Employee representatives’ influence on continuing vocational training: The impact of institutional context

Abstract

What factors determine the involvement of employee representatives in continuing vocational training? This article uses data from the European Company Survey 2009 to examine firm-level and country-level characteristics in 27 European Union (EU) countries. Multilevel logistic regressions indicate that employee representatives increase the probability of companies providing training needs assessments and time off for training. This association is stronger for disadvantaged groups of employees (low-skilled or temporary employees) if the representatives receive support from encompassing collective agreements, strong trade unions or regular training.

Workplace Unionism, Collective Bargaining and Skill Formation: New Results from Mixed Methods

“…Trade unions seem to care not only about employability, but also about the inclusion of some segments of the workforce -especially those with low qualifications -and about the introduction of training topics beyond those required by the law. In cases where smooth trade union relations create a collaborative company climate and training plans are shared with workers' representatives, as shown by the next excerpts, RSU/RSA can take the chance to widen the audience of recipients towards the inclusion of blue-collars and low-skilled workers (Hoque and Bacon, 2008;Lindsay et al, 2012;Wiß, 2017). Moreover, training contents go beyond the compulsory and basic courses.…”

The collective voice of unions and workplace training in Italy: New insights from mixed methods

“…Also, when collective bargaining is defensive, the union may play a role in the processes of skill formation (Klindt, 2017; Pulignano & Stewart, 2013), for example through the promotion of employees’ re‐training programmes. In addition, unions may engage with training decisions becoming training providers and participating with other stakeholders in middle‐level institutions in the design and implementation of training programmes for the local labour market (CNEL‐Istat, 2015; Cooney & Stuart, 2012; Del Punta, 2003; Kristensen & Rocha, 2012; Trampusch & Eichenberger, 2012), possibly widening the audience of recipients towards the inclusion of low‐skilled workers (Hoque & Bacon, 2008; Lindsay et al., 2012; Wiß, 2017). More indirectly, workplace unionization may be associated with longer tenure (Boockmann & Steffes, 2010; Busemayer & Trampusch, 2012; Estevez‐Abe et al., 2001; Hirsch et al., 2010; Pfeifer, 2011) and bolster the integrity of internal labour markets (Harcourt & Wood, 2007), thus creating incentives for long‐run human capital investments (Lazear, 2009).…”

Temporary Employment, Employee Representation, and Employer-Paid Training: A Comparative Analysis

“…Employee representation affects training opportunities not just at the individual level, but also at the country level, as reflected by union coverage. At the country level, unions influence the policy agenda by engaging in the social dialogue and communicating with governmental institutions (Wiß, 2017), using these channels to lobby for training policies with governments and employer organizations (Mustchin, 2012). Unions can also engage in collective bargaining on a national level to regulate firms' training policies and reinforce fiscal policies that encourage employers' investments in training (Cedefop and Eurofound, 2009).…”

“…In principle, in line with the power resource theory, unions can reduce inequalities in access to training by engaging in political discussions and lobbying for legislation that improves the rights and job security of all workers. Indeed, empirical research documents trade union initiatives towards equal treatment of disadvantaged and vulnerable employees (Heyes and Rainbird, 2011;Wiß, 2017). However, to protect their institutional role in the policymaking process, unions are forced to make strategic choices and compromise on the flexibility for some workers when negotiating with the government and employers.…”