in the text as they stood or after compromises formulated in the Advisory Committee for Labour Policy's NAP working group. On the trade union side, STTK, which participated in the ad hoc group preparing the NAP, had hoped that a civil servant from the Ministry of Finance would have participated in these meetings and provided information on its position on lifelong learning and adult education. STTK also believes that remarks on implementing equality legislation should have been included in the NAP.

The NAP is not intended to be a joint government/social partner text and is not signed by the social partners, though they drafted jointly a text on tripartite cooperation.

Cooperation between government and social partners on employment policy was in place long before the European employment strategy, and the NAPs have not brought any new elements in this respect.

Matters of policy content

Objective D of the 2002 Employment Guidelines calls for a 'comprehensive partnership with the social partners for the implementation, monitoring and follow-up of the employment strategy'. Since the 1970s, Finland has had wide-ranging system of cooperation and consultation with the social partners on all aspects of employment policy through various standing and ad hoc committees and groups, with no changes seen as being required in the light of the European employment strategy. This is based on the International Labour Organisation (ILO) tripartite principle (in line with Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 122 on employment policy). The NAP reflects mainly the short- and medium-term plans of the relevant ministries.

In terms of the role of the social partners in implementing the Employment Guidelines, in recent years broad multiannual national incomes policy agreements (FI0012170F) have been concluded by the partners in order to enhance economic growth and stability. They include agreements on various aspects of working life relevant to the Employment Guidelines. However, these agreements are not negotiated in connection with the NAPs. According to PT, the question of implementation is not relevant: various measures are agreed informally and case-specifically, and social partner organisations' responsibilities can be set only by their members

With regard to the social partners' assessment of the policy content of the NAP and the government's employment policy, according to PT the social partners are quite satisfied with the content of NAP and there are no significant disagreements. The TT employers' organisation, however, has a number of comments. Its perspective on the development of employment in the next few years is more positive than that of the Ministry of Labour. The Ministry expects a major increase in unemployment and demands more resources for preventative policies. In TT's view, employment growth will slow down because of the problems in the export markets of certain industrial branches of industry. Policies should aim at a better functioning labour market by enhancing the skills (through basic education and retraining) and mobility of the workforce. In general, TT's main points were adopted in the NAP as they stood, or at least satisfactorily included in compromise formulations. The main exceptions were TT's positions that: the amount of active labour market policy measures should not be increased, but the effectiveness of the measures should instead be enhanced through better individual tailoring and cooperation with companies; and employment subsidies (without training obligations) should not be given to enterprises. According to TT, the NAP lacks focus as a strategy: it has far too many targets and objectives.

Bargaining

The 2002 Employment Guidelines promote collective bargaining in the areas of:

• improving the quality of work and employment (in general);

• modernising work organisation (guideline 13);

• lifelong learning in the context of competence and skill development in enterprises (guideline 15);

• 'active ageing' (guideline 3);

• strengthening equal opportunities for men and women (tackling the gender pay gap, desegregating the labour market, reconciling work and family/private life etc) (guidelines 16,17 and 18); and

• social integration by way of better access to the labour market for groups and individuals at risk or at a disadvantage, such as people from ethnic minorities, migrant workers, long-term unemployed people and people with disabilities (guideline 7).

Since the 2002 Employment Guidelines 2002 were sent to the Member States (in November 2001) and the preparation of the 2002 NAP started, there has not been a collective bargaining round. The results of the most recent central incomes policy round in 2000-1 - when the negotiations covered all the subjects listed above - are reported in the NAP. The incomes policy agreements set up a number of working groups handling specific issues (of relevance to the Employment Guidelines), whose work is ongoing and specified in each bargaining round. A bargaining and dialogue framework that makes it possible to promote the issues covered in NAPs has existed for a long time and the NAPs have not influenced this practice and little change in this area is expected in the coming years.