Opportunity or threat? How trade union power and preferences shape occupational pensions

Abstract

In this article, we discuss the role of trade unions in the evolution of occupational pensions in four countries: Austria, Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands. In all four cases, important reforms have been made to the pension systems, including the consolidation of extensive occupational pensions in the Netherlands, substantial expansion of occupational pensions in Germany, and a continued marginal position of occupational pensions in Austria and Belgium. We show that the distinct developments in occupational pensions in the four cases since the 1990s can, to an important extent, be understood by the differences in the power resources and preferences of trade unions. The influence of unions on the development of occupational pension systems depends, on the one hand, on the extent to which they see them as an opportunity or a threat, and, on the other hand, on the extent to which they have the power resources to consolidate, oppose or shape these systems.

Trade union strategies against precarious work: Common trends and sectoral divergence in the EU

“…In addition, union strategies can have a conflictive logic (strikes, protests, organizing) or a cooperative and negotiated logic (collective bargaining, social dialogue, bilateral initiatives). Union strategies and their outcomes are strongly affected by their power resources (Korpi, 1983), which include the level of membership, centralization of union movements, cooperation between unions and the institutional positions unions occupy in collective bargaining and social dialogue (Frege and Kelly, 2003; Gumbrell-McCormick and Hyman, 2013; Keune, 2018). The more power resources, the more successful unions will be in fighting precarious employment.…”

El Bienestar Ocupacional: delimitación conceptual y variables clave de su desarrollo

“…Según Wiß (2018), algo similar pasó en Alemania. Keune (2018) analiza el papel de los sindicatos en el desarrollo de las pensiones ocupacionales en cuatro casos nacionales (Alemania, Austria, Bélgica y Países Bajos). El autor concluye que los distintos desarrollos observados en los cuatro países pueden ser comprendidos, en gran medida, por las diferencias en los recursos de poder y en las preferencias de los sindicatos.…”

“…El autor concluye que los distintos desarrollos observados en los cuatro países pueden ser comprendidos, en gran medida, por las diferencias en los recursos de poder y en las preferencias de los sindicatos. Más en concreto, la influencia de los sindicatos en el desarrollo de los sistemas de pensiones ocupacionales depende, según Keune (2018), por un lado, de la medida en que ellos las vean como una amenaza o como una oportunidad y, por otro lado, de la medida en que los sindicatos posean los recursos de poder necesarios para consolidar, oponerse o dar forma esos sistemas. Así, en los Países Bajos, los sindicatos han convivido con un sistema multipilar durante décadas y no cuestionan la importancia del pilar ocupacional.…”

Multipillarisation remodelled: the role of interest organizations in British and German pension reforms

“…They should also be more critical about shifts towards private responsibilities without sufficient state regulation or power to negotiate collective solutions (Ebbinghaus and Wiß 2011). If trade unions have enough bargaining power they may pursue occupational pensions as 'second best' strategy (Mares 2003), seeing it as an opportunity to provide services to their waning membership (Keune 2018). For such unions the 'collectivization of risks' (Johnston, Kornelakis, and Rodriguez d'Acri 2012) would counter the individualization risk typical of prefunded pensions, for instance, by pooling some risks within a collective scheme.…”

“…Moreover, there are important governance issues in respect to resolving the principal-agent conflict between the sponsor and investing agent in addition to the labour-capital conflict between the employer as (co)sponsor and the employee as beneficiary (Ebbinghaus and Wiß 2011). While we expect that employers together with financial services to favour privatization, unions may adopt this as their second best option when expecting opportunities to negotiate occupational pensions (Keune 2018).…”