Expert committee to examine industrial democracy

Systems regulating industrial democracy and other forms of worker participation are to be examined by an expert committee set up by the Norwegian government in late February 2009. The committee is to finish its work by March 2010. Recent research has found that worker participation often depends on company efficiency and profitability rather than democracy and fairness. Moreover, it can be difficult to fill the role of safety representative in the workplace.

On 28 February 2009, the Norwegian Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion (Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet, AID) set up an expert committee to examine existing systems regulating industrial democracy, co-determination and worker participation in working life. The committee is led by Ida Munkeby and includes 13 specialists in this field. A total of 11 experts represent major social partner organisations, or are employer or employee representatives at company level, and the remaining two experts are researchers. The committee is to submit its report by 1 March 2010.

Existing systems for industrial democracy

The existing systems for industrial democracy have developed incrementally over time and may be identified as one of the following:

• individual rights – for example, in relation to the individual work situation;

• representative rights – for instance, where the safety representative or trade union official/shop steward are consulted and receive information about the company;

• representation on the company board.

Additionally, regulations also exist regarding employees’ rights in local government. The different forms of regulations are established in several pieces of legislation.

Current shortcomings

In its mandate (in Norwegian), the government emphasises the increasing importance of industrial democracy in modern working life. Thus, not only the physical but also the social and psychosocial work environment is growing in importance. However, according to the mandate, recent research indicates that worker participation has to be justified on the basis of considerations relating to company efficiency and profitability rather than principles pertaining to democracy and fairness. Furthermore, the role of company-level safety representative is not seen as an attractive post for workers, and recruitment of personnel to these types of posts is difficult.

Committee mandate

The expert committee has been given the mandate to undertake a broad examination of existing regulations on worker participation and other forms of industrial democracy. The work will partly involve a strengthening of the knowledge base on how existing regulations are practised, and will partly consider the appropriateness of existing regulations and the extent to which changes should be made. More specifically, the mandate seeks to:

• describe the development of existing industrial democracy regulations;

• consider how existing regulations work in practice;

• evaluate the systems individually and as a whole;

• evaluate the possible role of the workers’ safety representative and the company-level working environment committees as regards the external environment;

• identify, evaluate and make priorities with regard to the areas most in need of further development of co-determination systems;

• put forward any bills or other measures;

• examine the fiscal, administrative and other major consequences of potential bills or measures.

Further information

More information on worker participation is available at European level.

Kristin Alsos, Fafo Institute for Applied Social Science