Sweden: Role of social dialogue in industrial policies

  • Observatory: EurWORK
  • Topic:
  • Published on: 02 Rugsėjis 2014



About
Country:
Sweden
Author:
Institution:

Disclaimer: This information is made available as a service to the public but has not been edited by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The content is the responsibility of the authors.

In Sweden, the social partners play a central role in creating the conditions for sustainable growth and full employment, particularly through collective bargaining agreements and social dialogue. Most of the industrial policy interventions in Sweden are formulated as horizontal interventions, and the largest central partners are primarily involved in the industrial policy formulation process by responding to referrals at the national, cross-sectoral level. Tripartite discussions have been taking place between the Government and the social partners, for example, within the so-called Job Pact aimed at finding shared solutions to improve labour market participation among young people.

Part 1: Overall role and involvement of social partners in industrial policy in the national context

Industrial policy is in this context used in its broader sense as…

those policies that have an impact on the cost, price and innovative competitiveness of industry and individual sectors, such as standardisation or innovation policies, or sectoral policies targeting e.g. the innovation performance of individual sectors.

The policy instruments are then defined as the method or mechanism used by government, political parties, business or individuals to achieve a desired effect, through legal or economic means.

Industrial policy initiatives are often undertaken unilaterally by the government but other forms may include social partners in different constellations, including:

  • bipartite initiative (a common approach by the social partners);
  • tripartite initiative (the social partners in tandem with the public authorities);
  • tripartite+ initiative (the three stakeholders in combination sometimes with other civil society players such as NGOs, research centres or qualified figures);
  • public-private partnership initiatives (one social partner and the public authorities); and
  • unilateral initiatives by a single social partner

1. Is there in your country currently a policy framework to stimulate investments that both create economic growth and employment? Tick Yes/No

Table 1

Policy framework

Yes

No

Economic growth

X

 

Employment

X

 

Both economic growth and employment

X

 

Competitiveness

X

 

2. Is there evidence in your country of involvement of social partners in the process of formulating industrial policy interventions? If yes, please indicate which types of involvement:

Table 2

Type of social partner involvement:

… in the formulation of horizontal (cross-sector) interventions

… in the formulation of vertical (sector-, industry- or company-specific) interventions

Sector-specific involvement

Yes/no:

No.

Yes/no:

Yes. However, most of the industrial policy interventions in Sweden are formulated as horizontal interventions. In Sweden, there are three main trade union confederations, Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO), Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) and Swedish Confederation of Professional Associations (Saco), and one major employer organisation confederation, Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv). Due to these central confederations’ relatively important role, the social partners’ involvement in the process of formulating industrial policy interventions in Sweden is generally cross-sectoral.

Cross-sector involvement

Yes/no:

Yes. The social partners play a central role in creating the conditions for sustainable growth and full employment in Sweden, where the Swedish labour market has a high degree of organisation, broad collective bargaining agreement coverage and a well-developed social dialogue. The social partners also have a central role in the implementation of EU directives and guidelines through arrangements in collective bargaining agreements.

No.

Bipartite, tripartite, tripartite+, unilateral, public/private partnership?

Please indicate which, if any, of these types apply:

The social partners in Sweden traditionally resolve many issues by means of collective bargaining agreements, without central government intervention (that is, by bipartite initiatives). Against the background of worryingly high youth unemployment levels in Sweden, however, tripartite discussions have been taking place between the Government and the social partners, aimed at finding shared solutions to improve labour market participation among young people and other exposed groups.

Please indicate which, if any, of these types apply:

3. How have social partners been involved in the industrial policy formulation process?

Table 3
 

Please indicate (X) the extent to which the different types of involvement are used, including whether this involvement is statutory:

Level of government?

Sector focus?

Specific form of social partner involvement:

Statutory/mandatory

Very common/ used in most policy processes but not statutory

Fairly common but not consistently used

Rarely used

Not used at all

National or regional?

Sectoral or cross-sectoral?

Tripartite standing committee

       

X

-

-

Tripartite ad hoc committees

   

X

   

National

Cross-sectoral

High-level groups or other multi-stakeholder committees involving other stakeholders in addition to social partners

     

X

 

If multi-stakeholder committees:

Please indicate which types of other stakeholders are (typically) involved:

Hearings

     

X

 

Consultations

     

X

 

Conferences

     

X

 

Other - please specify below:

 

X

     

.

The largest central partners in Sweden are primarily involved in the industrial policy formulation process by responding to referrals (Swedish: remiss) at the national, cross-sectoral level.

4. Is there evidence in your country of initiatives that follows recommendations and development at EU-level? If yes, please indicate in which sectors:

Yes. According to Sweden’s Globalisation Council (2008), many of the industrial policy initiatives in Sweden follow recommendations, regulations and development at the EU-level. For example, Sweden’s national reform programme 2013 reflects the overall priorities of the Europe 2020 strategy.

5. Which types of industrial policy instruments/interventions at different government levels have social partners been involved in? Please indicate degree of involvement

3 = high degree of involvement,

2 = involvement to some extent,

1 = low degree of involvement,

0 = no involvement.

Table 4

Policy instruments:

National level

Regional level

Local level

Public investment programmes:

2

   

infrastructure

2

   

construction

1

   

building renovation

1

   

other

0

   

Innovation programmes

3

   

Support for R&D

2

   

Cluster promotion

0

   

Export promotion

0

   

Internationalisation of SMEs

2

   

Improvement of access to finance:

3

   

loan

2

   

loan guarantee programmes

0

   

venture capital funding

2

   

other

0

   

Public procurement policies

2

   

Tax and duty policies

3

   

Adapting the skills base

3

   

Subsidies for restructuring/ bail-out of companies in crisis

3

   

Social plans in case of restructuring. Training/re-training

2

   

Investment incentives

2

   

Energy efficiency/ energy shift

2

   

Energy supply security

1

   

Access to raw materials

0

   

Prices of energy and raw materials

0

   

Others, please specify below:

0

   
       

6. Which, if any, positive effect(s) can be related to the involvement of social partners in the industrial policy process in your country?

Table 5

Positive effects

Tick (X) where applicable

Please comment briefly: How did effect manifest itself?

Speed of policy process

   

Robustness of policy initiatives

X

As the social partners play a relatively important role in Sweden, their involvement in the industrial policy process may give the initiatives increased legitimacy, robustness and relevance.

Relevance of policy initiatives

X

Same as above.

Dynamism in the policy process

   

European coordination

   

Ownership of policy initiatives

   

Coherence and coordination of labour market, education, and economic policies

X

The Swedish model entails the Government and the social partners bearing a shared responsibility for the development of the labour market, such that the social partners’ involvement in the industrial policy process increases the coherence and coordination of policies, especially related to the labour market. For example, the Government has conducted discussions with the social partners as how the Swedish model could be further developed to make the labour market more inclusive and flexible.

Stimulating public-private partnerships

   

Others, please specify below:

   

.

   

7. Which, if any, problems or challenges related to involvement of social partners in the industrial policy process have been encountered in your country?

Table 6

Problems/challenges:

Tick (X) where applicable

Please comment briefly: How did the problem manifest itself?

Increased bureaucracy

   

Lengthy policy processes

X

As an example of a lengthy process, the tripartite initiative the ‘Job Pact’ (see more below) has not yet been implemented at the central, national level due to disagreements between the largest social partners.

Lengthy bargaining processes

X

Same as above.

Dilution (circumvention) of parliamentary democracy

   

Problems of establishing accountability

   

Lack of dynamism in the policy process

   

Lack of culture to involve social partners

   

Others, please specify below:

   

.

   

8. What, if anything, has been done to address these challenges/problems listed in questions 7? What was the outcome?

Table 7

Problems/challenges:

Measures undertaken

Effect positive/negative

Lengthy processes

For example, the Job Pact, which has not been agreed upon on the national, central level, has instead been able to continue on the sectoral, union level.

The case of the Job Pact illustrates the difficulties and time-consuming processes of a tripartite initiative. At the same time, positive effects of the initiative are present at the sectoral level (see Example 1 below).

     

Part 2: Description of relevant sector examples of social partner involvement

This section aims to identify examples of policies targeting specific sectors and involving social dialogue. Among the industrial policies treated in the previous section in question 5, please select 2-3 examples which represent significant industrial policies in your country and describe the policy instruments used and the contribution of social partners to the shaping of the policy and the outcome of their involvement.

The selection of examples should be guided by the following criteria:

  • importance of the sector to the national economy;
  • level of government support to the industry; and
  • best practice of social dialogue in the country.

Please provide references to key sources.

Example 1

Name of the instrument:

In national language and English

Den nationella innovationsstrategin (The Swedish Innovation Strategy)

Sector:

Cross-sectoral

Type of instrument applied:

(use categories from question 5. Some sector policies may apply more than one instrument

Innovation programmes

Timing:

(Period of implementation of instrument)

2012-2020

Operational level

National

Regional

Local

Please tick the government level and/or provide details of geographical implementation area if relevant:

X

   

Funding:

(Please describe the size of the instrument and detail the source(s) of funding, e.g. EU, state budget, levies, stakeholder contributions, etc.).

Public funding.

Target group(s):

(please describe target group in terms of sector/industry, type of company, geographical criteria and/or other relevant characteristics)

The purpose of this strategy is to contribute to a climate with the best possible conditions for innovation in Sweden with year 2020 in sight, where people and organisations in industry, the public sector and civil society will be able to develop and more effectively contribute to new or improved solutions meeting needs and demand (The Swedish Innovation Strategy).

Rationale/motivation for the instrument:

(please describe the problem that the instrument should address – for instance: market failure, need to increase sector competitiveness, crisis intervention, etc.)

The Swedish Innovation Strategy is a long-term effort to maintain and further develop Sweden’s leading position in terms of innovation climate and innovation capacity in order to address the global societal challenges, increase competitiveness and renew public services of the future (An Innovation Strategy aiming at 2020).

Policy stage

Please describe stage of involvement of the social actors i.e.

policy preparation (consultation),

policy decision (co-determination? and

policy implementation (fx. by involvement in agencies)

The processes of formulating the strategy have consisted of a broad dialogue with stakeholders in different parts of society together with the Government. The social actors, however, have not been active in the different policy stages of the innovation strategy.

Objectives of the instrument:

(please describe the objectives and any quantitative targets set for the instrument– e.g.

increased employment by X% in sector Y by 20xx

increase in sector exports by X%

increase in FDI by X%

The main objective of the innovation strategy is a vision for the innovation climate in Sweden 2020, where: people have the capacity, willingness and conditions to contribute to innovation; research and higher education in Sweden is of a high quality by international standards and contributes to innovation in many ways; framework conditions and infrastructure that lays the foundation for a strong innovation climate; businesses and organisations in Sweden have world-class innovation capacity; innovative and collaborative public service organisations that are legally secure and effective, and has a high degree of quality, service and availability, and; Sweden’s regional innovation environments have international appeal.

Activities and implementation:

(Please give details on the implementation of the intervention)

The Government is, together with many other actors in all parts of Sweden, responsible for the innovation climate and therefore also the implementation of the innovation strategy. The implementation of the innovation strategy is integrated into existing processes, where each department and unit has primary responsibility for its innovation issues. The Innovation Office (Innovationskansliet) serves as an aid and contributes to the utilisation of synergies between units and departments.

Social partner involvement

 

Type of social partner involvement:

(Bipartite, tripartite, tripartite+, unilateral, public/private partnership? – cf. qu. 1)

Unilaterally by the Government.

Level of involvement of social partners involvement:

European, National, regional, local

Sectoral

-

Specific form of social partner involvement:

(tripartite standing or ad hoc committee, high-level group, hearing, consultation, conferences, etc.? – cf. qu. 2)

-

Timing and nature of social partner involvement:

(Please provide more details on the processes that social partners were involved in, their input, the timing, etc.)

-

Impact of social partner involvement on design and implementation of instrument:

(Please describe how/if the design and/or implementation was affected through the involvement of social partners)

-

Other stakeholders involved, if any:

(please name stakeholders and briefly describe their roles)

The Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications has overall responsibility for regular monitoring of the innovation strategy’s implementation and the innovation climate’s development. This is done in collaboration with the Swedish Agency for Growth Policy Analysis (Tillväxtanalys) and Sweden’s Innovation Agency (VINNOVA), together with other agencies and actors.

Results and outcomes

 

Outputs/results:

(Please give details of the outputs/results of the intervention; e.g number of jobs created/retained, number of workers upskilled; wage increases, investment increases, increased co-operation between social partners, etc.)

As the innovation strategy is only at its beginning of being implemented, it is still too early to assess its outputs and results.

Assessment of effectiveness:

(Please provide an assessment of the effectiveness of the intervention - were the objectives reached? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

-

Possible explanations for the effectiveness of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of effectiveness achieved, including the contribution of the social partner involvement; e.g. improved bargaining process? Increased dynamism in the policy process? Other explanations?)

-

Assessment of efficiency:

Did the outputs/results measure up to the effort/resources invested? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

-

Possible explanations for the efficiency of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of efficiency, including the contribution of the social partner involvement)

-

Example 2

Name of the instrument:

In national language and English

Forskning och innovation för ett långsiktigt hållbart energisystem (Research and innovation for a long-term sustainable energy system)

Sector:

Energy sector

Type of instrument applied:

(use categories from question 5. Some sector policies may apply more than one instrument

Innovation programmes

Support for R&D

Energy efficiency/ energy shift

Energy supply security

Timing:

(Period of implementation of instrument)

2013-2016

Operational level

National

Regional

Local

Please tick the government level and/or provide details of geographical implementation area if relevant:

National

   

Funding:

(Please describe the size of the instrument and detail the source(s) of funding, e.g. EU, state budget, levies, stakeholder contributions, etc.).

In the budget proposals for 2013, the Government has proposed an extension and gradual intensification of the efforts devoted to research and development in the energy sector with a total of SEK 1,240 million from 2013 to 2016 (Regeringens proposition 2012/13:21). Compared to previously approved levels, the Government has proposed to increase the funding by SEK 250 million in 2013, and by an estimated increase of SEK 250 million in 2014, SEK 270 million in 2015 and SEK 470 million in 2016. This implies a level of around SEK 1.3 billion during 2013-2015 and a level of around SEK 1.4 billion from 2016, compared with the previous basic level of SEK 900 million.

Target group(s):

(please describe target group in terms of sector/industry, type of company, geographical criteria and/or other relevant characteristics)

The target group for this instrument is primarily the energy sector, but potentially also other sectors in the Swedish economy.

Rationale/motivation for the instrument:

(please describe the problem that the instrument should address – for instance: market failure, need to increase sector competitiveness, crisis intervention, etc.)

Support for research and innovation in the energy sector is a central and integrated part of the industrial policies in Sweden. The sector has strong synergies with instruments of energy policy and is of fundamental importance for achieving the climate, energy, growth and innovation targets.

Policy stage

Please describe stage of involvement of the social actors i.e.

policy preparation (consultation),

policy decision (co-determination? and

policy implementation (fx. by involvement in agencies)

In 2012, the Swedish Government proposed a number of objectives for the efforts of research and innovation in the energy sector, including energy and climate targets, long-term energy and climate policy, and energy-related environmental policy objectives. In relation to this Government bill, many of the social actors were consulted and involved in, for example, the policy preparation stage, particularly by responding to referrals. An example of the social partners’ involvement in this process is the employers’ organisation the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) (Remissvar).

Objectives of the instrument:

(please describe the objectives and any quantitative targets set for the instrument– e.g.

increased employment by X% in sector Y by 20xx

increase in sector exports by X%

increase in FDI by X%

The objectives of the instrument are that research and innovation in the energy sector should build scientific and technological knowledge and skills necessary for the application of new technologies and services to enable a transition to a sustainable energy system in Sweden. This system should be characterised by a combination of ecological sustainability, competitiveness and security of supply. It should also develop technologies and services that can be commercialised by the Swedish industry, and thus contribute to sustainable growth and energy system transformation and development both in Sweden and in other markets, as well as contribute to and benefit from international energy cooperation.

Activities and implementation:

(Please give details on the implementation of the intervention)

In November 2011, the Government decided to give the Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten) the mission to prepare a basis for future decisions on research and innovation in the energy sector. In March 2012, this mission resulted in a report (Forskning och innovation för ett hållbart energisystem), which was then consulted for referrals by the social partners and other relevant stakeholders. Taking this input into account, the Swedish Government thereafter outlined the guidelines for its efforts in research, development, demonstration and commercialization within the energy sector in the Government bill ‘Research and innovation for a long-term sustainable energy system’ (Regeringens proposition 2012/13:21), which is planned to be implemented during the period 2013-2016.

Social partner involvement

 

Type of social partner involvement:

(Bipartite, tripartite, tripartite+, unilateral, public/private partnership? – cf. qu. 1)

The initiative was taken by the Government, but involved consultations with the social partners and other relevant stakeholders (tripartite+).

Level of involvement of social partners involvement:

European, National, regional, local

Sectoral

National

Cross-sectoral and sectoral

Specific form of social partner involvement:

(tripartite standing or ad hoc committee, high-level group, hearing, consultation, conferences, etc.? – cf. qu. 2)

The social partners were mainly involved in the form of referrals (consultation).

Timing and nature of social partner involvement:

(Please provide more details on the processes that social partners were involved in, their input, the timing, etc.)

The social partners were primarily involved at the policy preparation stage, where they provided input to the Government bill through referrals and comments on the Swedish Energy Agency’s (Energimyndighetens) report. An example of a social partner that was involved in this process was the employers’ organisation the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) (Remissvar). Similar issues have also been discussed and emphasised by trade unions, such as the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) (Möt klimatkrisen med investeringar och teknikutveckling) and the Swedish Confederation for Professional Employees (TCO) (TCOs klimatprogram).

Impact of social partner involvement on design and implementation of instrument:

(Please describe how/if the design and/or implementation was affected through the involvement of social partners)

In the Government bill (Regeringens proposition 2012/13:21) it was, for example, noted that the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) contributed to the decision that the funds for research, development and demonstration of energy should continue to be administered by the Swedish Energy Agency’s (Energimyndighetens). The same social partner also advocated a more international perspective.

Other stakeholders involved, if any:

(please name stakeholders and briefly describe their roles)

-

Results and outcomes

 

Outputs/results:

(Please give details of the outputs/results of the intervention; e.g number of jobs created/retained, number of workers upskilled; wage increases, investment increases, increased co-operation between social partners, etc.)

As the instrument was implemented in 2013, it is still too early to assess its output and results. According to the Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten), however, the Swedish energy and climate targets for 2020 are likely to be achieved, and previous efforts in research and innovation have resulted in public benefits in a variety of areas (Forskning och innovation för ett hållbart energisystem).

Assessment of effectiveness:

(Please provide an assessment of the effectiveness of the intervention - were the objectives reached? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

Although the instrument has not yet been implemented, the Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten) has noted that the energy system is developing in a sustainable direction, that the energy research contributes to meeting several major societal challenges, that the carbon dioxide emission are reduced while GDP increases, and that the energy need has declined in many sectors, etc. As such, the instrument seems to have great potential for becoming an effective and efficient instrument.

Possible explanations for the effectiveness of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of effectiveness achieved, including the contribution of the social partner involvement; e.g. improved bargaining process? Increased dynamism in the policy process? Other explanations?)

A possible explanation for the effectiveness of this instrument in relation to the social partners may be their (and others’) possibility to affect and influence the policy at a relatively early stage through referrals, as well as the Government’s ability to incorporate these opinions. This gives an increased robustness of industrial policy initiatives such as this one.

Assessment of efficiency:

Did the outputs/results measure up to the effort/resources invested? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

See the discussion on assessment of effectiveness above.

Possible explanations for the efficiency of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of efficiency, including the contribution of the social partner involvement)

See above.

Example 3

Name of the instrument:

In national language and English

Jobbpakten (the ‘Job Pact’)

Sector:

The general Job Pact, as initially outlined, was cross-sectoral. The instrument, however, is particularly relevant for the industry and health care sectors, in which it has already been implemented.

Type of instrument applied:

(use categories from question 5. Some sector policies may apply more than one instrument

Adapting the skills base

Social plans in case of restructuring. Training/re-training

Timing:

(Period of implementation of instrument)

2013-

Operational level

National

Regional

Local

Please tick the government level and/or provide details of geographical implementation area if relevant:

X

   

Funding:

(Please describe the size of the instrument and detail the source(s) of funding, e.g. EU, state budget, levies, stakeholder contributions, etc.).

Against the background of high unemployment rates among young people in Sweden, in July 2012 the Government presented the proposal for the Job Pact together with trade unions and employers (SvD). In order to attract the trade unions and employers to the Job Pact, the Swedish Government promised to provide support for supervisors and payroll tax reductions.

Target group(s):

(please describe target group in terms of sector/industry, type of company, geographical criteria and/or other relevant characteristics)

The main target group for the Job Pact was young unemployed people.

Rationale/motivation for the instrument:

(please describe the problem that the instrument should address – for instance: market failure, need to increase sector competitiveness, crisis intervention, etc.)

The rationale for the Job Pact was the idea that the Government, employers and trade unions must work together to cut youth unemployment and that young people without experience can be helped to enter the labour market if companies agree to combine on-the-job training with education (SE1208019I). Another important motivation for the Job Pact was a similar vocational introduction agreement, which was signed within the industrial sector in 2010 by the social partners the Swedish Industrial and Chemical Employers Association (Industri- och KemiGruppen) and IF Metall (IKEM). The purpose of this vocational introduction agreement in the industry sector was to secure the industry’s skills needs and at the same time help to reduce youth unemployment.

Policy stage

Please describe stage of involvement of the social actors i.e.

policy preparation (consultation),

policy decision (co-determination? and

policy implementation (fx. by involvement in agencies)

As a tripartite initiative, the social partners have been involved in practically all policy stages of the Job Pact.

Objectives of the instrument:

(please describe the objectives and any quantitative targets set for the instrument– e.g.

increased employment by X% in sector Y by 20xx

increase in sector exports by X%

increase in FDI by X%

The main objective of the Job Pact was to create 30,000 new jobs for youths by a 75-25 percent combination of work and education (SvD).

Activities and implementation:

(Please give details on the implementation of the intervention)

The three main activities of the Job Pact, as initially outlined, were agreements on vocational training, adjustment agreements concerning the termination of contracts due to redundancy, and agreements on short-time work. In January 2013, disagreements between the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) and the employers’ organisation the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) halted the centralised negotiations. Since then, the activities and implementation of the Job Pact have continued on the sectoral and union level instead (DN). In particular, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) and the Swedish Municipal Workers’ Union (Kommunal) have signed an agreement on working life introductory positions (SE1303019I).

Social partner involvement

 

Type of social partner involvement:

(Bipartite, tripartite, tripartite+, unilateral, public/private partnership? – cf. qu. 1)

Tripartite

Level of involvement of social partners involvement:

European, National, regional, local

Sectoral

National

Cross-sectoral and sectoral

Specific form of social partner involvement:

(tripartite standing or ad hoc committee, high-level group, hearing, consultation, conferences, etc.? – cf. qu. 2)

Tripartite consultations etc.

Timing and nature of social partner involvement:

(Please provide more details on the processes that social partners were involved in, their input, the timing, etc.)

Initially, the Job Pact initiative was welcomed by all the central social partners, including the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO), the Swedish Confederation of Professional Associations (SACO), the Swedish Confederation for Professional Employees (TCO) and the employers’ organisation the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv), as well as by the opposition Social Democrat party (SE1208019I). After six months of talks and 18 meetings between the Government, the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) and the employers’ organisation the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv), however, the talks suddenly collapsed and the unions and the employers blamed each other (SE1302019I). In February 2013, however, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) and the Swedish Municipal Workers’ Union (Kommunal) signed an agreement very similar to the Job Pact, which is to be used in the health and social care sectors (SE1303019I).

Impact of social partner involvement on design and implementation of instrument:

(Please describe how/if the design and/or implementation was affected through the involvement of social partners)

While the initiative for the Job Pact came from the Government, this was largely based on a similar agreement between the social partners within the industrial sector. In practice, the social partners have played a crucial role for the design and implementation of this instrument. This is illustrated both by the fact that the disagreement between the largest social partners have paused the discussions on a central level, as well as by the fact that the Job Pact is still being implemented on the sectoral level.

Other stakeholders involved, if any:

(please name stakeholders and briefly describe their roles)

-

Results and outcomes

 

Outputs/results:

(Please give details of the outputs/results of the intervention; e.g number of jobs created/retained, number of workers upskilled; wage increases, investment increases, increased co-operation between social partners, etc.)

Although the tripartite discussions have stalled on a central level, the work with the Job Pact has continued on the union and sectoral levels, and the Swedish Government stands by its commitments to reduce social security contributions and grants for tutoring (SvD). Moreover, the vocational introduction agreement signed between the social partners in the industry sector in 2010 has strengthened the ability of companies to recruit young people (IKEM). This agreement allowed people under the age of 25 who lack relevant experience to get employment introduction contracts. This means that the company employing a youth under age 25 must pay a salary that is at least 75 percent of the applicable collective minimum salary. The employers should also offer introduction and training to the youth.

Assessment of effectiveness:

(Please provide an assessment of the effectiveness of the intervention - were the objectives reached? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

The effectiveness of the Job Pact is difficult to assess, as it is still too early. On the one hand, the intervention has not been very effective, as it has not been implemented on a large and centralised scale. On the other hand, there is still good potential for similar agreements on the sectoral level, where particularly the agreement within the industry sector has served as a good example.

Possible explanations for the effectiveness of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of effectiveness achieved, including the contribution of the social partner involvement; e.g. improved bargaining process? Increased dynamism in the policy process? Other explanations?)

If the Job Pact becomes effective, a potential explanation for this is the possibility of the social partners to continue the discussions and eventually implement the instrument on sectoral levels, even after the negotiations have stranded on the centralised level.

Assessment of efficiency:

Did the outputs/results measure up to the effort/resources invested? If possible, base the assessment on evaluation reports or similar)

As the instrument has not yet been implemented on a large scale it is too early to assess its efficiency. While the results on the central level have not been very large in comparison with the time invested in negotiations, it is not unlikely that this will eventually pay off in terms of sectoral agreements.

Possible explanations for the efficiency of the instrument:

(Please provide possible explanations for the degree of efficiency, including the contribution of the social partner involvement)

Too early to assess (see above).

Emilia Johansson and Olle Berggren, Oxford Research

COM(2010) 614 An Integrated Industrial Policy for the Globalisation Era Putting Competitiveness and Sustainability at Centre Stage. EC 2010

Useful? Interesting? Tell us what you think. Hide comments

Komentuoti