欧洲社会对话:通过育儿假权利塑造欧盟社会政策

IF 2.9 3区 管理学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Zhen Jie Im, Trine Pernille Larsen, Brigitte Pircher
{"title":"欧洲社会对话:通过育儿假权利塑造欧盟社会政策","authors":"Zhen Jie Im, Trine Pernille Larsen, Brigitte Pircher","doi":"10.1177/00197939241231789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Social Dialogue (ESD) has served as the platform for European social partners to negotiate parental leave policies at the European Union (EU) level since 1995. The partners’ efforts to revise the regulations in 2015, in response to the European Commission’s broader approach toward European work–life balance policies, failed, however, and the reasons for and implications of this failure remain insufficiently explored. Drawing on existing ESD literature and leveraging the regulator-intermediary-target (RIT) model, the authors develop a typology of policymaking outcomes based on the analysis of three parental leave directives from 1996 to 2019. The findings demonstrate that divergent preferences among European social partners, particularly when juxtaposed against the Commission’s policy objectives and interests, reduced the probability of a successful ESD through which European social partners could generate a framework agreement. Instead of being rule-makers, these conditions relegated European social partners to the role of rule-takers. If this trend continues, it poses a significant challenge to the role and influence of European social partners in EU policymaking.","PeriodicalId":13504,"journal":{"name":"ILR Review","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"European Social Dialogues: Shaping EU Social Policy through Parental Leave Rights\",\"authors\":\"Zhen Jie Im, Trine Pernille Larsen, Brigitte Pircher\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00197939241231789\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The European Social Dialogue (ESD) has served as the platform for European social partners to negotiate parental leave policies at the European Union (EU) level since 1995. The partners’ efforts to revise the regulations in 2015, in response to the European Commission’s broader approach toward European work–life balance policies, failed, however, and the reasons for and implications of this failure remain insufficiently explored. Drawing on existing ESD literature and leveraging the regulator-intermediary-target (RIT) model, the authors develop a typology of policymaking outcomes based on the analysis of three parental leave directives from 1996 to 2019. The findings demonstrate that divergent preferences among European social partners, particularly when juxtaposed against the Commission’s policy objectives and interests, reduced the probability of a successful ESD through which European social partners could generate a framework agreement. Instead of being rule-makers, these conditions relegated European social partners to the role of rule-takers. If this trend continues, it poses a significant challenge to the role and influence of European social partners in EU policymaking.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ILR Review\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ILR Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00197939241231789\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ILR Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00197939241231789","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自1995年以来,欧洲社会对话(ESD)一直是欧洲社会合作伙伴在欧盟(EU)层面就育儿假政策进行谈判的平台。然而,为响应欧盟委员会对欧洲工作与生活平衡政策采取的更广泛方针,合作伙伴在 2015 年修订法规的努力以失败告终,而失败的原因和影响仍未得到充分探讨。作者借鉴现有的可持续发展教育文献,利用监管者-中介-目标(RIT)模型,在分析 1996 年至 2019 年三项育儿假指令的基础上,对决策结果进行了分类。研究结果表明,欧洲社会合作伙伴之间的偏好分歧,尤其是在与欧盟委员会的政策目标和利益并列时,降低了可持续发展教育取得成功的可能性,而欧洲社会合作伙伴可以通过可持续发展教育达成框架协议。这些条件使欧洲社会伙伴不再是规则的制定者,而是沦为规则的接受者。如果这一趋势继续下去,将对欧洲社会伙伴在欧盟决策中的作用和影响构成重大挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
European Social Dialogues: Shaping EU Social Policy through Parental Leave Rights
The European Social Dialogue (ESD) has served as the platform for European social partners to negotiate parental leave policies at the European Union (EU) level since 1995. The partners’ efforts to revise the regulations in 2015, in response to the European Commission’s broader approach toward European work–life balance policies, failed, however, and the reasons for and implications of this failure remain insufficiently explored. Drawing on existing ESD literature and leveraging the regulator-intermediary-target (RIT) model, the authors develop a typology of policymaking outcomes based on the analysis of three parental leave directives from 1996 to 2019. The findings demonstrate that divergent preferences among European social partners, particularly when juxtaposed against the Commission’s policy objectives and interests, reduced the probability of a successful ESD through which European social partners could generate a framework agreement. Instead of being rule-makers, these conditions relegated European social partners to the role of rule-takers. If this trend continues, it poses a significant challenge to the role and influence of European social partners in EU policymaking.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ILR Review
ILR Review INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.60%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Issued quarterly since October 1947, the Industrial and Labor Relations Review is a leading interdisciplinary journal publishing original research on all aspects of the employment relationship. The journal also publishes reviews of some 30 books per year. This site offers an index of all articles and book reviews published since 1947, abstracts of all articles, and information about upcoming issues. At the "All Articles" and "All Book Reviews" pages, visitors can search on titles and authors. Use this site, too, to learn about upcoming articles and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信