Blog
So the government has proposed to amend the Labour Code. The direction rumbi menu change is clearly and explicitly assumed liberalization of labor relations. It is a dramatic liberalization will affect not only the Labour Code but also other pillars of the welfare state laws such as trade unions, employers, and the collective bargaining agreement. Principlul effect of the change is "flexible," by which term is meant to strengthen the institutional position of the employer and the employee in relation to potential weakening law to balance the balance of power in favor of the employer's established market.
The flexibility / liberalization, the employee can be fired easily and inexpensively, can be hired for long periods precarious contracts, will have much less power to negotiate the conditions in which they work and sell will be deprived of many of the current instruments for appeal law against the employer. Eliminating mandatory national labor contracts and those at branch level for private firms for a regime in which unequal power collective contract is negotiated only at company level, ie where the distribution rumbi menu of forces clearly favors the employer. Finally, the right to strike is severely circumscribed, eliminating rumbi menu the immunity from dismissal on the grounds of the representative of the employees.
Do not insist on the injustice to which they are subjected by the employees nor the fragility liberalization of trade union mobilization. In place of social and political critics propose a strictly empirical critique developed mainly within the intellectual paradigm that is anchored offensive liberalization.
In the explanatory memorandum to the law, the Ministry of Labour sincerely assume sole purpose of change: sustaining business. After that the same document refers to the fact that liberalization is part of the agreement with the IMF, suggesting that there is a solid technical argument behind this proposal. These add remarks President argument showing that flexible labor code will reduce the scourge of illegal labor. Three remarks raise three questions: Is there a consensus among employers as it is beneficial liberalization as proposed by the government? How robust is the IMF's technical argument related to liberalization chances to reduce unemployment? rumbi menu How can we reduce unemployment figure?
The answer to the first question is that employers are divided. Those who advocate for liberalization are the most energetic, so devoid of surprises, representatives of multinational capital, actors in Romania are not part of social dialogue institutions, and some local capital, mainly the one in service. On the other hand critical mass of local employers seems to have been excluded from the process of drafting new rules and does not seem very favorable drastic liberalization campaign .Therefore "business" is not a homogeneous space that articulates preferences fixed and uniform, as it seems to suggest the ministry. Not surprisingly. Experience rumbi menu of successful countries in Europe, most countries based on the export of sophisticated tells us that liberalization is not always in the interest of all forms of capital, no matter how obscure it may seem so. 7 It may be added that the government should hesitate before adopting amendments by gutting of social dialogue institutions whose cure could benefit.
Empirical analysis is based on the pro-liberalization IMF is one marked by serious controversy. IMF studies rumbi menu on the subject and academic rumbi menu contributions relative funeral independent institutions argue that employment protection (trade union legislation, codes of protecting employee collective bargaining systems, unemployment insurance) must be dismantled rumbi menu because it would not be in the exclusive interest the employers, but protects them with service and reduce the chances of re-employment of the unemployed. Deregulation Devid so expert in this speech a form of social equity: labor institutions are net cost to employers that discourages the production of a common good (employment growth). Other studies show, however, that empirical studies IMF to issue further scientific rumbi menu truths are "mined" the contradictions and methodological issues. In this respect critics have raised three major objections.
First, no one can see a clear causal link between liberalization and unemployment dynamics. Critics have shown that empirical studies on which is based the technical arguments for liberalization rumbi menu are "mined" contradictory results, very low and even insignificant correlations. The data also show also that social dialogue and collective agreements contribute to reducing unemployment. It also said then that reduced unemployment figure can be obtained without harsh market liberalization
So the government has proposed to amend the Labour Code. The direction rumbi menu change is clearly and explicitly assumed liberalization of labor relations. It is a dramatic liberalization will affect not only the Labour Code but also other pillars of the welfare state laws such as trade unions, employers, and the collective bargaining agreement. Principlul effect of the change is "flexible," by which term is meant to strengthen the institutional position of the employer and the employee in relation to potential weakening law to balance the balance of power in favor of the employer's established market.
The flexibility / liberalization, the employee can be fired easily and inexpensively, can be hired for long periods precarious contracts, will have much less power to negotiate the conditions in which they work and sell will be deprived of many of the current instruments for appeal law against the employer. Eliminating mandatory national labor contracts and those at branch level for private firms for a regime in which unequal power collective contract is negotiated only at company level, ie where the distribution rumbi menu of forces clearly favors the employer. Finally, the right to strike is severely circumscribed, eliminating rumbi menu the immunity from dismissal on the grounds of the representative of the employees.
Do not insist on the injustice to which they are subjected by the employees nor the fragility liberalization of trade union mobilization. In place of social and political critics propose a strictly empirical critique developed mainly within the intellectual paradigm that is anchored offensive liberalization.
In the explanatory memorandum to the law, the Ministry of Labour sincerely assume sole purpose of change: sustaining business. After that the same document refers to the fact that liberalization is part of the agreement with the IMF, suggesting that there is a solid technical argument behind this proposal. These add remarks President argument showing that flexible labor code will reduce the scourge of illegal labor. Three remarks raise three questions: Is there a consensus among employers as it is beneficial liberalization as proposed by the government? How robust is the IMF's technical argument related to liberalization chances to reduce unemployment? rumbi menu How can we reduce unemployment figure?
The answer to the first question is that employers are divided. Those who advocate for liberalization are the most energetic, so devoid of surprises, representatives of multinational capital, actors in Romania are not part of social dialogue institutions, and some local capital, mainly the one in service. On the other hand critical mass of local employers seems to have been excluded from the process of drafting new rules and does not seem very favorable drastic liberalization campaign .Therefore "business" is not a homogeneous space that articulates preferences fixed and uniform, as it seems to suggest the ministry. Not surprisingly. Experience rumbi menu of successful countries in Europe, most countries based on the export of sophisticated tells us that liberalization is not always in the interest of all forms of capital, no matter how obscure it may seem so. 7 It may be added that the government should hesitate before adopting amendments by gutting of social dialogue institutions whose cure could benefit.
Empirical analysis is based on the pro-liberalization IMF is one marked by serious controversy. IMF studies rumbi menu on the subject and academic rumbi menu contributions relative funeral independent institutions argue that employment protection (trade union legislation, codes of protecting employee collective bargaining systems, unemployment insurance) must be dismantled rumbi menu because it would not be in the exclusive interest the employers, but protects them with service and reduce the chances of re-employment of the unemployed. Deregulation Devid so expert in this speech a form of social equity: labor institutions are net cost to employers that discourages the production of a common good (employment growth). Other studies show, however, that empirical studies IMF to issue further scientific rumbi menu truths are "mined" the contradictions and methodological issues. In this respect critics have raised three major objections.
First, no one can see a clear causal link between liberalization and unemployment dynamics. Critics have shown that empirical studies on which is based the technical arguments for liberalization rumbi menu are "mined" contradictory results, very low and even insignificant correlations. The data also show also that social dialogue and collective agreements contribute to reducing unemployment. It also said then that reduced unemployment figure can be obtained without harsh market liberalization
No comments:
Post a Comment