Representativeness of the European social partner organisations: Temporary agency work sector

  • Observatory: EurWORK
  • Topic:
  • Social dialogue,
  • Representativeness,
  • Industrial relations,
  • Date of Publication: 08 February 2016



About
Author:
Eckhard Voss
Institution:
Wilke, Maack und Partner

This study provides information designed to aid sectoral social dialogue in the temporary agency work sector. The study is divided into three parts: a summary of the sector’s economic and employment background; an analysis of the relevant social partner organisations in all EU Member States, including their membership, role in collective bargaining, social dialogue and public policy, and national and European affiliations; and an overview of relevant European organisations, particularly their membership composition and their capacity to negotiate. The aim of Eurofound’s series of representativeness studies is to identify the relevant national and supranational social partner organisations in the field of industrial relations in selected sectors. The impetus for these studies comes from the European Commission’s aim to recognise the representative social partner organisations to be consulted under the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

Download the full report (1.35 MB PDF)

See also the executive summary

Introduction

Objectives, concept and methodology

The aim of this representativeness study is to identify the relevant national and supranational social partner organisations – the trade unions and employer organisations – in the temporary agency work sector, and to show how these actors relate to the sector’s European interest associations of labour and business. The impetus for this study arises from the aim of the European Commission to identify the representative social partner associations to be consulted under the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Hence, this study seeks to provide basic information needed to support sectoral social dialogue. The effectiveness of European social dialogue depends on whether its participants are sufficiently representative in terms of the sector’s relevant national actors across the EU Member States. Only associations which meet this precondition will be admitted to European social dialogue.

To accomplish these aims, the study first identifies the relevant national social partner organisations in the temporary agency work sector by means of both a top-down approach (listing the members of the European affiliations) and a bottom-up approach (through Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents). This involves clarifying the unit of analysis at both the national and European level of interest representation. The study includes only organisations whose membership domain is ‘sector-related’.

A European association is considered to be a relevant sector-related interest association if:

  • it is on the European Commission’s list of interest organisations to be consulted on behalf of the sector under Article 154 TFEU;
  • and/or it participates in the sector-related European Social Dialogue;
  •  and/or it has requested to be consulted under Article 154 TFEU.

A national association is considered a relevant sector-related interest association if it meets both criteria A and B:

A.        The association’s domain relates to the sector.

B.         The association is:

  1. either regularly involved in sector-related collective bargaining,
  2. and/or affiliated to any relevant European interest association.

Social partner organisations are considered ‘sector related’ if their membership domain relates to the sector in one of the ways displayed in Figure 1. The domains of the trade unions and employer organisations as well as the purview of collective agreements are likely to be not congruent with the NACE classification (78.2 ‘Temporary employment agency activities’) employed in this representativeness study (see comments on temporary agency work activities in the section below on sectoral properties). Hence, we include all trade unions, employer organisations and collective agreements which are ‘sector-related’. Being sector-related in the strict sense of NACE 78.2 applies to the following four patterns:

  • Congruence: the domain is identical with the NACE classification;
  • Sectionalism: the domain covers only a certain part of the sector as demarcated by NACE classification, while no group outside the sector is covered;
  • Overlap: the domain covers the entire sector plus (parts of) one or more other sectors;
  • Sectional overlap: the domain covers part of the sector plus (parts of) one or more other sector.

Figure 1: Sector-relatedness of social partner organisations: Domain patterns

Source: Eurofound.

As regards criterion B.2 (affiliation to European level interest association), it must be said that taking affiliation to a European social partner organisation as sufficient to determine a national association as a social partner does not necessarily imply that the association is involved in industrial relations in its own country. Although this selection criterion may seem odd at first glance, a national association that is a member of a European social partner organisation will become involved in industrial relations matters through its membership of the European organisation. Furthermore, it is important to assess whether the national affiliates to the European social partner organisations are engaged in industrial relations in their respective country. Affiliation to a European social partner organisation and/or involvement in national collective bargaining are of utmost importance to the European social dialogue, since they are the two constituent mechanisms that can systematically connect the national and European levels.

Sectoral properties

Sector relatedness (criterion A) is defined in terms of the Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community (NACE) to ensure the cross-national comparability of the findings. More specifically, the temporary agency work sector is defined as embracing the following NACE (Rev. 2) activity: 78.2 – Temporary employment agency activities. This NACE code is defined as follows:

This class includes the activities of supplying workers to clients’ businesses for limited periods of time to temporarily replace or supplement the working force of the client, where the individuals provided are employees of the temporary help service unit. However, units classified here do not provide direct supervision of their employees at the clients’ work sites. (Eurostat)

According to this NACE based definition of the sector, the organisations listed by the European Commission as a social partner organisation consulted under Article 154 of the TFEU are, on the employee side, UNI Europa and, on the employer side, Eurociett.

Directive 2008/104/EC on temporary agency work defines a temporary work agency as:

any natural or legal person who, in compliance with national law, concludes contracts of employment or employment relationships with temporary agency workers in order to assign them to user undertakings to work there temporarily under their supervision and direction. (Article 3.1b)

The directive defines a temporary agency worker as:

a worker with a contract of employment or an employment relationship with a temporary-work agency with a view to being assigned to a user undertaking to work temporarily under its supervision and direction. (Article 3.1c)

Due to the specificities of temporary agency work and the ‘triangular’ employment relationship of agency work, at a kick-off meeting of this representativeness study, representatives of the European Commission, the cross-sector and sectoral social partners agreed that the traditional NACE based approach should be combined with a broader bottom-up approach of analysing temporary agency work as a form of employment that cuts across all economic sectors. It was therefore agreed that this study should apply a combined approach of analysing the relevant interest representation organisations consisting of:

  • a top-down screening, starting with the reference to the sector-related European interest associations and looking at the affiliations of national associations to them;
  • a bottom-up screening, starting with the reference to the national organisations involved in sector-related collective bargaining (that is, NACE 78.2 or broader definition) and the collection of data on their affiliation to any European organisation.

Consequently, this report also aims to identify in the bottom-up approach affiliates of European associations that have members in user sectors of temporary agency work activities, but not temporary agency work activities in the strict sense (that is, NACE 78.2).

As this approach could basically cover all national sectoral social partner organisations, as all are potential users of temporary agency activities, the study had to define certain selection criteria. For this purpose, the study focused on the most relevant organisations in terms of membership of temporary work agencies and temporary agency workers as well as involvement in collective bargaining and bipartite and/or tripartite consultation in regard to temporary agency work.

Collection of data and quality control

The collection of quantitative data is essential for investigating the representativeness of the social partner organisations. It is carried out in a two-fold approach involving a bottom-up (Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents) and a top-down (a list of members of European Social Partners at national level) check. Unless otherwise cited, this study draws on country studies provided by the Eurofound Network of Correspondents, consisting of national industrial relations experts, based on a standard questionnaire (available on the Eurofound website), which they completed by contacting the sector-related social partner organisations in their countries.

Contact was generally made via telephone interviews in the first place, but might also have been established via email. In the case of non-availability of any representative, the national correspondents were asked to fill out the relevant questionnaires based on secondary sources, such as information given on the social partner’s website, or derived from previous research studies.

It is often difficult to find precise quantitative data. In such cases, the correspondents are requested to provide rough estimates rather than leaving a question blank, given the practical and political relevance of this study. However, if there is any doubt over the reliability of an estimate, this will be noted.

In principle, quantitative data may stem from three sources:

  • official statistics and representative survey studies;
  • administrative data, such as membership figures provided by the respective organisations, which are then used for calculating the density rate on the basis of available statistical figures on the potential membership of the organisation;
  • personal estimates made by representatives of the respective organisations.

In order to ensure the quality of the information gathered, several verification procedures and feedback loops are used in the Eurofound representativeness studies:

First, the external expert entrusted with the elaboration of the representativeness study, in collaboration with Eurofound, checks the consistency of the national contributions.

Second, Eurofound sends the national contributions to both the national members of its governing board, as well as to the European-level sector-related social partner organisations. The peak-level organisations then ask their affiliates to verify the information. Feedback received from the sector-related organisations is then taken into account, if it is in line with the methodology of the study.

Finally, the complete study is evaluated by the European-level sectoral social partners and Eurofound’s Advisory Committee on Industrial Relations, which consists of representatives from both sides of industry, governments and the European Commission.

Employment and economic trends

Economic characteristics and trends

Temporary agency work is a specific form of employment that is characterised by a triangular relationship between workers, intermediary agencies and user companies.

The temporary agency work sector in some countries was among the fastest growing employment segments both before (for example, in Austria, Germany, Italy, Spain) as well as after the 2008 economic crisis (in Hungary, Poland, Romania) according to a series of comparative studies by:

However, the average share of the temporary agency work in the EU15 workforce was estimated at only 2.5% in 2012 according to the IDEA Consult report (PDF 3.12MB) for Eurociett and UNI Europa.

The growth in the temporary agency work sector also results from the fact that, in many EU countries, temporary agency work is a form of employment that became legally regulated only during the past two decades. At EU level it was only in 2008 that Directive 2008/104/EC was adopted, on the basis of Article 153 TFEU that allows the EU to regulate the employment conditions of temporary agency workers.

According to the 2015 edition of the Economic Report of the International Confederation of Private Employment Services (Ciett), about 8.7 million people in 2013 had worked as an agency worker at some point during the year in Europe. This was an increase of about 9% on the previous year.

Both supply and demand side factors have fostered the increasing role of temporary agency work in the European economy and on the labour market:

On the demand side, temporary agency work enables user companies to make relatively easy labour adjustments and offers transaction cost savings by outsourcing some responsibility for recruitment and administration. It also generates a group of workers from which candidates can be selected for any permanent post.

On the supply side, there is evidence of that temporary agency work is a way of testing different kinds of work/employers and gaining work experience. Under certain labour market conditions, it can be a stepping stone into direct employment. Temporary agency work might also suit the interest of specific groups of workers to be more flexible or supplement other income.

As the development of temporary work activities and employment during the past years has shown, the dynamic of the temporary agency work sector is very pro-cyclical. As a recent report by IDEA Consult commissioned by Eurociett and UNI Europa (PDF 3.12MB) illustrates, agency work relatively directly follows developments in gross domestic product (GDP) and its workforce is first to adapt to economic conditions. As temporary agency work in user companies functions as a buffer or flexible layer, the increase as well as reduction of agency workers often prefigures developments of permanent employment.

This pattern was particularly strong in the context of the 2008 crisis when the temporary agency work sector in Europe experienced a decline in employment that was much stronger than overall employment. At the same time, agency employment started to increase again – with differences between EU countries – earlier than direct employment and more strongly than employment in general.

Table 1 illustrates the change in the number of companies in the temporary agency work sector between 2009 and 2013–2014 as gathered by Eurofound national correspondents in the context of this study on the basis of national statistics. It shows that, in particular, in the central and eastern European (CEE) region and with few exceptions (for example, the Czech Republic and Slovenia), the number of temporary agency work companies increased significantly until 2014 (or the year with the latest available figures). In western Europe, however, the development was much more diverse, that is, relatively stable in countries such as Belgium, Finland, France and the Netherlands, declining in some others (Denmark, Spain, UK) or reporting a relatively strong increase as in Austria, Germany and Sweden.

Table 1: Number of temporary agency work companies in 2009 and 2013–2014

 

2009

2013–2014

AT

779

>1,062

BE

140

257

BG

36

40*

CY

6

13

CZ

2,214

1,588

DE

5,714

6,593

DK

739

512*

EE

316

462

EL

n.a.

9

ES

333

261

FI

995

1,098

FR

1,500

1,500

HR

27

71

HU

916

1,016

IE

n.a.

166

IT

76

78

LT

75

92*

LU

41

46

LV

50

163

MT

8

6

NL

6,345

6,170

PL

2,947

5,157

PT

540

514

RO

42

389

SE

1,675

2,321

SI

152

98

SK

144

186

UK

15,130

10,535

Notes: n.a. = not available; * Refers to 2012. For a detailed description of sources, please refer to the national reports.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents (2015).

Employment characteristics and trends

Due to the specific nature of temporary agency work (the triangular contractual relationship with the agency as well as the user companies) and, related to this, different national concepts of counting agency workers (see below), it is extremely difficult to gather employment data on agency work on a comparative basis. As the method of gathering data on temporary agency employment differs between countries, any comparative review faces several uncertainties, for example, on the absolute number of employees or with view on structural characteristics.

The differences in the availability and quality of data on the temporary agency work sector are noted in the Eurofound comparative study, Temporary agency work and collective bargaining in the EU, published in 2009. This issue had been highlighted by previous Eurofound research on temporary agency work, with a study in 2002 describing in detail the problems of calculating employment figures. This was confirmed by the 2009 comparative study which asked national correspondents to assess the availability and quality of national statistical data. The result was that only very few national correspondents were satisfied with the data available (see Table 2 of the 2009 report).

Following the revision of NACE, Eurostat’s Structural Business Statistics (SBS) employment data are available from 2008 onwards. In 2011, according to Eurostat data, 3.9 million people were employed by temporary employment agencies in the EU (no data were available for Croatia, Greece, Ireland and Malta). 2012 data are available, but these contain significant gaps, for example, there are no data for France. If measured in full-time equivalents (FTEs), the overall employment figure would be only 2.5 million in 2011 (with even more countries without any data).

In contrast to Eurostat figures, the temporary agency employer organisation Ciett estimates the number of temporary agency workers as much higher on the basis of reports from national members. However, Ciett calculates the ‘daily average number of agency workers’ (headcount). Translated into FTEs, the Ciett figure for 2011 was around 4 million agency workers in the EU according to its agency work business indicator for September 2014 which was roughly the same as for 2013.

As Table 2 illustrates, data from the Eurostat SBS database for code 78.2 and Ciett differ quite significantly when single countries are compared. Due to differences in the mode of calculation, the Ciett figures are, sometimes significantly, higher than Eurostat data in around half of all EU Member States, while there are also countries where the opposite is the case.

The final report for the joint Eurociett and UNI Europa project ‘Temporary agency work and transitions in the labour market’ provides reasons for the stark differences for some countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, UK). With regard to the UK, for example, a representative of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skill (BIS) stated in a comment for this study that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Labour Force Survey (LFS) data underestimate the levels of agency workers. Thus, care should be taken when using LFS data to make comparisons on the levels and proportions of agency workers with the rest of the population. The BIS representative also mentioned that BIS and ONS are working closely to obtain more robust estimates of agency workers.

Table 2: Temporary agency work employment in the EU  

 

Eurostat (SBS): temporary employment agency activities/ number of employees in FTEs, 2013

Ciett: daily average number of agency workers in FTEs, 2013

AT

58,127

74,000*

BE

97,188

83,000

BG

2,643

10,000

CY

635

n.a.

CZ

44,132

46,000

DE

708,612

839,000

DK

16,655

17,000

EE

5,913

4,000

EL

584**

5,000

ES

145,285

81,000

FI

34,128

28,000

FR

n.a.***

510,000

HR

4,441

8,000

HU

44,789

74,000

IE

n.a.

26,000

IT

176,362

277,000

LT

2,848

2,000**

LU

8,767

6,000

LV

765

200**

MT

n.a.

n.a.

NL

381,202

211,000

PL

59,725

185,000

PT

66,116

80,000

RO

19,666

20,000

SE

51,756

70,000

SK

5,671

19,000**

SL

n.a.

5,000*

UK

612,434

1,156,000****

Notes: n.a. = not available; * 2011 data; ** 2012 data; *** The FTE data on temporary agency workers for France as provided by Eurostat are obviously not correct: For 2013, Eurostat reports a number of employees (FTEs) of 42,940. Compared with other sources and an overall employment figure produced by Eurostat for the same year (718,392), the FTE data are hardly likely; **** Data refer to the number of agency workers ‘on any given day’.

Source: Eurostat’s SBS (annual detailed enterprise statistics for services (NACE Rev. 2 H-N and S95) extracted 11 December 2015) and Ciett’s Economic report 2015, p. 31.

These differences between data provided by Eurostat based on the European LFS and the figures provided by Ciett based on self-reporting should be kept in mind when turning to the more recent employment figures, trends and characteristics gathered in the context of this study which are based on data by national statistical offices. Table 3 presents employment figures for 2009 and 2013–20114 (or the latest available). As highlighted previously, there are significant national varieties in calculating temporary agency workers and employment. There are not only differences between countries in regard to calculating temporary agency workers but also within countries, as the example of the UK described below illustrates.

The Eurofound national correspondent in the UK pointed out that temporary agency work arrangements in the UK can be complex, making it hard to assess the employment status of the workers concerned and their sectoral classification. Notably, agency workers may be:

  • employed directly by the temporary work agency on the basis of an employment contract, with full entitlements as employees of the agency under employment law;
  • engaged by the temporary work agency on the basis of a contract for services – such ‘PAYE temps’ are not considered to be employees of the agency but are generally deemed to be ‘workers’ in employment law terms, which means that they have certain entitlements in areas such as minimum wages, working time and equality;
  • supplied by the temporary work agency to the user undertaking via an intermediary ‘umbrella company’, which employs the employees on the basis of an employment contract;
  • self-employed and supplied by the temporary work agency to the user undertaking through the worker’s own ‘personal service company’.

Table 3: Development of temporary agency work employment since 2009

 

2009

2013–2014

Proportion of agency workers in total workforce (%)

 

Total employment

FTE employment

Total employment

FTE employment

2009

2013–2014

AT

56,882

51,185

65,327

63,450**

1.6

1.8

BE

77,957*

n.a.

82,854

n.a.

2.1

2.3

BG

999

988

2,772

2,699

0.04

0.12

CY

90

90

413

413

0.0

0.1

CZ

n.a.

n.a.

223,808

n.a.

n.a.

4.2 (est.)

DE

632,377

n.a.

814,580

n.a.

1.5

1.9

DK

17,863

15,312

22, 477

18,040

0.6

1.0

EE

2,696

2,602

6,218

5,913

0.7

1.5

EL

n.a.

n.a.

12-13,000

6,000

n.a.

0.1–0.2

ES

428,564

82,435

495,675

95,343

0.43

0,55

FI

n.a.

28,052

n.a.

34,616

1.0

1.3

FR

2,000,000

527,147

2,000,000

509,885

1.86

1.78

HR

3,500 (est.)

3,450 (est.)

6,000 (est.)

5,910

0.3

0.4

HU

79,085

n.a.

120,704

102,900

2.1

3.1

IE

6,400

n.a.

6,200

n.a.

0.3

0.3

IT

220,273

164,141

192,479

167,316

1.0

0.9

LT

1,314

1,208

2,545

2,376

0.1

0.2

LU

5,884

4,592

6,226

4,934

1.76

1.65

LV

402

334

1,036

812

0.0

0.1

MT

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

NL

711,274

134,400

700,711

119,000

2.6

3.3

PL

377,100

n.a.

559,500

209,000 (est.)

0.4

1.2

PT

2,549***

2,549 ***

9,425*

9,425*

0.1

0.3

RO

29,926*

13,965*

52,214

16,207

0.5

0.9

SE

51,470

n.a.

60,768

n.a.

1.26

1.4

SI

n.a.

n.a.

12,331

n.a.

n.a.

1.5

SK

37,074

n.a.

49,993

n.a.

1.9

2.5

UK****

237,300

n.a.

327,700

n.a.

0.9

1.2

Notes: n.a. = not available; * 2010–2011; ** 2012; *** 2001;**** Figures and percentages are from the ONS LFS survey and indicate the number of employees across the UK who reported that their job was temporary because they were ‘agency temping’ (2009) or ‘working for an employment agency’ (2014).

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents (2015).

Though the reliability of the employment features is quite weak, the figures at least indicate certain patterns and trends. With view on the share of agency workers in the total workforce, there is a clear difference between western and in particular north-western European countries on the one hand and most parts of the CEE and southern European region on the other. The highest shares in 2013–2014 are reported for countries such as the Netherlands (3.3%), Belgium (2.3%) and Germany, France and Luxembourg (all more than 1.5%). Although the data for the UK are based on a different way of calculation (permanent staff of temporary work agencies), the proportion of agency workers in the total workforce would be the highest in Europe if the share was based on the Eurostat employment figures.

In some countries that joined the EU only during the past decade and where the first-time regulation of temporary agency work has been quite recent, the number and respective share of agency workers in the total workforce has increased very fast between 2009 and 2013-2014, for example, in the Czech Republic (4.2% estimated), Hungary (3.1%), Slovakia (2.5%), Estonia and Slovenia (both 1.5%) and Poland (1.2%).

In contrast, other countries in the CEE region as well as in southern Europe (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal) the ‘penetration’ (Ciett) rates are well below 1.0%. Northern European countries as well as Italy and Spain occupy a position in the middle, for example, Denmark and Italy at around 1.0%, Finland at 1.3% and Sweden with 1.4%.

With regard to the growth in temporary agency work employment between 2009 and 2013–2014, the strongest absolute increases were reported for Germany and Poland amounting to an increase of around 29% and 48%, respectively. In addition, Hungary (41,600 agency jobs or 53%) and Romania (22,000 agency jobs or 74.5%) and Slovakia (13,000 agency jobs or 34%) show quite strong increases during the study period. Apart from Germany, Denmark (25%) Austria (15%), Sweden (18%) and Belgium (6%) are the only western European countries that reported an increase of jobs between 2009–2010 and 2013–2014. While in France and Spain there were no significant changes, the number of agency workers decreased in Italy (by 12%), Ireland (3%) and, slightly, in the Netherlands (1.5%). However, agency employment in 2009 in many countries was quite low due to the 2008 crisis effect. Thus, the strong pro-cyclical nature of temporary agency employment means that the choice of reference years will have a strong influence on the overall trends. With view on Germany, for example, the latest report of the Federal Labour Agency on agency work (in German, PDF 358KB) from July 2015 highlights that the number of agency workers more than doubled during the 10-year period up to 2014. However, the size of the agency workforce is fairly stable if the number of agency workers in 2014 is compared with the situation in 2007.

These differences in temporary agency work employment changes may reflect evolution patterns of regulation, but also different economic development contexts and national differences in the role of temporary agency work for user companies. In countries such as Austria, Denmark and Germany, there seems to be a trend of temporary agency work being used by companies not only as a temporary/buffer instrument but as an integral part of the workforce so as to increase external flexibility permanently. In contrast, recent labour market reforms in Italy have sought to reduce this structural usage of temporary agency work in favour of direct employment. Finally, in the Netherlands, the dynamic of temporary agency work during the past five years has to be seen against the background of a generally high share in total employment and the emergence of new forms of employment that provide alternative options for companies (for example, contract work or freelancing). For further details see the recent report by IDEA Consult for Eurociett and UNI Europa (PDF 3.12MB).

As highlighted by previous comparative studies, it is extremely difficult to gather comparative data on employment features and characteristics such as age, qualification and occupational background on temporary agency employment. It has, at least, been possible to present data in this report on gender characteristics and the proportion of female employees as reported by the statistical offices in a number of EU Member States (Table 4). Apart from Germany, Portugal, Romania and Spain, where the share of women in agency work is higher than that of men, most EU countries have a female share of between 30% and 50%. The lowest rates of below 30% are reported for Austria, France and Luxembourg, likely indicating a strong role for male agency jobs, for example, in manufacturing.

Table 4: Share of female temporary agency workers, 2013–2014

 

Countries

Above 50%

DE, ES, PT, RO

40–50%

BG, DK, EL, HR, HU, LV, PL, UK

30–40%

BE, IT, NL, SI, SK

Below 30%

AT, FR, LU

Note: No data available for Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Lithuania, Malta and Sweden.

Source: Eurofound Network of European correspondents (2015).

National level of interest representation

In many EU countries, statutory regulations on the representativeness of social partner organisations exist and become important when assigning certain rights of interest representation, collective bargaining or in public policymaking. Representativeness is normally measured by the membership strength of the organisations.

For a sectoral study such as this, measures of membership strength of both the trade unions and employer organisations also have to take into account how the membership domains relate to the sector. Furthermore, the representativeness of the national social partner organisations is important for the European umbrella organisations to participate in the European social dialogue. Therefore, and apart from organisational strength, the role of the national actors in collective bargaining and public policymaking are two further important aspects of representativeness. This is based on research evidence that the effectiveness of the European social dialogue tends to increase with the growing ability of the national affiliates of the European organisations to regulate employment terms and to influence national public policies affecting the sector.

Thus, representativeness is a multidimensional concept that involves three basic elements:

  • the membership domain of social partner organisations and membership strength, measured by organisational density;
  • the role of social partner organisations in collective bargaining;
  • their role in public policymaking.

As in other Eurofound representativeness studies, the following analysis of national level interest representation in the temporary agency work sector thus focuses on these three aspects. In this context, the specific nature of temporary agency work as both a sector demarcated according to the specific NACE classification as well as a form of employment that cuts across all economic sectors has to be taken into account. This has important effects on the three dimensions of representativeness mentioned above as is shown in the following sections.

Membership domain and strength

This study has collected quantitative data on membership and organisational strength/density through the Eurofound Network of Correspondents along the indicators listed in Table 5.

Table 5: Definition of membership and organisational strength/density

 

Membership

Organisational Strength/Density

Trade unions

·       Number of active members in employment

·       Number of active members in employment in the sector

·       Sectoral density: Number of active members in employment in the sector divided by total number of employees in the sector

Employer organisations

·       Number of member companies

·       Number of employees working in member companies

·       Number of member companies in the sector

·       Number of employees working in member companies in the sector

·       Sectoral density (companies): Number of member companies in the sector divided by the total number of companies in the sector

·       Sectoral density (employees): Number of employees working in member companies in the sector divided by total number of employees in the sector

Source: Eurofound Network of European correspondents (2015).

In the following sections we first present data on trade unions and employer organisations in terms of:

  • domain patterns;
  • membership and organisational strength;
  • collective bargaining;
  • participation in public policy.

Domain patterns

Trade unions

Detailed data and information on employee organisations, membership domains, strength and affiliation to EU level trade unions are presented in Tables A1, A2 and A3. Given the cross-cutting nature of agency work, however, potentially all trade unions may organise temporary agency workers on the basis of the work they are conducting in user companies. Thus, and in line with the broader approach of this study, national correspondents were asked to identify the three most important social partner organisations that not only organise temporary agency workers in the strict sense but also through user companies’ sectoral domains.

As a result, Eurofound national correspondents have identified a total of 62 trade union organisations in 22 EU Member States where trade union domains relate to the sector. The names and abbreviations of these trade unions are given in Table A9.

In six Member States (Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania, Romania), no trade union could be identified which organises any temporary agency workers. Both Cyprus and Romania have several thousands of agency workers, making this a quite remarkable result and one that perhaps also illustrates the fact that temporary agency work in these countries is a recent phenomenon which is only now becoming an issue for trade unions and recruitment.

In a number of countries, sectoral domain patterns are not totally clear. In particular in countries where trade unions are organised on sectoral/industry domain patterns and not as occupational or general unions, it is often not clear whether all agency workers fall within the domain of a trade union or only those who are working in a specific sector. Thus we found a number of countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, UK) where different domain patterns exist. The only country where a domain pattern of congruence exists is France. Here, specific trade union organisations, affiliated to the large national union federations, have been established for temporary agency workers. A similar pattern exists in Italy but in this case, the unions do not focus just on agency workers but also other workers such as freelancers, dependent solo self-employed or contract workers.

What clearly results from our study is that the two main domain patterns are overlap (in countries where general unions are the most important pattern of union organisation) and sectional overlap (in those countries where unions are organised on the industry principle, thus reflecting the cross-cutting nature of temporary agency work). All in all, however, quite a pluralistic picture emerges with several countries following a mix of domain patterns as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Domain coverage of trade unions in the temporary agency work sector

Note: * Different domain patterns exist. For details see Table A1.

Employer organisations

The structure of employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector in the EU differs quite significantly from the trade union structures. In total, our study identified 41 organisations as relevant and so interest representation is much less fragmented compared with workers’ interest representation. While there are only two countries where there is no employer organisation for the temporary agency work sector, in 15 countries the companies in this sector are organised by only one organisation and, in most of the others, only two organisations exist. The names and abbreviations of the 41 employer organisations are given in Table A9.

Domain patterns of sectoral relatedness also differ from those of trade unions: The pattern of congruence is much more widespread as shown in Figure 3. Furthermore, and in strong contrast to trade unions, no case of sectional overlap was found. A quite dominant domain pattern is overlap; in most cases this results from the principle of employer associations organising not only temporary work agencies but also private enterprises involved in job placement activities, recruitment or other human resource activities.

Figure 3: Domain coverage of employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector

Note: * Different domain patterns exist. For details see Table A5.

Membership figures and organisational strength

Trade unions

A key finding of this study is that there is a significant lack of information regarding membership figures and the organisational strength of trade unions. As shown in Table A1, there are only a minority of EU Member States where trade unions were able to report figures of temporary agency workers being a member of the organisation. Thirty out of the total of 62 trade union organisations identified in our study were not able to provide any figures or estimates on the number of agency workers organised in the respective organisation. Furthermore, three organisations (in Latvia and Malta) reported a membership figure of zero.

This lack of data may also reflect the peculiarity of temporary agency employment (including an employment relationship with the agency as well as with user companies, transitional character, frequency of changes and breaks in careers) that contrasts to traditional trade union organisational principles.

Thus, those countries where trade unions provided figures are those where either agency workers are organised in specific, status-related trade union organisations or specific sections (in particular in France and Italy) or in trade unions that register agency workers as a specific category of members (Finland, Hungary, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, UK). Table 6 lists those national trade unions that appear to organise the largest known numbers of temporary agency workers.

Table 6: Trade unions reporting the highest number of temporary agency workers, 2014–2015

 

Organisation

Total members
(active and non-active)

Members within the sector (NACE 78.2 or broader definition)

FI

PAM-liitto

160,000

2,000–3,000

FI

Metalliliitto

140,000

7,000 (est.)

FR

USI GCT

3,000

3,000

HU

VASAS

20,417

2,175

IT

Nidil – Cgil

67,632*

14,953*

IT

Felsa – Cisl

50,000 (est.)

40,000 (est.)

NL

FNV

1.1 million

5,500

NL

CNV

300,000

1,000

NL

LBV

12,500

1,250

PT

SINTTAV

8,530

3,150

PT

SINDETELCO

7,789

1,632

SE

LO (member unions)

1,200,000

20,000

SE

Unionen

500,000

11,000

SE

Akademikerförbunden

350,000

4,000

SE

SLF

33,600

1,000

SE

Byggnads

76,517

2,000

UK

CWU

201,729*

2,107

UK

Unite

1,200,000

15,000

Note: * 2013.

Source: Eurofound Network of correspondents (2015).

Given these patchy and weak data on sectoral union membership, it is extremely difficult and too vague to try to estimate any organisational density rates. A further problem arises from the uncertainties in the calculation of the national temporary agency workforces. This certainly explains the large differences and somewhat surprising results of calculating membership density rates for those countries where a sufficient basis of information is available.

In Finland, a total temporary agency workforce (FTE) of 34,000 (national sources for 2013–2014) and a union membership in the sector of approximately 12,000 would equate a membership density of about 35%. According to surveys carried out by the employer organisation, HPL, and the Ministry of the Economy and Employment the trade union density is even higher (about 50–60%).

In Italy, the total temporary agency workforce (FTE) is 167,000 (national sources for 2013–2014) and the reported union membership (without the largest organisation, Uiltemp) of approximately 55,000 would equate to a density rate of nearly 33%.

In the Netherlands, the total temporary agency workforce (FTE) is 119,000 based on national sources for 2013–2014. However, a figure of 218,000 from the temporary agency work employer organisations and a union membership (without De Unie) of about 7,750 would mean that only 6.5 or 3.5% of all agency workers are organised in a trade union.

In Sweden, the total temporary agency workforce is 65,000 (only business figures on membership are available for FTE). With a union membership of approximately 40,000, this would result in a very high membership rate of around 61%.

In UK, the union density rate would be as low as 1.8% if the Ciett figures of around 1 million agency workers on a full-time basis are taken as the reference.

Employer organisations

Again in contrast to trade unions, the quantitative data on the number of member companies as well as the number of employees in these member companies as reported by the 41 employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector identified in this study are much more comprehensive and exist for all EU countries where employer organisations exist in the sector (for details see Table A5).

However, and with a view to the density of employer organisations, there are some gaps in the availability of figures. For example, for France and the UK, figures are only available for permanent staff in the member companies in the agency business enterprises.

For those countries where figures are available, employer organisations in several countries report large number of employees in member companies within the temporary agency work sector. Compared with the total national temporary agency work employment, the coverage seems to be particularly high in those countries such as Austria, Belgium, Finland, Germany and Sweden that generally have a high organisational density rate of employer organisations at sector level. However, as shown in Table 7, the numbers of employees in member organisations within the temporary agency work sector as reported by employer organisations in countries such as Poland, Romania and Slovakia are remarkably high and indicate a high organisational density rate of employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector in these countries. Another result for these three countries is that the temporary agency work workforce seems to be concentrated in a very few but very large companies if the number of member companies within the temporary agency work sector is compared with the number of employees working in these member companies.

Table 7: Employer organisations reporting the highest number of temporary agency workers in member companies, 2014–2015

 

Organisation

Number of members in the TAW sector*

Total number of employees in member companies within the TAW sector*

AT

FVGD

2,400

65,000–75,000

BE

Federgon

124

87,000 (est.)

DE

BAP

n.a.

320,000 (est.)

DE

iGZ

2,850

300,000

FI

HPL

290 (est.)

33,000

FR

Prisme

600

459,000**

PL

Forum HR

21

254,000 (est.)

PL

SAZ

9

150,000 (est.)

RO

ARAMT

20

42,000

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

550

75,000–80,000

SK

APAS

15

15,000

UK

REC

n.a.

96,000***

Notes: n.a. = not available; * NACE 78.2 or broader definition; ** According to Prisme, its member companies employ around 90% of the total temporary agency work workforce; *** Employees working in the ‘recruitment profession’ according to REC. For more details and other countries see Table A5.

Source: Eurofound Network of correspondents (2015). 

Collective bargaining

In terms of collective bargaining practice and coverage, the situation in the EU temporary agency work sector is very heterogeneous and significantly polarised. High bargaining coverage rates of 90–100% are reported in countries with a strong practice of sectoral bargaining and extension practices (Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden), while in countries where bargaining takes place at company level, bargaining coverage rates are low (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, UK).

An important result from this study is that no collective bargaining is taking place in 11 EU Member States in relation to the temporary agency work sector. That is, it is either carried out within the temporary agency work sector or in other sectors where the collective agreement also covers temporary agency workers.

As shown in Table 8, multi-employer bargaining at cross-sector and sector level only is carried out by trade unions in some western European countries. In the entire CEE region and the two Anglo-Saxon Member States (Ireland, UK), as well as in southern Europe, collective bargaining in most cases is totally absent even at the company level.

Table 8: Collective bargaining and bargaining levels of trade union organisations in the temporary agency work sector, 2014

Form/level of bargaining

Countries

Multi-employer bargaining at inter-sectoral and sectoral level

AT, DE, LU, NL, PT*, SE

Single and multi-employer bargaining

BE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, IT, NL

Only bargaining at plant and company

BG, CZ, IE, MT, UK

No collective bargaining

CY**, EE**, EL**, HR**, HU, LT**, LV, PL, RO**, SL**, SK**

Notes: * No agreements signed so far; ** No trade unions exist that would cover the temporary agency work  sector. For further details, see Table A4.

Source: Eurofound Network of correspondents (2015).

The trade union involvement in collective bargaining reflects the pattern of employer organisations and their involvement or non-involvement in bargaining processes. The collective bargaining practices of the employer organisations identified by this study reflect a western European versus eastern European/Anglo-Saxon contrast.

As shown in Table 9, only in 10 EU Member States do employer organisations have the capacity or competence to conduct collective agreements at multi-employer, sectoral or branch level (Austria, Denmark, Germany, Finland, France, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden). All of these countries have industrial relations patterns and traditions characterised by a strong multi-level system of bargaining at branch level. Portugal is a peculiar case as here the social partners and employers are involved in collective bargaining but no agreements have so far been signed. An agreement covering temporary agency work dating back to 1989 (and extended in 1995 is, in principle, still in force but according to social partners in the sector it is actually not implemented. Initiatives to sign new agreements at sectoral level in 2009 and 2011 both failed.

In Ireland and the UK, as well as in the CEE countries, collective bargaining at either level is totally absent. In 17 out of the 28 EU Member States collective bargaining does not take place and 19 out of 41 sector-related employer organisations are not engaged in collective bargaining. This confirms previous studies which showed that, in 15 out of 27 EU Member States, employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector have no mandate for collective bargaining at sector level; see, for example, the overview of good practice cases (PDF 2.84MB)in an annex of the report by IDEA Consult for Eurociett and UNI Europa.

Table 9: Collective bargaining practices of employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector

Type

Organisations by country

Involved in collective bargaining at multi-employer and sector/branch level

Austria: FVGD

Belgium: Federgon

Denmark: Dansk Erhverv/VB, DI

Germany: BAP, iGZ

Spain: ASEMPLEO

Finland: HPL, PALTA

France: Prism’emploi

Italy: Assolavoro, Assosomm

Luxembourg: FEDIL

Netherlands: ABU, NBBU

Sweden: Bemanningsföretagen, Medieföretagen, BI

Involved in collective bargaining but no agreements signed

Portugal: APESPE, APCC

Not involved in collective bargaining

Austria: VZA

Bulgaria: BG Staffing

Croatia: CPEA

Czech Republic: APPS

Estonia: EPREL

Greece: ENIDEA

Hungary: SZTMSZ

Ireland: NRF

Lithuania: LIIA

Latvia: LPDAA

Poland: Forum HR, SAZ, OKAP

Romania: ARAMT

Slovakia: APAS, APAS,* APSZ

Slovenia: ZAZ

UK: REC

No sector-related employer organisations

Cyprus and Malta

Note: No information on FEDETT (Spain).

Source: Eurofound Network of correspondents (2015).

Participation in public policy

Apart from the sector relatedness, organisational and membership strength of social partners and their active involvement in collective bargaining processes, participation in public policy is a third important indicator of the representativeness of national social partner organisations.

Here, not only is the participation in tripartite or bipartite consultation (either on a regular or ad hoc basis) relevant but also the existence of bipartite or tripartite bodies and institutions established in the temporary agency work sector as these often play an important role in public policies regarding regulatory and other frameworks in the sector.

Tripartite and bipartite consultation

In most EU Member States, social partners related to the temporary agency work sector are also consulted on sector-related matters by public authorities (Table 10). This is the case for 84% of all trade union organisations (52 out of 62 organisations) and for 77.5% of all employer organisations analysed by our study (31 out of 40 organisations). In most cases, consultation by public authorities is reported to take place on an ad hoc basis.

However, there are a number of EU Member States where no sector-related trade union and employer organisations exist and thus consultation does not take place. There are six countries with no trade union structures (Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania, Romania) and two countries without any employer organisation related to the temporary agency work sector (Cyprus, Malta).

The participation of employer organisations in public policy consultation is stronger than in the case of trade unions. Apart from Cyprus and Malta, where no sector-related organisations exist, only employer organisations in Bulgaria, Greece and Sweden (here only one out of three) report that they are not being consulted; however, no information is available for Hungary, Portugal and Slovakia.

In contrast, trade union organisations in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia and Portugal report that they are not consulted by public authorities. If we add these countries to the six countries with no sector-related trade union organisations, then trade unions are not consulted by public authorities about temporary agency work matters in 10 out of the 28 EU Member States.

However, the question of whether or not consultation of trade union organisations (most likely at cross-sector-level) took place in the past or on an ad hoc basis by public authorities (for example, in the context of regulatory reforms of temporary agency work) in these countries was out of the scope of this representativeness study and has not been addressed specifically.

But as practices reported in the Czech Republic show, tripartite and also bipartite social dialogue and consultation is happening and, at least in this country, seems to be an emerging issue. Since 2008, the tripartite Council of Economic and Social Agreement (RHSD ČR) has addressed issues related to temporary agency work through a working group. However, this working group includes only one of the two employer organisations (APPS), government representatives and as representatives from the Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (ČMKOS). In March 2015, the RHSD and the working group discussed, for example, a new legislative proposal by the government on work agencies that included provisions to limit the maximum share of agency workers at company level (15%) and the equality of working conditions of agency workers and directly employed employees. APPS, together with the Confederation of Industry of the Czech Republic (SP ČR), has also been involved in bipartite dialogue with trade unions, for example, on fighting illegal practices by work agencies. Furthermore, APPS has reached an agreement with the Czech Metalworkers’ Federation (OS KOVO) on general cooperation, improving working conditions in the temporary agency work sector and combatting illegal forms of employment.

In other countries, however, social partners differ in regard to the assessment of the quality of consultation as the case of Bulgaria illustrates. According to information given to this study by a representative of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB), the organisation has not received information from the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy on the status of the implementation of Directive 2008/104/EC as well as on suggestions made by CITUB in regard to legislative changes. However, this was not confirmed by a Ministry representative who stated that CITUB had been involved in the directive’s implementation in the context of the consultation of the National Tripartite Council; for further details, see the national report for Bulgaria for this study).

Table 10: Participation of trade unions and employer organisations in public policies

Practice

Trade unions

Employer organisations

Social partners involved in consultation on a regular basis

AT, DE*, FR*, NL*, SE*, UK*

AT*, CZ, ES*, FI*, FR, HR, NL, SE, UK

Social partners involved in consultation on an ad hoc basis

BE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, IE, IT, LU, MT, NL, PL, SL, SK, UK

AT**, BE, CZ**, DE, DK, EE, FI**, IT, LT, LU, LV, PL, RO, SL

No consultation

CZ, HU, LV, PT

BG, EL, SE**

No consultation as no sector-related organisation exist

CY, EE, EL, HR, LT, RO

CY, MT

No information available

BG, FR***, IE***, PT***, SE***

ES***, HU, PT***, SK

Notes: * Trade unions: USI GCT (France); DGB (Germany); FNV, CNV (Netherlands); LO, Unionen, Akademikerförbunden (Sweden); Unite (UK). Employer organisations: VZA (Austria); APPS (Czech Republic); HPL (Finland); ASEMPLEO (Spain); ** Employer organisations: FVGD (Austria); APA (Czech Republic); PALTA (Finland); Medieföretagen (Sweden); *** Trade unions: CFTC-CSVF (France); SIPTU (Ireland); FETESE (Portugal); SEKO (Sweden). Employer organisations: APESPE, APCC (Portugal); FEDETT (Spain). For further details see Tables A4 and A8.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents (2015).

Bodies dealing with sector-specific public policies

There are eight EU member states where social partners in the temporary agency work sector are actively involved in the regulation of working conditions and other issues of the sector. Important topics and areas addressed by joint bodies are:

  • provision of (further) social support and benefits (for example, old age pensions and bridging spells of non-employment);
  • support for further training and labour market transitions for jobseekers into agency work;
  • monitoring compliance with the requirements of legal or sectoral collective agreements;
  • health and safety provisions.

The overview in Table 11 shows that a strong system of collective bargaining is a key precondition in most of the countries where such joint bodies exist. With the only exception being the UK, in all countries these bodies have been established by the social partners, have a bipartite character and are based on collective agreements. As reported by some trade union organisations in the context of this study (for example, from the Netherlands) and documented in other comparative research (the recent IDEA Consult report for Eurociett and UNI Europa (PDF 2.84MB)), an important motivation of social partners (namely trade unions involved in the establishment of joint social and other funds) has been to improve not only the financial situation of temporary agency workers but also to improve their employment security, in particular by providing further training and career support activities. A further motivation was highlighted in trade unions responses from Belgium and the Netherlands which report the need to monitor the compliance with collective agreements and particularly the equal pay principle.

Further comment is necessary on the scope of joint bodies and institutions. Whereas in Sweden and the UK this is limited to licensing functions, the various funds in Austria, Belgium and Luxembourg (see Table 11) focus entirely on social and training support measures. In contrast, the joint bodies in France, Italy and the Netherlands have a broader scope; most notably in France and the Netherlands, a relatively large number of funds and bodies have been set up to address a broad scope of topics.

Finally, in Spain there is a statutory tripartite working group on temporary agency work. The sector-related social partners are not involved in it. Instead the peak-level trade union organisations, the General Workers’ Union (UGT) and the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions (CCOO), and employer organisations, the Spanish Confederation of Employers’ Organisations (CEOE) and the Spanish Confederation of Small and Medium Businesses (CEPYME), provide representatives.

Table 11: Bodies dealing with sector-specific public policies in 2014

 

Name of body and scope of activity

Character

Basis

AT

Social and further training fund

Bipartite, supervised by government

Statutory based on agreement

BE

Social fund

Training fund

Health and safety fund*

Bipartite

Agreement*

ES

Working group on Temporary Agency Workers. Health and Safety on Work Commission

Tripartite

Statutory

FR

Social fund

Fund for employment and skills forecasting

Fund for financing professional training

Fund for supporting jobseekers access to temporary agency workers

Fund for providing financial support for agency workers between two work spells

Fund to provide social and financial support for temporary agency workers

Bipartite commission for collective bargaining in the temporary agency work sector

Bipartite body for welfare and pension

Bipartite body for research

Bipartite

Agreement

IT

E.bi.temp

Fontemp

Forma.Temp

Bipartite

Statutory based on agreement

LU

Fund for social benefits, social assistance and training

Bipartite

Agreement

NL

Three sectoral funds for financing and supporting education and training, health and safety and providing social support for agency workers

Pension fund for temporary agency workers

Certification body for temporary work agencies

Body monitoring the compliance with the collective agreements

Bipartite

Agreement

SE

Authorisation Board

Bipartite

Agreement

UK

Licensing authority for temporary work agencies

Tripartite

Statutory

Notes: * Statutory. For further details see Table A12.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of correspondents (2015).

European level of interest representation

At European level, eligibility for consultation and participation in social dialogue are linked to three criteria defined in the European Commission’s Communication on adapting and promoting social dialogue at Community level (COM/98/0322 final). Accordingly, a social partner must:

(a) … relate to a specific sector or categories and be organized at European level;

(b) … consist of organizations which are themselves an integral and recognized part of Member States’ social partner structures and have the capacity to negotiate agreements, and which are representative of several Member States;

(c) … have adequate structures to ensure their effective participation in the work of the Committees.’  (Article 1)

In terms of social dialogue, the constituent feature is the ability of such organisations to negotiate on behalf of their members and to conclude binding agreements. This section on the European associations in the temporary agency sector therefore analyses:

  • the membership domains of these organisations;
  • the composition of their membership;
  • their ability to negotiate.

Two sector-related European associations – the employee association, UNI Europa, and the European Confederation of Private Employment Services (Eurociett) – are particularly significant for the temporary agency work sector as they are listed by the European Commission as social partner organisations consulted under Article 154 TFEU. Since 2000, these two organisations have been engaged in the Social Dialogue Committee for the temporary agency work sector. The following analysis concentrates first on these organisations before providing supplementary information on the relevance of other EU level organisations that are linked to the sector’s national social partners.

Membership domain and composition

UNI Europa is the European regional organisation of Union Network International (UNI) with offices in Brussels and in Nyon in Switzerland. UNI Europa is affiliated to the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and represents 7 million workers in 330 European trade unions. As the European trade union federation for services and communication, it is responsible for social dialogue with the corresponding employer organisations in numerous areas of activity in the service sector, including temporary agency work for which it has a specific section. UNI Europa has members in all EU countries.

Eurociett is the regional confederation of the International Confederation of Private Employment Agencies (Ciett) and has members within the EU, the European Economic Area (EEA) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) areas and other countries located within the territory of geographical Europe. According to its constitution:

Eurociett is the European representative body of the private employment agencies industry in particular and job market intermediaries in general. As such, Eurociett is the natural contact for European-wide industry consultation …                                                                      (Article 6)

Eurociett’s offices are located in Brussels. Apart from national employer federations representing the private employment agency sector at large, Eurociett also has multinational corporate members. Eurociett has members in all EU Member States except in Cyprus and Malta.

Trade unions

As seen in the screening of national level trade unions and employer organisations, industrial relations in the temporary agency work sector have a peculiar character that stems from the triangular relationship of this form of work. As detailed below, this results in quite different patterns of organisational principles in trade unions and employer organisations. While temporary work agencies and companies in the overwhelming number of cases are organised in national interest organisations that are also affiliated to the EU peak level organisation Eurociett, the situation of trade union organisation is quite different. Here, agency workers may be organised on the basis of the specific employment status as agency workers (narrower definition) or on the basis of their affiliation to specific user sectors and branches. Against this background, the question ‘who represents agency workers?’ is neither easy to answer nor are there general rules that could be found across the EU. As explained above the landscape of organisational principles is very pluralistic and heterogeneous.

There is a further difficulty in particular with regard to trade unions arising from this study. As sector-specific trade unions exist only in a few Member States (France, Italy), temporary agency workers in most EU countries may join any union that matches their respective professional or occupational background, or organises employees in user companies. Against this, there was a need for this study to focus on the most important organisations, whereby the criteria were the standard criteria used by Eurofound in representativeness studies (sector-relatedness of the organisations domain, involvement in sector-related collective bargaining and/or affiliated to any relevant European organisation). This resulted in significant differences in the number of trade union organisations regarded as relevant and important by national correspondents ranging zero or just one (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Slovenia, Slovakia) to eight (Sweden) (see Table A1).

Screening of the European affiliations of the 62 trade union organisations in the 22 EU Member States (no sector-related trade unions could be identified in Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania and Romania), shows that there is quite a pluralistic pattern of affiliation. Nearly 10% (six out of 62) of the trade union organisations are currently not affiliated to any EU level union organisations. The overwhelming majority (42 out of 62) organisations, representing a share of around 68% of the trade union organisations, are only affiliated to one EU level union. However, 22.5% (14) of the sector-related trade union organisations are affiliated to at least two EU level trade union organisations.

Our analysis identified six sectoral European trade union organisations as relevant as they represent national organisations with a link to the temporary agency work sector. Apart from UNI Europa these are industriALL, the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU), the European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT), the European Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF) and the European Federation of Building and Woodworkers (EFBWW). Each of these organisations represents national affiliates in at least three countries. With more than half of the 62 organisations (56.5%), the largest share of national trade union organisations are affiliated to UNI Europa, followed by the manufacturing union industriALL (22.5%) and the public service union EPSU (16%). Furthermore, 14.5% of the national trade union organisations are affiliated to the cross-sectoral ETUC which represents national union confederations and is also the umbrella organisations of the EU level sectoral trade union federations (Figure 4).

Figure 4: European affiliation of trade union organisations in the temporary agency work sector

Notes: N = 62 trade union organisations in 22 EU Member States. There are no sector-related unions in Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania. For further details see Table A3.

Source: Eurofound Network of European correspondents (2015).

Table 12 presents an overview of different patterns of EU level affiliation and coverage of countries by UNI Europa. In five EU Member States (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia), no national trade union(s) are affiliated to UNI Europa. As those countries where there are no sector relevant trade unions at all (that is, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania, Romania) have to be added to this list, there is currently quite a significant group of 11 EU Member States where no UNI Europa affiliates exists.

Table 12: European affiliation of sector-relevant trade unions

EU level affiliation

Countries

Countries where trade unions are only affiliated to UNI Europa

BE, ES, IT, LU, LV, PT, UK

Countries with sector-related trade unions affiliated to UNI Europa and other EU level trade union organisations

AT, DE, DK, FI, FR, IE, MT, NL, PL*, SE

Countries where sector-relevant trade unions are not affiliated to UNI Europa

BG, CZ, HU (industriALL), SI (ETUC), SK (industriALL, EPSU)

Countries where no sector related trade union exists that is affiliated to an EU level organisation

BG, CZ

Countries where no sector-relevant trade union organisations exist

CY, EE, EL, HR, LT, RO

Notes: * Only the Bank, Commerce and Insurance Workers branch of NSZZ Solidarność is affiliated to UNI Europa. For further details, see Table A3.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of correspondents (2015).

Affiliation to other EU level sectoral trade union federations again reflects the triangular relationship and cross-sectoral nature of temporary agency employment. This study has shown that five European level trade union federations have national affiliates which are related to the temporary agency work sector. By far the most important of these trade union federations is industriALL, which has manufacturing-related national affiliates in 10 EU Member States, followed by the public service union federation, EPSU, which has sector-related members in six countries (Austria, Denmark, Malta, Slovakia, Sweden, UK), EFFAT in five countries (Austria, Denmark, Malta, Sweden, UK), ETF in four countries (Germany, Malta, Sweden, UK) and EFBWW in three countries (Denmark, Sweden, UK). Furthermore, and reflecting also the cross-sectoral structure of temporary work, ETUC is a relevant trade union organisation as national members in six countries report an affiliation to the ETUC (Germany, Ireland, Malta, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden).

Against this, and in terms of the coverage of additional organisations and countries, we found that only industriALL and ETUC would be able to increase the number of countries represented by EU level organisations as all other European federations only have members in countries that are already covered by UNI Europa.

  • industriALL could add eight more national trade union organisations (ones not already affiliated to UNI Europa) in seven countries, including Hungary and Slovakia where no trade union organisations exist that are affiliated to another EU level organisation.
  • ETUC could also add eight more national cross-sectoral unions not affiliated to UNI Europa in five countries, including Slovenia that is currently not covered by another EU level organisation.

A further aspect of representativeness should be mentioned in this context given the cross-sectoral nature of temporary agency work. The eight additional industriALL affiliates represent temporary agency workers in the manufacturing sector in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands and Slovakia; most of these affiliates (Pro-GE in Austria; 3F and Metal in Denmark; Metallilitto in Finland; IG Metall and IG BCE in Germany; VASAS in Hungary; De Unie in the Netherlands; and OS Kovo in Slovakia) are among the largest national sectoral union organisations and are actively involved in collective bargaining on behalf of temporary agency workers. This also applies to ETUC affiliates in regard to cross-sectoral matters and the involvement of union confederations in public consultation on matters relating to temporary agency work. In countries such as Germany and Sweden, ETUC affiliates are also involved in collective bargaining covering the whole temporary agency work sector. The ETUC affiliates relevant in this context are: DGB in Germany; SIPTU in Ireland; NSZZ Solidarność, OPZZ and FZZ in Poland; ZSSS in Slovenia; and LO in Sweden.

Against this, and considering the organisational strength and coverage of UNI Europa, industriALL and ETUC, the coverage of the temporary agency work sector could increase significantly both in quantitative as well as qualitative terms (that is, collective bargaining and involvement in public consultation). These three trade union organisations would represent, by affiliation, 50 out of the 62 identified union organisations which is a share of 83%; if only the 56 national organisations affiliated to EU level organisations are taken into account, the share would be 89%. Furthermore, the number of countries covered by EU level organisations would increase from 17 to 20 out of a total of 22 EU countries where there are trade unions related to the temporary agency work sector.

Our analysis shows that UNI Europa is clearly is the biggest and most representative organisation in the temporary agency work sector. However, the analysis also identified deficits with respect to the coverage of national organisations related to the sector as well as the coverage of EU Member States which should be taken into account. 

Employer organisations

The European membership pattern of national employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector is dominated by Eurociett as the most representative organisation in terms of membership.

As a specific business sector, respective employer organisations with domain patterns that either are congruent or overlap with other private employment agency activities (for example, recruitment, outplacement) exist in all but two countries. Only in two countries (Poland, Sweden) are there more than two relevant employer organisations.

As a result, 63% of the 41 employer organisations identified by our study are affiliated to Eurociett. Apart from Cyprus and Malta where sector-relevant employer organisations do not exist, at least one employer organisation in each of the remaining 26 EU Member States is a member of Eurociett. In contrast to the multiple affiliation patterns of many trade union organisations, there are only four national organisations that are affiliated to EU level employer’s organisations other than Eurociett (Figure 5). Thus, Eurociett by far is the most representative EU level employer’s organisation in regard to the temporary agency work sector. In this context, it should be mentioned that, according to Eurociett, its policy is to have only federation per country and that should be the most representative in terms of market share and turnover. Eurociett also stated that, among the 41 employer organisations considered, there are some that by their nature cannot be Eurociett members because their focus is broader and does not fit the Eurociett membership criteria.

Figure 5: European affiliation of employer organisations in the temporary agency work sector

Notes: N = 41 employer organisations in 26 EU Member States. There are no sector-related organisations in Cyprus and Malta. For further details, see Table A7.

Source: Eurofound Network of European correspondents (2015).

Capacity to negotiate

The third criterion of representativeness at European level refers to the organisation’s capacity to negotiate on behalf of its members and the existence of adequate structures and resources to participate in European social dialogue.

Both UNI Europa and Eurociett have specific procedures to define the positions to be presented within the European social dialogue framework.

Following an inquiry in the context of this study, UNI Europa and Eurociett confirmed that both organisations have been given a statutory mandate to negotiate on behalf of its members. This mandate is defined in the UNI Europa’s statutes and Eurociett’s constitution.

As a European trade union federation for services and communication, UNI Europa currently represents 272 national trade unions in 50 countries. UNI Europa’s aim is to strengthen the social dialogue in sectors where it already exists and to establish sectoral social dialogue where it does not, so as to build a platform for European industrial relations in each of these areas. Above that UNI Europa supports the activities and priorities of its national affiliates and helps to promote them at national level. As stated in its statutes, UNI Europa seeks to fulfil the objectives by:

  • deciding policy and action with respect to the institutions of the European Union to ensure that there is a social and democratic dimension to European integration;
  • representing affiliates in European institutions whose activities affect the social, economic and cultural conditions of affiliates and their members.

With regard to its main functions, Eurociett’s constitution stipulates that:

Eurociett is involved in all issues that related to the activities of private employment agencies at the European level. As such, its main functions are as follows:

  • represent its members with all of the institutions concerned. Its main activity consists of ensuring that European laws and regulations that affect the members’ interests are as compatible as possible with the members’ growth and prosperity;
  • promote the industry’s activities, in particular, triangular employment relationships, and attempt to eliminate any discrimination in the industry;
  • negotiate with European institutions and organisations (for example, in the form of social dialogues) and, if expressly requested by a national member federation, with the government or official organisations of this member’s country; […]                                                              (Paragraph II, Article 3)

After a joint application to the EU Commission, since 2000 UNI Europa and Eurociett have been the two social partners involved in the Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee (SSDC) on temporary agency work at the European level. According to the SSDC’s web page, it is currently focusing on:

  • labour market policies;
  • promoting national social dialogue;
  • temporary agency work regulation;
  • sectoral developments and the economic situation;
  • projects on cross -order activities within temporary agency work and on transitions in the labour market.

UNI Europa and Eurociett have carried out a number of joint projects, issued joint declarations on various issues and have drafted joint opinions which illustrate their capacity and resources to negotiate successfully at European level. Examples include:

  • joint project on ‘How temporary agency work compares with other forms of employment’ (2013–2015);
  • joint project on temporary agency work and transitions in the labour market (2011–2012);
  • promoting sectoral social dialogue on temporary agency work: organisation of a round table events in Bulgaria (2009), Turkey (2010), Croatia (2013) and Serbia (2014);
  • joint declaration on vocational training for temporary agency workers: ‘Joint actions developed by sectoral social partners play a key role in facilitating skills upgrading’ (2009);
  • agreement to set up a European observatory on cross-border activities within the temporary agency work sector (2009);
  • joint opinions: Eurociett/UNI Europa joint declaration on the directive on working conditions for temporary agency workers (2008) and on flexicurity (2007).

Other EU-level organisations

As final proof of the weight of UNI Europa and Eurociett, it is useful to look at the other European organisations to which the sector-related trade unions and employers’ organisations are affiliated. As highlighted in previous sections, there are five European sectoral/industry trade unions federations (industriAll, EPSU, EFFAT, EFBWW and ETF) as well as the cross-sectoral European confederation ETUC that are relevant in the context of temporary agency work. The presence of these organisations reflects the overlapping domains of many trade unions as well as the cross-sectoral nature of temporary agency work. The bottom-up approach of our analysis has clearly shown that only in very few cases are temporary agency workers organised in specific trade union organisations. In most cases, their membership is either linked to the narrower sector definition (that is, NACE 78.2) and those trade unions (in the service sector) representing this specific sector or linked to the user sectors that also reflect their professional and sectoral background.

While this explains the broad variety of possible union representation/membership patterns, our study has shown that UNI Europa is the most representative EU level trade union organisation in terms of the number of countries and national trade unions linked to the temporary agency work sector covered. This confirms the principal status of UNI Europa as the sector’s most representative trade union organisation. However, our study has also identified a number of weaknesses in terms of the organisational affiliation of national sector-related union organisations and the number of countries covered by UNI Europa. This not only reflects strong differences between countries in regard to trade union presences, membership density and collective bargaining coverage of the temporary agency work sector but also a variety of different EU affiliation patterns of sector-related trade unions. In this context our study found industriALL as the major manufacturing union organisation as well as the cross-sectoral ETUC as the most relevant EU level organisations.

The situation in regard to employer organisations is quite different as the overwhelming majority of national organisations in the temporary agency work sectors are affiliated to Eurociett. Eurociett is the most important sector-related European organisation since it covers 26 EU Member States.

Conclusions

Given the cross-cutting nature of temporary agency work and the bottom-up approach applied in this representativeness study, it is not surprising that the analysis has identified a pluralistic landscape of social partner organisations and affiliation patterns in the sector, consisting of 103 social partner organisations.

Our study has also shown that organisational pluralism on the employee side is much stronger than on the employer side, with 62 trade unions being identified. Certainly the number would have been much higher without the instruction for the Eurofound national correspondents to analyse only the most relevant social partner organisations in each country. As the study has shown, there is considerable variety with regard to trade union organisations reporting to organise workers in the temporary agency work sector. On the one hand, there are countries where potentially every sector-related trade union organises agency workers; also in some countries, cross-sectoral trade union confederations are the main actor of social dialogue and bargaining processes. On the other hand, we found six countries (Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania, Romania) where no trade union organisation linked to the sector in terms of membership exists and a further six countries (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia), where only one trade union reported having membership links to the temporary agency work sector.

On the employer side, a much less fragmented system exists. The 41 organisations identified in our study are quite equally spread among the 28 EU Member States with only two countries (Cyprus, Malta) having no employer organisations representing the temporary agency work sector, though the number of agencies and agency workers is very small in both these countries.

Differences between trade unions and employer organisations also appear with regard to their domain demarcation. In the case of trade unions, overlap and sectional overlap are the dominant domain patterns, while in the case of the employer organisations, domains tend to be much narrower and sector-related, that is, congruence and overlap prevail.

With regard to sectoral organisational membership density, an important result of our study is that reliable data were difficult to obtain with more than half of all trade union organisations unable to provide even estimates on numbers of sector-related members. This may also reflect a generally low trade union density among agency workers, something which is confirmed by countries where trade unions report a membership of zero (Latvia, Malta). Against these limitations of available and reliable data, our study indicates that the highest trade union membership rates can be found in countries such as Sweden with around 60% as well as Belgium, Finland or Italy with approximately one-third of the agency workforce organised in trade unions.

For the employer organisations, the quantitative data on membership are much better, though there are some gaps, including for those countries with a high number of temporary agency workers such as France, Italy and the UK. However, our study confirms previous findings that in those countries where temporary agency work had been regulated since the 1970s and 1980s (for example, Belgium, France and the Netherlands), the density rate of employer organisations are much higher than in southern and eastern Europe.

This polarised pattern is even stronger for collective bargaining. While in some countries in western and northern Europe, very high bargaining coverage rates of 90–100% are reported, collective bargaining in the CEE region as well as in a number of southern EU countries takes place in the temporary agency work sector or agency workplaces hardly at all. Our study also confirms the strong differences concerning the role and importance of different bargaining levels, ranging from bargaining at cross-sectoral and/or national level to plant level. The rather polarised and overall fragmented picture of collective bargaining seems to be driven by employer organisations. Only in 10 EU Member States do employer organisations representing the temporary agency work sector have the capacity or competence to conduct collective agreements at multi-employer, sectoral or branch level; all these cases are in countries characterised by a strong multi-level system of bargaining at branch level.

As far as participation in public policy is concerned, the overwhelming majority of social partners report being consulted by public policymakers on an ad hoc or regular basis in regard to the regulation or other relevant issues of temporary agency work. Generally, public authorities tend to consult employer organisations more frequently than trade unions; we found more trade union organisations reporting a lack of consultation on matters regarding temporary agency work than employer organisations. If those countries where there are no sectoral trade unions representing the sector are included, a total of ten countries emerge where trade unions are not involved in any consultation on the temporary agency work sector compared with only four countries where this is the case from the point of view of employer organisations.

Certainly a peculiarity of the temporary agency work sector is the existence of bipartite funds and bodies in fields such as social security, further training, labour market transitions or compliance and monitoring. There are seven EU member states where social partners in the temporary agency work sector have initiated such practices, all of them in countries where there are strong sector-related social partner organisations and that are characterised by high collective bargaining rates. Furthermore, there are two EU Member States where social partners work together in institutionalised working groups or licensing authorities.

To be eligible to be consulted, European social partners organisations must meet the three criteria defined under Article 1 of Commission Communication COM(1998) 322 final. This study has shown that the two European social partners under consideration, Eurociett and UNI Europa, both fulfil these criteria, including a statutory mandate to negotiate on behalf of their affiliates. However, there are differences between them with regard to sector-relatedness, domain patterns and coverage.

Mapping of individual organisations showed that UNI Europa has 35 direct affiliations (56% of the unions identified in the study) in 17 EU Member States. The second most relevant sector-related union organisation, industriALL, has 14 direct affiliations (around 23% of the unions identified) in 10 EU Member States, out of which eight organisations in seven countries are not also affiliated to UNI Europa. Our study has shown that the cross-sectoral confederation ETUC should also be regarded as relevant in regard to the temporary agency work sector, not only because it has nine direct affiliations (14.5% of all unions identified) but also because eight of these in five countries are not also affiliated to UNI Europa. Furthermore, industriALL and ETUC represent affiliates in three countries (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia) that are currently not covered by UNI Europa.

Eurociett has 26 direct affiliations (63.4% of the employer organisations identified in the study) in 26 EU Member States. Moreover, our study could identify no EU level employer organisation that seems sector-relevant and has national affiliates in more than two EU countries.

Thus, the analysis of the temporary agency work sector in the European Union results in the following two general conclusions.

Firstly, Eurociett for the employer side ought to be regarded as the most important EU-wide representative employer organisation within the temporary agency work sector. For trade unions, the conclusion is less clear-cut but UNI Europa should be regarded as the most important EU-wide representatives of the employees within the sector.

Secondly, our bottom-up screening (that is, looking at the most relevant national social partner organisations and analysing them) has identified certain weaknesses and gaps in terms of the coverage of national organisations as well as EU Member States. And in contrast to the employer side and also reflecting the cross-sectoral nature of temporary agency employment, our study has identified a number of further EU level trade union organisations as relevant, with industriALL and ETUC being the most important of these.

Annex: Data tables

Table A1: Domain coverage and membership of trade union organisations*

 

Name

Domain coverage

Total members**

Members in the sector

Members in the largest companies

AT

PRO-GE

Sectional overlap

229,776

n.a.

Yes

AT

DPA-djp

Sectional overlap

275,455*

1,000

Yes

BE

ABVV BBTK – FGTB Setca

Sectional overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

BE

ABVV-ACCG / FGTB-CG

Sectional overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

BE

LBC-CNE

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

BE

ACLVB – CGSLB

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

BG

NFTISI

Overlap

15,956

100 (est.)

Yes

CY

 

 

 

 

CZ

KOVO MB

Sectional overlap

20,000

2,000

Yes

DE

DGB joint bargaining unit

Overlap

6.18 million

n.a.

Yes

DE

ver.di

Overlap

2.039.931

n.a.

Yes

DE

IG Metall

Sectional overlap

2,269,281

n.a.

Yes

DE

IGBCE

Sectional overlap

657,752

n.a.

n.a.

DE

EVG

Sectional overlap

203,875

n.a.

No

DK

3F

Sectional overlap

253,430

n.a.

Yes

DK

Metal

Sectional overlap

81,130

n.a.

Yes

DK

FOA

Sectional overlap

164,615

800 (est.)

Yes

DK

DSR

Sectional overlap

54,689

370

Yes

EE

 

 

 

 

EL

 

 

 

 

ES

FES-UGT

Overlap

140,000

n.a.

Yes

ES

CCOO-SERVICIOS

Overlap

187,301

n.a.

Yes

FI

PAM-liitto

Sectional overlap

160,000

2,000–3,000

Yes

FI

Metalliliitto

Overlap

140,000

7,000 (est.)

Yes

FI

ERTO

Overlap

17,000 (est.)

1,300

Yes

FI

TEAM-liitto

Overlap

36,000

700-800

Yes

FR

USI GCT

Congruence

3,000

3,000

Yes

FR

FEC-FO

Congruence

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

FR

CFDT Services

Overlap

11,000

n.a.

Yes

FR

CFTC-CSVF

Overlap

32,000

n.a.

n.a.

FR

FNECS

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

HR

 

 

 

 

HU

VASAS

Sectional overlap

20,417

2,175

Yes

IE

CWU

Overlap

19,550

n.a.

Yes

IE

SIPTU

Overlap

165,000

n.a.

Yes

IT

Nidil – Cgil

Overlap

67,632*

14,953

Yes

IT

Felsa – Cisl

Overlap

50,000

40,000

Yes

IT

Uiltemp

Overlap

70,780

42,000***

Yes

LT

 

 

 

 

LU

Syndicat Services et Energie de l’OGBL

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

LU

LCGB – Services et Commerce

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

LV

LKDAF

Sectional overlap

1,934

n.a.

No

MT

GWU

Overlap

39,201

n.a.

Yes

MT

UHM

Overlap

22,502

n.a.

No

NL

FNV

Overlap

1.1 million

5500

Yes

NL

CNV

Overlap

300,000

1000

Yes

NL

LBV

Overlap

12,500*

1,250

Yes

NL

De Unie

Overlap

50,000

n.a.

n.a.

PL

NSZZ Solidarność

Overlap

667,500

n.a.

n.a.

PL

OPZZ

Overlap

792,500

n.a.

n.a.

PL

FZZ

Overlap

408,100

n.a.

n.a.

PT

SINTTAV

Overlap

8,530

3,150

Yes

PT

SINDETELCO

Overlap

7,789

1,632

Yes

PT

FETESE

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

RO

 

 

 

 

SE

LO

Sectional overlap

1,200,000

20,000­

Yes

SE

SEKO

Sectional overlap

80,000

250

Yes

SE

Unionen

Sectional overlap

500 000

11,000

Yes

SE

Akademikerförbunden

Sectional overlap

350,000

4,000

Yes

SE

SLF

Sectional overlap

33,600

1,000

No

SE

Vårdförbundet

Sectional overlap

91,300

100–800

Yes

SE

SJF

Sectional overlap

13,000

400 (est.)

Yes

SE

Byggnads

Sectional overlap

76,517

2,000

Yes

SI

ZSSS

Overlap

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

SK

OS Kovo

Overlap

70,000 (est.)

1,000 (est.)

Yes

UK

CWU

Overlap

201,729*

2,107

No

UK

USDAW

Overlap

432,000

1,335

No

UK

Unite

Sectional overlap

1,200,000

15,000

Yes

Notes: n.a. = not available; * Membership of all organisations listed is voluntary; ** The national reports contain the latest available figures for 2013–2015; *** Includes non-active members.

Source: Eurofound’s network of European correspondents.

Table A2: Domain description of trade union organisations

 

Name

Domain description

AT

PRO-GE

All blue-collar workers, apprentices and retirees in the private sector of the following industries: metalworking, mining, energy, textiles and leather, agriculture, food processing, tobacco, chemicals, glass production, paper, vulcanisation, mineral oil and gas, and temporary agency workers

AT

DPA-djp

All white-collar workers and a few blue-collar workers (in the printing and paper industries) in the private sector

BE

ABVV BBTK – FGTB Setca

All white-collar workers

BE

ABVV-ACCG / FGTB-CG

All blue-collar workers

BE

LBC-CNE

 

BE

ACLVB – CGSLB

 

BG

NFTISI

 

CY

 

CZ

KOVO MB

ŠKODA AUTO Mladá Boleslav, ŠKODA AUTO Vrchlabí a ŠKODA AUTO Kvasiny

DE

DGB joint bargaining unit

DGB is the largest cross-sectoral trade union federation, covering all sectors by its affiliates

DE

ver.di

Service sector, including temporary agency work sector

DE

IG Metall

Only temporary agency workers employed in agencies in IG Metall’s domain and workers sent to work in establishments of IG Metall’s domain

DE

IGBCE

Only temporary work agencies forming part of company groups in the chemical, mining and energy sectors and of establishments employing temporary agency workers in these sectors.

DE

EVG

EVG covers the temporary work agency of the Deutsche Bahn group and temporary workers sent to Deutsche Bahn and other transport/railway companies

DK

3F

Only blue-collar, skilled and unskilled workers in the temporary agency work sector and all public as well as private sectors where unskilled and skilled work is performed

DK

Metal

Blue-collar workers only working as metalworkers, and within areas such as information technology (IT), techniques, engineering and mechanics

DK

FOA

Social, healthcare and public sectors

DK

DSR

White-collar nurses only

EE

 

EL

 

ES

FES-UGT

Communication, banking and insurance activities, cleaning and private security 

 

CCOO-SERVICIOS

Commerce, hotels and restaurants, gambling, finance, banking and insurance, engineering and tourism

FI

PAM-liitto

Mainly blue collar-workers in temporary agency work sector; workers in retail trade, property services, security services as well as tourism, restaurant and leisure services

FI

Metalliliitto

Technology industry (for example, engineering, shipbuilding, iron and steel industry, electronic industry, car manufacturing), car repair workshops, clerical employees of car retail, telecommunication industry, mining, electricity and power plants, precious metals sector, sheet metal industry, repair works for mechanical forest industry, civilian workers in Ministry of Defence repair shops

FI

ERTO

IT, transportation and forwarding, advertising, market research, digital media, healthcare and social services, financial management, physical exercise, culture, leisure activities and other special fields

FI

TEAM-liitto

 

FR

USI GCT

 

FR

FEC-FO

All sectors where temporary workers are employed

FR

CFDT Services

80 branches within the sectors of: retail; textile, leather and clothing products; hotel, tourism and restaurant; business and personal services; legal professions; consular chambers

FR

CFTC-CSVF

 

FR

FNECS

 

HR

 

HU

VASAS

Manufacture of basic metals and fabricated metal products; manufacture of machinery and equipment; manufacture of electrical and optical equipment

IE

CWU

CWU is the main union in the telecommunications industry and one of the largest unions in services in general

IE

SIPTU

Largest union in the country representing employees in manufacturing, public administration, health services, retail and other services, construction

IT

Nidil – Cgil

Atypical, and dependent self-employed workers

IT

Felsa – Cisl

Atypical, and dependent self-employed workers

IT

Uiltemp

Atypical, and dependent self-employed workers as well as people looking for a job

LT

 

LU

Syndicat Services et Energie de l’OGBL

Energy, services

LU

LCGB – Services et Commerce

Services, commerce

LV

LKDAF

Culture, arts and entertainment sectors: music and art schools and colleges, crafts schools, interest and extracurricular education institutions (music, arts), higher education institutions of music and arts, libraries, cultural centres and other institutions, museums, theatres, cinema, video, orchestra, state culture protection institutions, TV companies, radio, concert halls, sports institutions, game grounds, zoo, tourism companies, national archives

MT

GWU

 

MT

UHM

 

NL

FNV

Nearly all sectors of economic activity

NL

CNV

Nearly all sectors of economic activity

NL

LBV

Nearly all sectors of economic activity

NL

De Unie

Nearly all sectors of economic activity

PL

NSZZ Solidarność

 

PL

OPZZ

 

PL

FZZ

 

PT

SINTTAV

Temporary agency work and telecommunications sector, and so on.

PT

SINDETELCO

Temporary agency work and graphic industries, security, telecommunications, and so on.

PT

FETESE

Several services, manufacturing

RO

 

SE

LO

All blue-collar workers

SE

SEKO

All blue-collar workers

SE

Unionen

All white-collar workers

SE

Akademikerförbunden

All academics

SE

SLF

All medical doctors

SE

Vårdförbundet

All nurses, midwives, biomedical scientists and radiographers

SE

SJF

All journalists

SE

Byggnads

Blue-collar workers, all construction workers

SI

ZSSS

All the workers in those sectors not covered by the 22 sectoral trade unions in ZSSS

SK

OS Kovo

Metal, steel and electronic industries, road transport, and so on.

UK

CWU

Postal services, telecommunications and financial services

UK

USDAW

Temporary agency workers in retail and distribution, and workers in retail and distribution, food processing and manufacturing, catering, chemical processing, pharmaceuticals, home shopping and call centres

UK

Unite

Whole economy

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A3: Trade unions’ international, European and national affiliations

 

Name

National affiliation

European affiliation

International affiliation

AT

PRO-GE

ÖGB

EFFAT, industriALL Europe

industriALL Global, IUF, TUAC

AT

GPA-djp

ÖGB

EFFAT, EFJ, EPSU, industriALL Europe, UNI Europa

industriALL Global, IFJ, UNI

BE

ABVV BBTK – FGTB Setca

ABVV-FGTB

UNI Europa

n.a.

BE

ABVV-ACCG / FGTB-CG

ABVV-FGTB

UNI Europa

n.a.

BE

LBC-CNE

ACV-CSC

UNI Europa

n.a.

BE

ACLVB – CGSLB

not applicable

UNI Europa

n.a.

BG

NFTISI

CL Podkrepa

CY

 

 

 

CZ

KOVO MB

DE

DGB joint bargaining unit

not applicable

ETUC

ITUC

DE

ver.di

DGB

UNI Europa

UNI Global

DE

IG Metall

DGB

industriALL Europe

industriALL Global

DE

IGBCE

DGB

industriALL Europe

industriALL Global

DE

EVG

DGB

ETF

ITF

DK

3F

LO

ETF, industriALL, EFFAT, EFBWW, EPSU

ITF, PSI, UNI-Global, industriALL Global

DK

Metal

LO

UNI Europa, industriALL, EPSU

ITF, UNI-Global, industriALL Global

DK

FOA

LO

EPSU

n.a.

DK

DSR

FTF

EPSU

n.a.

EE

 

 

 

EL

 

 

 

ES

FES-UGT

UGT

UNI Europa

UNI Global

ES

CCOO-SERVICIOS

CCII

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FI

PAM-liitto

SAK, SASK

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FI

Metalliliitto

SAK, SASK

industriALL Europe

industriALL Global, Nordic Industry Workers (IN)

FI

ERTO

STTK

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FI

TEAM-liitto

SAK and others

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FR

USI GCT

CGT

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FR

FEC-FO

CGT-FO

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FR

CFDT Services

CFDT

UNI Europa

UNI Global

FR

CFTC-CSVF

CFTC

FR

FNECS

CFE-CGC

CEC European Managers

HR

 

 

 

HU

VASAS

MSZOSZ

industriALL Europe

industriALL Global

IE

CWU

ICTU

UNI Europa

IE

SIPTU

ICTU

ETUC

UNI Global Union, industriALL Global, IUF

IT

Nidil – Cgil

Cgil

UNI Europa

UNI Global

IT

Felsa – Cisl

Cisl

UNI Europa

UNI Global

IT

Uiltemp

Uil

UNI Europa

UNI Global

LT

LU

Syndicat Services et Energie de l’OGBL

OGBL

UNI Europa

UNI Global

LU

LCGB – Services et Commerce

LCGB

UNI Europa (through the confederation LCGB)

LV

LKDAF

LBAS

UNI Europa Graphical

International Federation of Actors (FIA), International Federation of Musicians (FIM), UNI Global Media & Entertainment International (UNI-MEI)

MT

GWU

ETUC, ETF, EFFAT, EPSU, ETUF-TCL, Eurocadres, industriALL, UNI Europa, European Workers' Education Association, Stockholm in Sweden (EURO WEA), Federation of Europe Retired Personnel Association, Brussels in Belgium (FERPA), European central banks federation (SCECBU)

ITUC, ITF, IUF, industriALL Global, Public Service International (PSI), International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers' Federation (ITGLWF), UNI Global, International Federation of Musicians, International Federation of Workers' Education (IFWEA)

MT

UHM

CMTU

ETUC, EPSU, FERPA

WOW (International Secretariat of the World Organization of Workers)

NL

FNV

not applicable

UNI Europa, ETUC

UNI Global, ITUC

NL

CNV

not applicable

UNI Europa, ETUC

UNI Global, ITUC, WOW

NL

LBV

not applicable

NL

De Unie

n.a.

industriALL

GIFTED, industriALL Global

PL

NSZZ Solidarność

not applicable

ETUC

ITUC

PL

OPZZ

not applicable

ETUC

ITUC

PL

FZZ

not applicable

ETUC

PT

SINTTAV

CGTP-IN

UNI Europa

UNI Global

PT

SINDETELCO

UGT

UGC

FETESE

ASSOCIAÇÃO AGOSTINHO ROSETA

UNI Europa

UNI Global

PT

FETESE

UGT

n.a.

n.a.

RO

 

 

 

SE

LO

not applicable

ETUC

ITUC

SE

SEKO

LO

UNI Europa, ETF, EFBWW, EPSU

UNI Global, ITF, BWI, PSI

SE

Unionen

TCO

EFFAT, UNI Europa, ETF, industriALL

UNI Global, ITF, industriALL Global

SE

Akademikerförbunden

SACO

SE

SLF

SACO

Standing Committee of European Doctors (CPME), European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS)

World Medical Association (WMA)

SE

Vårdförbundet

TCO

EPSU, European Midwives Association (EMA), European Association for Professions in Biomedical Science (EPBS), European Federation of Radiographers Societies (EFRS), European Federation of Nurses’ Associations (EFN)

International Confederation of Midwives (ICM), International Federation of Biomedical Laboratory Science (IFBLS), International Society of Radiographers & Radiological Technologists (ISRRT), International Council of Nurses (ICN)

SE

SJF

TCO

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), International News Safety Institute (INSI)

SE

Byggnads

LO

EFBWW

BWI

SI

ZSSS

Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia, ZSSS

ETUC

SK

OS Kovo

KOZ SR

industriALL Europe, EPSU, EMF.

PSI

UK

CWU

TUC

UNI Europa, ETF

UNI Global, ITF

UK

USDAW

TUC

UNI Europa, EFFAT, ETF, industriALL

UNI Global, industriALL, ITF, IUF

UK

Unite

TUC

UNI Europa, EFBWW, EFFAT, EPSU, ETF, industriALL

UNI Global, BWI, industriALL Global, ITF, IUF, PSI

Note: n.a. = not available.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A4: Collective bargaining and consultation – trade unions

 

Name

Collective bargaining

Number of employees covered by the collective agreement

Consultation

Consultation pattern

AT

PRO-GE

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch and occupational level

50,000–60,000

Yes

On regular basis

AT

GPA-djp

Multi-employer bargaining at multi-branch and occupational level

14,000

Yes

On regular basis

BE

ABVV BBTK – FGTB Setca

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

100%

Yes

On ad hoc basis

BE

ABVV-ACCG / FGTB-CG

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

100%

Yes

On ad hoc basis

BE

LBC-CNE

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

100%

Yes

On ad hoc basis

BE

ACLVB – CGSLB

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

100%

Yes

On ad hoc basis

BG

NFTISI

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

345 (est.)

n.a.

n.a.

CY

 

 

 

 

CZ

KOVO MB

Multi-employer bargaining in one company

2,000 (est.)

No

DE

DGB joint bargaining unit

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch and occupational level

800,000

Yes

On regular basis

DE

ver.di

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DE

IG Metall

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DE

IGBCE

Multi-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DE

EVG

Multi-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DK

3F

Single-bargaining at plant/company/ group level and multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DK

Metal

Single-bargaining at plant/company/ group level and multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DK

FOA

Single-bargaining at plant/company/ group level and multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

DK

DSR

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

370

Yes

On ad hoc basis

EE

 

 

 

 

EL

 

 

 

 

ES

FES-UGT

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

10,600

Yes

On ad hoc basis

ES

CCOO-SERVICIOS

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

5,000

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FI

PAM-liitto

Single-bargaining at company level and multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

2,000–3,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FI

Metalliliitto

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

7,500 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FI

ERTO

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

18,000

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FI

TEAM-liitto

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

700–800 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FR

USI GCT

Single-bargaining at plant, company and group level and multi-employer bargaining at branch level

2 million temporary agency workers or 509,855 in FTE. Figure relates to all five unions in France. Additionally, 20,000 permanent staff of agencies

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FR

FEC-FO

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FR

CFDT Services

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

FR

CFTC-CSVF

Single-employer bargaining at plant, company and group level and multi-employer bargaining

n.a.

n.a.

FR

FNECS

Single-employer bargaining at plant, company and group level and multi-employer bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

HR

 

 

 

 

HU

VASAS

No bargaining

No

IE

CWU

Single-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

IE

SIPTU

No bargaining

n.a.

n.a.

IT

Nidil – Cgil

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

560,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

IT

Felsa – Cisl

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

550,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

IT

Uiltemp

Single- and multi-employer bargaining

550,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

LT

 

 

 

 

LU

Syndicat Services et Energie de l’OGBL

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

6,226

Yes

On ad hoc basis

LU

LCGB – Services et Commerce

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

6,226

Yes

On ad hoc basis

LV

LKDAF

No bargaining

No

MT

GWU

Single-employer bargaining at company level

1,182*

Yes

On ad hoc basis

MT

UHM

Single-employer bargaining at company level

300*

Yes

On ad hoc basis

NL

FNV

Single and multi-employer bargaining

460,000

Yes

On ad hoc basis

NL

CNV

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral level

460,000

Yes

On ad hoc basis

NL

LBV

Single and multi-employer bargaining

702,700

Yes

On ad hoc basis

NL

De Unie

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral level

460,000

Yes

On ad hoc basis

PL

NSZZ Solidarność

No bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

PL

OPZZ

No bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

PL

FZZ

No bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

PT

SINTTAV

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

3,150

No

PT

SINDETELCO

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

No

PT

FETESE

Yes, but no further information available

n.a.

n.a.

RO

 

 

 

 

SE

LO

Multi-employer bargaining at cross-sectoral level

25,000–30,000 (FTE, 50,000-60,000 individuals annually)

Yes

On regular basis

SE

SEKO

No, SEKO takes part in the LO agreement

n.a.

n.a.

SE

Unionen

Multi-employer bargaining at cross-sectoral level

50,000 (est.)

Yes

On regular basis

SE

Akademikerförbunden

Multi-employer bargaining at cross-sectoral level

8,000

Yes

On regular basis

SE

SLF

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

2,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

SE

Vårdförbundet

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch and single employer level

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc basis

SE

SJF

Multi-employer bargaining (sectoral/branch) and one single employer agreement

400–500 (est.)

Yes

On regular basis

SE

Byggnads

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

2,000 (est., only agreement with BI)

Yes

On regular basis

SI

ZSSS

No bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

SK

OS Kovo

No bargaining

Yes

On ad hoc basis

UK

CWU

Single-employer bargaining at sub-company level

2,000 (est.)

Yes

On ad hoc basis

UK

USDAW

Single-employer bargaining at sub-company level

1,335

Yes

On ad hoc basis

UK

Unite

Single-employer bargaining at company and sub-company level

n.a.

Yes

On ad hoc and regular basis

Note: n.a. = not available. * Employed in companies engaged in activities similar to temporary agency work agencies and are subcontracted with user companies for long periods.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.  

Table A5: Domain coverage and membership of employer organisations

 

Name

Type

Type of membership

Total members

in sector

Total no. of employees in member companies

Members in largest companies

AT

FVGD

O

Compulsory

135,000

2,400

65,000–75,000

Yes

AT

VZA

O

Voluntary

90

90

n.a.

Yes

BE

Federgon

O

Voluntary

470

124

6,3452

Yes

BG

BG Staffing

O

Voluntary

4

4

5,000

Yes

CY

 

 

 

 

 

 

CZ

APPS

O

Voluntary

26

26

90,000–100,000*

Yes

CZ

APA

O

Voluntary

23

23

22,500

No

DE

BAP

O

Voluntary

2,000 (est.)

n.a.

320,000 (est.)

Yes

DE

iGZ

C

Voluntary

2,850

2,850

300,000

n.a.

DK

Dansk Erhverv/VB

O

Voluntary

17,000

100

n.a.

Yes

DK

DI

O

Voluntary

10,000

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

EE

EPREL

C

Voluntary

6

6

3,000

Yes

EL

ENIDEA

C

Voluntary

9

9

12.000–13.000

Yes

ES

ASEMPLEO

C

Voluntary

36

36

5,000

Yes

ES

FEDETT

C

Voluntary

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

FI

HPL

O

Voluntary

300 (est.)

290 (est.)

33,000 (est.)

Yes

FI

PALTA

O

Voluntary

1,725

44

2,568

Yes

FR

Prism’emploi

C

Voluntary

600

600

16,496**

Yes

HR

CPEA

C

Voluntary

6,500

16

4,800 (est.)

Yes

HU

SZTMSZ

O

Voluntary

15

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

IE

NRF

C

Voluntary

136

136

4,200

Yes

IT

Assolavoro

C

Voluntary

41

41

n.a.

Yes

IT

Assosomm

C

Voluntary

19

19

n.a.

Yes

LT

LIIA

O

Voluntary

13

13

192**

Yes

LU

FEDIL

O

Voluntary

19

n.a.

n.a.

Yes

LV

LPDAA

C

Voluntary

3

3

300 (est.)

Yes

MT

 

 

 

 

 

 

NL

ABU

C

Voluntary

549

549

n.a.

Yes

NL

NBBU

O

Voluntary

963

n.a.

n.a.

No

PL

Forum HR

C

Voluntary

21

21

254,000 (est.)

Yes

PL

SAZ

C

Voluntary

58

9

150 000 (est.)

Yes

PL

OKAP

C

Voluntary

55

n.a.

8,000 (est.)

Yes

PT

APESPE

C

Voluntary

291

291

n.a.

n.a.

PT

APCC

n.a.

Voluntary

481

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

RO

ARAMT

C

Voluntary

20

20

42,000

Yes

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

O

Voluntary

550

550

75,000–80,000

Yes

SE

Medieföretagen

O

Voluntary

650

6

400-500

Yes

SE

BI

O

Voluntary

3,200

36

500–1,000 (est.)

No

SI

ZAZ

C

Voluntary

13

13

4,500

Yes

SK

APAS

O

Voluntary

 

20

15

15,000

Yes

SK

APAS*

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

SK

APSZ

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

UK

REC

O

Voluntary

 

3,500 (est.)

n.a.

96,000***

n.a.

Notes: n.a. = not available. Type of domain coverage: O = overlap; C = congruence. * Information taken from organisation’s website; **Permanent staff of member companies; *** Employees working in the ‘recruitment profession’ according to REC.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.  

Table A6: Domain description of employer organisations

 

Name

Description

AT

FVGD

Job placement activities; security and investigation activities; guarding activities; forestry activities and so on.

AT

VZA

Job placement activities

BE

Federgon

Human resources (HR) services and staffing

BG

BG Staffing

Broker activities of agencies for employment

CY

CZ

APPS

Personnel services, recruitment, outsourcing and so on

CZ

APA

 

DE

BAP

Temporary agency work sector as well as other activities related to private employment sector

DE

iGZ

Temporary agency work

DK

Dansk Erhverv/VB

Retail, service, IT, transport and knowledge services

DK

DI

Mainly manufacturing industry

EE

EPREL

 

EL

ENIDEA

Private employment services

ES

ASEMPLEO

Private employment services

ES

FEDETT

Private employment services

FI

HPL

Employment placement agencies

FI

PALTA

Service sector, logistics, information and communication, service and maintenance, business and professional services, administration and support services and entertainment and recreation

FR

Prism’emploi

 

HR

CPEA

Private employment services

HU

SZTMSZ

Recruitment, HR consulting, executive search

IE

NRF

Employment agencies

IT

Assolavoro

Private employment agencies

IT

Assosomm

Private employment agencies

LT

LIIA

HR services (that is, search and selection of employees, outsourcing and payroll, assessment of employees and candidates; career transition planning (outplacement); cost optimisation of personnel management; search and selection of employees in other countries, other services, related to personnel management)

LU

FEDIL

Recruitment sector

LV

LPDAA

 

MT

NL

ABU

 

NL

NBBU

Employment placement agencies

PL

Forum HR

 

PL

SAZ

 

PL

OKAP

 

PT

APESPE

Employment placement agencies

PT

APCC

Employment placement agencies

RO

ARAMT

 

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

Employment placement agencies

SE

Medieföretagen

Temporary work agencies in the media sector

SE

BI

Construction sector

SI

ZAZ

 

SK

APAS

Recruitment, personal consulting and other staffing services

SK

APAS*

n.a.

SK

APSZ

n.a.

UK

REC

Recruitment agencies

Note: n.a. = not available

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A7: National, European and international affiliations of employer organisations

 

Name

National affiliation

European affiliation

International affiliation

AT

FVGD

WKÖ

AT

VZA

WKÖ

Eurociett

Ciett

BE

Federgon

VBO, VOKA, Union Wallonne, BECI

Eurociett, ECSSA

Ciett

BG

BG Staffing

BIA, Association of Industrial Capital in Bulgaria (AICB)

Eurociett

Ciett

CY

CZ

APPS

Confederation of Industry of the Czech Republic

Eurociett

Ciett

CZ

APA

AMSP ČR

DE

BAP

BDA, Federation of German Wholesale, Foreign Trade and Services (BGA), Federal Association of the service industry (BDWI)

Eurociett

Ciett

DE

iGZ

Several employer or business organisations at regional level

DK

Dansk Erhverv/VB

DA

Eurociett, EuroCommerce

Ciett

DK

DI

DA

Business Europe

BIAC

EE

EPREL

Eurociett

Ciett

EL

ENIDEA

Eurociett

Ciett

ES

ASEMPLEO

CEOE and CEPYME

Eurociett

Ciett

ES

FEDETT

CEOE

FI

HPL

EK

Eurociett

Ciett

FI

PALTA

EK

FR

Prism’emploi

MEDEF, CGPME

Eurociett

Ciett

HR

CPEA

Croatian Employers Association – Coordination of private employment agencies

Eurociett

 

Ciett

HU

SZTMSZ

Eurociett

Ciett

IE

NRF

Eurociett

IT

Assolavoro

Confindustria

Eurociett

Ciett

IT

Assosomm

LT

LIIA

LVDK

Eurociett

Ciett

LU

FEDIL Employment Services

FEDIL

Eurociett

LV

LPDAA

n.a.

Eurociett

Ciett

MT

NL

ABU

VNO-NCW, MKB Nederland, AWVN

Eurociett

Ciett

NL

NBBU

MKB Nederland

PL

Forum HR

Konfederacja Lewiatan

Eurociett

Ciett

PL

SAZ

Business Centre Club

PL

OKAP

PT

APESPE

Eurociett

PT

APCC

RO

ARAMT

Eurociett

Ciett

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

The Confederation of Swedish Enterprises

Eurociett

Ciett

SE

Medieföretagen

The Confederation of Swedish Enterprises

SE

BI

The Confederation of Swedish Enterprises

European Construction Industry Federation (FIEC)

SI

ZAZ

ZDS

Eurociett

Ciett

SK

APAS

RUZ SR

Eurociett

Ciett

SK

APAS*

n.a.

SK

APSZ

n.a.

UK

REC

CBI

Eurociett

Ciett

Note: n.a. = not available

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A8: Collective bargaining and consultation – employer organisations

 

Name

Form/level of bargaining

Number of employees covered by bargaining

Consultation

Consultation pattern

AT

FVGD

Multi-employer bargaining at multi-branch, sectoral and occupational level

65,000–70,000

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

AT

VZA

No bargaining

Yes

On a regular basis

BE

Federgon

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral level

100%

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

BG

BG Staffing

No bargaining

No

CY

CZ

APPS

No bargaining

Yes

On a regular basis

CZ

APA

No bargaining

Yes

On a regular basis

DE

BAP

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

460,000 (2014)

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

DE

iGZ

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

300,000°

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

DK

Dansk Erhverv/VB

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level and single-employer bargaining

n.a.

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

DK

DI

Single-bargaining at plant/company/ group level and multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

6,495

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

EE

EPREL

No

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

EL

ENIDEA

No bargaining

No

ES

ASEMPLEO

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

8,000

Yes

On a regular basis and ad hoc

ES

FEDETT

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

FI

HPL

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

18,000 (est.)

Yes

On a regular basis

FI

PALTA

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

n.a

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

FR

Prism’emploi

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

2.020,000

Yes

On a regular basis and ad hoc basis

HR

CPEA

No bargaining

Yes

On a regular basis

HU

SZTMSZ

No bargaining

n.a.

n.a.

IE

NRF

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

IT

Assolavoro

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

480,000

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

IT

Assosomm

Joint agreements as Assolavoro

Same as Assolavoro

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

LT

LIIA

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

LU

FEDIL Employment Services

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

6,226

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

LV

LPDAA

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

MT

NL

ABU

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral level

460,000

Yes

On a regular basis

NL

NBBU

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral level

174,700

Yes

On a regular basis

PL

Forum HR

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

PL

SAZ

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

PL

OKAP

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

PT

APESPE

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch) level

No agreement signed

n.a.

n.a.

PT

APCC

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

RO

ARAMT

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

Multi-employer bargaining at cross-sectoral level

75,000

Yes

On a regular basis

SE

Medieföretagen

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

400–500 (est.)

 

No

SE

BI

Multi-employer bargaining at sectoral/branch level

500–1000 (est.)

Yes

On a regular basis

SI

ZAZ

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

SK

APAS

No bargaining

Yes

On an ad hoc basis

SK

APAS*

No bargaining

n.a.

n.a.

SK

APSZ

No bargaining

n.a.

n.a.

UK

REC

No bargaining

Yes

On a regular basis

Note: n.a. = not available

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A9: Organisation names and abbreviations – trade unions

 

Abbreviation

Full name in English

AT

PRO-GE

Production Trade Union

AT

DPA-djp

Union of Salaried Employees, Graphical Workers and Journalists

BE

ABVV BBTK – FGTB Setca

Trade Union for Employees, Technicians and Staff – Socialist Union

BE

ABVV-ACCG / FGTB-CG

General Centre – Socialist Union

BE

LBC-CNE

National White Collars Centre

BE

ACLVB – CGSLB

Liberal Trade Union

BG

NFTISI

National Federation Technical Industry, Science, Informatics

CY

CZ

KOVO MB

Trade union KOVO MB

DE

DGB joint bargaining unit

Negotiation Body of the German Confederations of Trade Unions

DE

ver.di

United Services Union

DE

IG Metall

German Metalworkers’ Union

DE

IGBCE

Chemical, Energy and Mining Workers’ Union

DE

EVG

Railway and Transport Workers’ Union

DK

3F

United Federation of Danish Workers

DK

Metal

Danish Metalworkers’ Union

DK

FOA

Trade and Labour [public sector union]

DK

DSR

Danish Nurses’ Organisation

EE

EL

ES

FES-UGT

Service Federation of the General Workers’ Confederation

ES

CCOO-SERVICIOS

Services Federation of the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions

FI

PAM-liitto

Service Union United PAM

FI

Metalliliitto

The Finnish Metalworkers’ Union

FI

ERTO

Federation of Special Service and Clerical Employees ERTO

FI

TEAM-liitto

Industrial Union TEAM

FR

USI GCT

Temporary Work Union CGT

FR

FEC-FO

Federation of Employees and Managers (CGT-FO)

FR

CFDT Services

CFDT Services

FR

CFTC-CSVF

Retail and Sales Forces’ Federation

FR

FNECS

National Federation of Retail and Services’ Managers

HR

HU

VASAS

Hungarian Metalworkers’ Federation

IE

CWU

Communications Workers’ Union

IE

SIPTU

Services Industry Professionals and Technicians’ Union

IT

Nidil – Cgil

New Identities of Work

IT

Felsa – Cisl

Federation of Autonomous, Atypical, and Temporary Agency Workers

IT

Uiltemp

National Federation of Temporary, Autonomous, Atypical, and Economically Dependent Workers

LT

LU

Syndicat Services et Energie de l’OGBL

Services and Energy Union of OGBL

LU

LCGB – Services et Commerce

LCGB – Services and Retail

LV

LKDAF

Latvian Trade Union Federation for People Engaged in Cultural Activities

MT

 GWU

General Workers’ Union

MT

UHM

Malta Workers' Union

NL

FNV

Federation of Dutch Trade Unions

NL

CNV

National Federation of Christian Trade Unions

NL

LBV

National Interest Association

NL

De Unie

The Union

PL

NSZZ Solidarność

Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union Solidarność

PL

OPZZ

All–Poland Alliance of Trade Unions

PL

FZZ

Trade Unions; Forum

PT

SINTTAV

National Union of Telecommunications and Audiovisual Workers

PT

SINDETELCO

Democratic Union of Workers of Communications and Media

PT

FETESE

Federation of Unions of Manufacturing and Services

RO

SE

LO

The Swedish Trade Union Confederation

SE

SEKO

The Union of Service and Communication Employees

SE

Unionen

Unionen

SE

Akademikerförbunden

Academics Union in Trade and Service

SE

SLF

The Swedish Medical Association

SE

Vårdförbundet

The Swedish Association of Health Professionals

SE

SJF

Swedish Union of Journalists

SE

Byggnads

Swedish Building Workers’ Union

SI

ZSSS

The Free Trade Union of Slovenia

SK

OS Kovo

Metal Trade Union Association

UK

CWU

Communication Workers’ Union

UK

USDAW

Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers

UK

Unite

Unite the Union

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A10: Organisation names and abbreviations – employer organisations

 

Name

Full name in English

AT

FVGD

Association of the Commercial Service Providers

AT

VZA

Austrian Association of Employment and Placement Agencies

BE

Federgon

Federgon

BG

BG Staffing

BG Staffing

CY

CZ

APPS

Association of Personnel Services Providers

CZ

APA

Association of Work Agencies

DE

BAP

Federal Employer Association for Personnel Service Companies and Private Employment Agencies

DE

iGZ

Association of German Temporary Employment Agencies

DK

Dansk Erhverv/VB

Danish Chamber of Commerce/ Federation of Staffing Agencies in Denmark

DK

DI

Confederation of Danish Industry

EE

EPREL

Estonian Staffing Agency

EL

ENIDEA

Association of Private Employment Services

ES

ASEMPLEO

ASEMPLEO

ES

FEDETT

Association of Temporary Agency Companies

FI

HPL

The Private Employment Agencies Association HPL

FI

PALTA

n.a.

FR

Prism’emploi

Prism’emploi

HR

CPEA

The Croatian Employers’ Association (CEA) – Coordination for Agency Work and Mediating by Employment

HU

SZTMSZ

Hungarian Association of Personnel Consultants

IE

NRF

National Recruitment Federation

IT

Assolavoro

National Association of Employment Agencies

IT

Assosomm

Italian Association of Employment Agencies

LT

LIIA

Association of Lithuanian Employment Agencies

LU

FEDIL

FEDIL Employment Services

LV

LPDAA

Temporary Employment Agencies Association of Latvia

MT

NL

ABU

Dutch Federation of Private Employment Agencies

NL

NBBU

Dutch Association of Recruitment and Temporary Employment Enterprises

PL

Forum HR

Polish Human Resources Forum

PL

SAZ

Association of Employment Agencies

PL

OKAP

Employment Agencies Nationwide Convention

PT

APESPE

Portuguese Association of Private Employment

PT

APCC

Portuguese Association of Contact Centres

RO

ARAMT

The Romanian Association of Temporary Work Agents

SE

Bemanningsföretagen

Swedish Staffing Agencies

SE

Medieföretagen

Media Industries Employers Association

SE

BI

The Swedish Construction Federation

SI

ZAZ

Association of Temporary Work Agencies

SK

APAS

Association of Staffing Agencies of Slovakia

SK

APAS*

Alliance of Staffing Agencies of Slovakia

SK

APSZ

Association of Employment Services

UK

REC

Recruitment and Employment Confederation

Note: n.a. = not available

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents.

Table A11: Collective bargaining patterns in the temporary agency work sector, EU28, 2014

 

Collective bargaining levels

 

 

 

Extensions

Collective bargaining coverage rate

(% of total employees in the sector)

 

Multi-employer

Single and multi-employer

Company level only

No collective bargaining

 

 

AT

X

 

 

 

No

100%

BE

X

 

 

 

No

100%

BG

 

X

 

 

Yes

57%

CY

 

 

 

X

CZ

 

 

X*

 

No

0.9%

DE

X

 

 

 

Yes

100%

DK

 

X

 

 

No

61%

EE

 

 

 

X

EL

 

 

 

X

ES

X

 

 

 

Yes

n.a.

FI

X

 

 

 

Yes

90% (est.)

FR

X

 

 

 

Yes

100%

HR

 

 

 

X

 

 

HU

 

 

 

X

 

 

IE

 

 

X

 

No

n.a.

IT

X

 

 

 

No

 

LT

 

 

 

X

 

 

LU

X

 

 

 

Yes

100%

LV

 

 

 

X

 

 

MT

 

 

 

X

 

 

NL

 

X

 

 

Yes

100%**

PL

 

 

 

X

 

 

PT

 

 

 

X

 

 

RO

 

 

 

X

 

 

SE

x

 

 

 

No

97%

SI

 

 

 

X

 

 

SK

 

 

 

X

 

 

UK

 

 

X

 

No

923% (est.)

Notes: * Only Skoda Auto Mladá Boleslav; ** According to estimates, around 10% of companies do not comply with the agreement.

Source: Eurofound’s Network of European correspondents and other sources

Table A12: Bipartite and tripartite bodies in the temporary agency work sector, 2014

 

Name and scope of activity

Character

Origin

Trade union organisations represented

Employer organisations represented

AT

Sozial- und Weiterbildungsfonds (Social and Further Training Fund)

Bipartite*

Statutory

PRO-GE, GPA-djp

FVGD

BE

Sociaal Fonds voor de uitzendkrachten – Fonds Social pour les Intérimaires

Bipartite

Agreement

BBTK-SETCA, ACCG, LBC-CNE, ACLVB-CGSLB

Federgon

BE

Vormingsfonds voor uitzendkrachten (VFU)/ Fonds de Formation pour les Intérimaires (FFI)

Bipartite

Agreement

BBTK-SETCA, ACCG, LBC-CNE, ACLVB-CGSLB

Federgon

BE

Preventie en Interim/ Prévention et Intérim (PI)

Bipartite

Statutory

ABVV, ACV, ACLVB, ACV, Algemene Centrale ABVV

Federgon

ES

Working Group on Temporary Agency Workers, Health and Safety on Work Commission

Tripartite

Statutory

UGT, CCOO

CEOE and CEPYME

FR

Fonds d’action sociale du travail temporaire (FASTT) – non-profit organisation set up to provide social and financial supports to temporary workers

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

FR

Observatoire des Métiers et de l’Emploi (OME) – forecast of employment and skills

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

FR

FAF-TT (Fonds d’assurance Formation du travail temporaire) – financing of professional training

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

FR

FPE-TT (Fonds professionnel pour l’emploi du travail temporaire) –  financing access of jobseekers to temporary work

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

FR

FSPI (Fonds de sécurisation des parcours des intérimaires) – financing temporary workers employed with a permanent employment contract between two occupations

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

FR

Commission paritaire nationale professionnelle pour le travail temporaire (collective bargaining)

Bipartite

Agreement

CFDT, CFTC, USI-CGT, FO, CFE-CGC

Prism’emploi 

IT

E.bi.temp

Bipartite

Agreement

Nidil – Cgil

Felsa – Cisl

Uiltemp – Uil

Assolavoro

Assosomm

IT

Fontemp

Bipartite

Agreement

Nidil – Cgil

Felsa – Cisl

Uiltemp – Uil

Assolavoro

Assosomm

IT

Forma.Temp

Bipartite

Statutory

Nidil – Cgil

Felsa – Cisl

Uiltemp – Uil

 

Assolavoro

Assosomm

LU

Fonds de formation sectoriel pour l’intérim – FSI (social benefits, social assistance and training)

Bipartite

Agreement

OGBL, LCGB

Fedil Employment Services

NL

SFU: sectoral social fund financing projects in the sector with respect to education and training, health and safety, and proper implementation of collective agreements

Bipartite

Agreement

FNV, CNV, De Unie, LBV

ABU, NBBU

NL

SNA: certification body for temporary work agencies

Tripartite**

Agreement

FNV, CNV

ABU, NBBU, COV, LTO, OSB

NL

SNCU: body falling under the SFU for the enforcement of collective agreements

Bipartite

Agreement

FNV, CNV, De Unie, LBV

ABU, NBBU

NL

SNF: association for registration and certification of providers of housing for temporary workers

Bipartite***

Agreement

FNV

ABU, NBBU, LTO, COV

NL

STAF: body falling under the SFU for health and safety issues

Bipartite

Agreement

FNV, CNV, De Unie, LBV

ABU, NBBU

NL

STOOF: body falling under the SFU for education and training

Bipartite

Agreement

FNV, CNV, De Unie, LBV

ABU, NBBU

NL

Stipp: pension fund for temporary agency workers

Bipartite

Agreement

FNV, CNV, De Unie

ABU, NBBU, VPO

SE

Authorisation Board (Auktorisationsnämnden) – authorises temporary work agencies (the authorisations are not legally binding)

Bipartite

Agreement

Unionen, LO, Akademikerförbunden

Bemanningsföretagen

UK

Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA) – licenses businesses that provide workers – on a temporary or permanent basis – in certain sectors

Tripartite

Statutory

Unite (plus the Trades Union Congress)

REC and others****

Notes: * Supervised by the Ministry.

** Tripartite in input, although technically it is a private, independent certification system.

*** Bipartite in input, although technically it is a private association.

**** Association of Labour Providers, British Retail Consortium, Food and Drink Federation, National Farmers’ Union, National Farmers’ Union of Scotland and Shellfish Association of Great Britain

Source: Eurofound’s network of European correspondents.

 

 

EF/15/81

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

Add new comment