The end of the Ghent system as trade union recruitment machinery?

Abstract

During the past 15 years, membership rates in many unions have been declining in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. Reasons for this decline may be similar to what has happened in other countries-occupational change and neoliberal ideology and policies-but in the three Ghent countries, changes in the unemployment insurance system may also have affected trade union membership losses. The major part of the decline has taken place in a period of low unemployment, which may have reduced the employee incentive to take unemployment insurance, but will increasing unemployment rates mean more trade union members? At least for the LO-and SAK-affiliated trade unions, it seems that trade union independent unemployment funds may be alternatives for workers who take unemployment insurance.

Union membership and density: Some (not so) stylized facts and challenges

“…Pointing out that the majority of former countries with Ghent systems replaced these by mandatory insurance many decades ago, Van Rie et al (2011) consider it highly unlikely that others countries will adopt a Ghent system. Moreover, they argue that the Belgian institutional set-up only stimulates union membership among particular groups and that the Ghent systems in the Nordic countries have been subject to erosion as unemployment insurance has become more costly and less generous (Lind, 2009). More specifically, Böckerman and Uusitalo (2006) opine that the fall in union density in Finland since the 1990s mainly reflects the erosion of the Ghent system with the emergence of an independent unemployment insurance fund not requiring union membership.…”

TheGhent effect for whom? Mapping the variations of theGhent effect across different trade unions inDenmark

“…In spite of the substantial body of research regarding the Ghent effect, the underlying theoretical explanation of how the Ghent system actually contributes to a high union density is not at all clear cut. In the first place, it is important to emphasise that there are no legal regulations stating that wage earners must join a trade union in order to access a UIF in any of the three Nordic Ghent countries (Kjellberg, ; Lind, ; Uusitalo and Bockerman, ). On the contrary, wage earners have always had a legal right to insure themselves against unemployment without being forced to organise in a trade union at the same time (Due and Steen Madsen, ; Nørgaard, ).…”

“…The presence of the Ghent system and a high union density is therefore referred to as the Ghent effect . However, the Nordic Ghent systems have come under significant pressure in recent years, and many researchers are referring to an erosion of the Ghent system as a recruiting mechanism for trade unions (Böckerman and Uusitalo, ; Kjellberg, 2006; 2011; Lind, 2004; 2009). This is mainly due to the deterioration of the unemployment benefits provided by the UIFs in terms of coverage, eligibility and the right of re‐entitlement, making membership in a UIF less attractive and eroding the UIFs as a recruiting mechanism for their associated trade unions.…”

“…This is mainly due to the deterioration of the unemployment benefits provided by the UIFs in terms of coverage, eligibility and the right of re‐entitlement, making membership in a UIF less attractive and eroding the UIFs as a recruiting mechanism for their associated trade unions. Hence, research regarding the Ghent effect has often focused on either analysing the erosion of the system as a recruiting mechanism (Due and Steen Madsen, ; Kjellberg, 2006; 2009; Lind, 2004; 2009; Uusitalo and Bockerman, ), or measuring the Ghent effect compared with other factors known to contribute to a high union density in cross‐national studies (Ebbinghaus et al ., ; Schnabel and Wagner, 2003; 2005; Scruggs, ; Van Rie et al ., ; Western, ). But do all trade unions and professional organisations equally benefit from a Ghent effect across sectors, occupations and branches, or are some unions more dependent on the Ghent effect as a recruiting mechanism than others?…”

Precarious workers' choices about unemployment insurance membership after the Ghent system reform: The Finnish experience

“…The reforms were introduced under the influence of neo‐liberalism for the purpose of providing multiple options for workers regarding UI. Many researchers predicted that such reforms would have a steady, negative impact on union density (Kjellberg, ; Lind, ; Van Rie, Marx, & Horemans, ). Böckerman and Uusitalo () show, using high‐quality panel data, that one of the main reasons for the decline in union density in Finland during the period from 1993 to 2002 was the emergence and growth of the independent UI fund.…”