PARTNERSHIP FOR THE CHANGE IN AN ENLARGED
EUROPE—ENHANCING THE CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL DIALOGUE (12002/04)
Letter from Jim Fitzpatrick MP, Minister
for Employment Relations and Postal Services, Department of Trade
and Industry to the Chairman
Thank you for your letter of 23 June 2006,[152]
raising a number of different issues. I apologise for the delay
in responding.
As you know one of the underlying principles
of the European Social Dialogue is that it is autonomous, and
Member States have no locus to intervene directly in discussions
between social partners. The Communication from the Commission
was therefore on a series of "recommendations" to the
social partners about the way in which European Social Dialogue
is given effect and proposed actions that the Commission itself
decided to effect in relation to its own interaction with European
Social Dialogue. The recommendations and proposed actions were
a response to the enlargement of the European Union, and in particular
the accession of 10 new countries in 2004. Two further states
will accede next year. There may well be a case for the Commission
and indeed the European Social Partners themselves to reflect
further on the operation of European Social Dialogue in a larger
Europe, although it is arguable that such a review might be more
informative after a longer period of membership.
Your letter refers to meetings of social dialogue
experts. Some time ago the Commission had suggested that Member
States might discuss Social Dialigue in an expert group under
the auspices of the regular High Level Group of Directors' General
of Industrial Relations. However, the prevailing view of most
Member States was that given the autonomy of European Social Dialogue,
it would be hard to see the role of such a group of representatives
of Member States. However, the Commision will continue to report
on social dialogue matters to the regular meeting of Directors'
General of Industrial Relations.
On the question of SME engagement in European
Social Dialogue and the voice of SMEs in wider European policy
making, the Government is a strong advocate of the SME Envoy and
the need for this champion within the Commission for the purpose
of making sure that relevant policy proposals have been thought
through especially in terms of their impact on small business.
On the Commission legal study on Transnational
Collective bargaining, the report was undertaken for the EU Commission.
It provides an analytical framework to inform further work by
the Commission on this topic, including its consultations with
interested parties. For example, the report was discussed at a
study seminar arranged by the Commission on 17 May attended by
representatives of employer and trade union organisations at both
EU and member state levels. The UK Government has not taken a
position on the report's analysis or its conclusions. The UK Government
would note, however, that the creation of a new mechanism to give
legal effect to transnational collective agreements, which is
one of the report's recommendations, would not sit comfortably
with the UK's voluntarist approach to industrial relations where
virtually all collective agreements are not legally enforceable.
16 October 2006
Letter from the Chairman to Jim Fitzpatrick
MP
Thank you for your letter of 16 October, this
was considered by Sub-Committee G on 30 November.
We note the explanation you provide of the limited
role of Member States in engaging in discussions between the social
partners, and of the need to bear in mind the possible impact
of the forthcoming accession of two new Member States on the operation
of social dialogue in the extended EU.
We welcome your clear support for the role of
the SME Envoy in championing SME issues in European policy making;
and we note the Government's clear views on the undesirability
of any future proposal from the Commission for legally enforceable
transnational collective agreements.
We would be grateful if you could give us advance
warning of any future move towards the introduction of European
legislation in this area; or indeed of any significant new proposal
from the Commission affecting UK policy. In such a case, we would
await a new Explanatory Memorandum. In the meantime, we are content
to release this Communication document from scrutiny.
6 December 2006
152 Correspondence with Ministers, 40th Report of Session
2006-07, HL Paper 187, pp 545-546. Back
| 
