Social Partnership

Assess the contributions social partnership has made to policy-making
Dr Chukwuemeka Nwaneri
Department of Healthcare Management
Institute of Public Administration
National University of Ireland
Dublin.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Mechanics & Institutional frameworks of Social partnership
Characteristic features of Social partnership
Social partnership: From Europe to Ireland
Social partnership pillars
Social partnership agreements: 1987 to 2015
Historical perspectives of Irish Social partnerships
Contributions of the social partnership to policy-making
Limitations and drawbacks of social partnership
Conclusion
References

Introduction
The Irish State since independence have demonstrated different levels of strata and relationship between social partnership with policy-making especially in areas of economic and social issues and management both in short term and long term basis.
When benchmarked with other European States this have an exemplary role on the management of different policies by government putting on board social partners.
Social partnership describes governance and policy making approach whereby government selected social partners work together in a collaborative manner to decide on the future of public policy in their area of involvement (ICSH, 2009).
Public policy is complex because of its diversification and intercalation ranging from agriculture, health, arts, housing, social, gender equality, child welfare to economy. Policy process is a continuous cycle, involving policy making, implementation and monitoring.
Bertie (2005) stated that social partnership had reinforced the people’s strong culture of consensus-building allowing participants a forum for expressing their views on government policies and proposals. Furthermore he stated that social partners constitute an enormous and priceless depot of experiences, expertise and feedback for the policy making process.
Bangs (2006) in quoting ‘the Copenhagen centre for partnership studies 2002’ defined social partnership as a tri or multi-partite arrangement involving employers, trade union, public authorities (the State including the local and regional authorities and others example Voluntary sector). Social partnership is usually concerned with areas of economic and social policy and might be based on a binding agreement or declaration of intent. Social partner is the term used to designate the representative organisations of trade unions and employers.
Mechanics and Institutional frameworks of Social partnership in policy-making in Ireland
The Social partnership bodies act through the tripartite National Economic Development Office (NESDO) which is composed of:
· The National Economic and Social Council ,NESC;
· The National Economic and Social Forum, NESF; and
· The National Centre for partnership and performance, NCPP.
The NESC has over the years since its establishment in 1973 played a leading role in the development of programmes and strategy to improve on economic “paralysis” increasing taxation and excessive debts. The NESC had been an advisory body in which employers, trade union, farmers, senior civil servant analyse policy issue. NESC role is to advise the government on the development of the national economy and the achievement of social justice.
The NESF established in 1993 plays a role in the area of equality especially to combat unemployment and have dominated areas of public policy evaluation and contribution to the formation of national consensus on social, economic issues.
The NCPP looks at organisational change and improvement in performance at the level of workplace at the same time developing models and measurement indices to promote collaborative efforts. NCPP was formed in 2001.
National Implementation body is bedrock of institutional framework of social partnership in Ireland.
Characteristic features of Social partnership
The NESC in its Report, strategy into the 21st century, offered the under listed characteristic features of social partnership (NESC 1996). The partnership process;
· Involves a combination of consultation, negotiation and bargaining;
· Is heavily dependent on a shared understanding of key mechanism and relationship in any given policy area;
· Should be an integral part of government. It provides the arena within which the process operates. It shares some of its authority with social partners. In some parts of the wider policy process it actively support formation of interest organisation;
· Reflects interdependence between the partners. The partnership is necessary because no party can achieve its goals without a significant degree of support from others
· Is characterized by a problem solving approach designed to produce consensus in which various interest groups address joint problems
· Involves trade-offs both between and within interest groups
· Involves different participants on various agenda items, ranging from national macroeconomic policy to local development (NESC 1996; O’Donnell & Thomas 1998).
Social Partnership: From Europe to Ireland
The Maastricht Treaty social chapter protocol lies the foundation of social partnership, which says that member states should and compliment each others activities on:
· Improving health and safety at work
· Working conditions
· The information and consultation of workers
· Equality between men and women with regard to job opportunities and treatment at work.
In October 2004, the European Commission published a work entitled “Partnership for change in an enlarged Europe: enhancing the contribution of European social Dialogue. Through a set of proposed activities the commission provided momentum to the council of ministers call on member states to ‘bind partnership for change’ involving social partners, civil society and public authorities in accordance with national tradition. Partnership for change as it became known, according to the commission, ‘recognises that successful economies in the 21st century will not be possible without a modern system of labour relations and efficient strategies for managing change pro-actively’. Ireland, the social partnership agreement covers a wide range of industries including management of the economy, wage level, workplace issues and social inclusion.
These involve the Government, the Irish congress of Trade Union and the Irish business and Employers confederations.
Four Pillars of Social partnership
1. Employer and Business organisation:
IBEC: Irish Business and Employers confederation
CIF: Construction Industry Federation
CCI: Chambers of commerce of Ireland
ITIC: Irish Tourist Industry Confederation
IEA: Irish Exporters Association
SFA: Small Firms Association
2. Trade Union ICTU: Irish Congress of trade unions
3. Framers organisation:
IFA: Irish Farming Association
ICMSA: Irish creamy and milk suppliers Association
Macra na feirme
ICOS: Irish cooperative Society
4. Community & Voluntary organisation:
ICSH: Irish Council for Social Housing
NWCI: national women’s Council of Ireland
NYCI: national youth Council of Ireland
CORI: Committee of Religious superiors
Centre for the Unemployed
Society of St Vincent de Paul
Protestant Aid
Community platform
Historical perspective of the Irish Social partnership
In the early 1930 and 1940, there were attempt at introducing a form of corporatism (or vocationalism) but it was unpopular among policy makers. About the middle 1940’s, Sean Lemass, although not pro-corporatism, had advocated for a modernization of trade union to suit into the framework of corporation to enhancing the metamorphosis of industrial development (O’Donnell & Thomas, 1998). But by virtue of opposition and lack of support on a background of inherent voluntarist culture of Irish industrial practices, Lemass made infinitesimal progress in his programme. In the 1960’s the social partnership arrangement with government public policy began to gain popularity as the Irish economy brightens. This heralded the appointment of trade union and community representatives in various public bodies in existent within these periods.
In the 1970’s, issues surrounding workers pay at the national level was dominant cumulating to series of National wage Agreement and National understanding (O’Donnell & Thomas, 1998). This heralded the development of periodic agreement commencing in 1987.
Current Social partnership agreements: 1987 to 2015
Since 1987, there have been 7 social partnership agreements in Ireland.
· Programme for National Recovery (PNR)1987-1990
· Programme for Economic and Social Progress (PESP) 1991-1993
· Programme for competitiveness and Work (PWC) 1994-1996
· Partnership 2000 for Inclusion, Employment and Competitiveness 1997-1999
· Programme for prosperity and Fairness 2000-2002
· Sustaining progress 2003-2005
· Towards 2016: a ten year framework plan of 2006 to 2015.
Contributions of Social partnership to Policy-making: Economic and Social impacts
Following the drawbacks prior to the first social partnership agreement, a re-examination of the requirement for effective concordance was undertaken (Hardiman 1988, 1992; O’Donnell & Thomas, 1998) and areas of improvement were identified.
It was the policy document produced by the NESC in 1986 title “A strategy for Development” which formed the basis upon which the government at that time and the social partners re-assessed and developed the programme for National Recovery between 1987 and 1990. The programme for National Recovery 1987 to 1990 was a three yearly agreement involving employers, trade unions, government and farming interest as wage levels in both public and private enterprises. This was aimed at correcting and controlling public finance, and enhancing international competitiveness. These programme PNR, extended to government acceptance of tax reform, and maintenance of social welfare payments values in order to reduce the economic burden of the Irish workers (O’Donnell & O’Reardon, 2000).
A theme which revibrates the programme as argued by O’Donnell and O’Reardon (2000) was on macroeconomic dimension of annual year correction, structural adjustment, austerity measure and trends in health expenditure with each member of the partnership agreeing on the balance between inflationary pressure, devaluation and insolvency with external problems. The outcome of the successes of the government economic and social policy was without the contributions of the working groups, committees, and task forces, which involved the social partners in the design, implementation and monitoring of public policy.
Yet another area of contribution of social partners in the Irish public policy was on the employment and job creation and consequences of long term unemployment (O’Donnell & O’Reardon, 2000). They argued that it was the PNR of 1990 that led to the creation of local partnership companies with the involvement of social partners, trade unions, community and voluntary sectors and State agencies in designing and implementing a coordinated, multi-faceted approach to social inclusion.
The PESP (1990-1993) revealed a legislative clause which allowed negotiation at industrial level for a maximum of three percent wage increase amongst workers. This like the PNR 1990 was pioneered by the contributions of the social partners in the design and implementation of a more organised multi-sectoral approach to social inclusion.
In the area of rural development, a complementary community leadership programme was implemented as part of partnership approach. The argument was supported by the work of Sabel (1996) on OECD evaluation of Irish local economic development policies.
The PCW (1994-1996) extended the development initiative on increasing the number of people at work and reducing the level of unemployment. Furthermore this formed the basis of National level discussion and arrangements for the following years to come.
The partnership 2000, re-assessed the ‘weakest link’ in the previous agreements of PNR, PESP and PCW arguing that there was a discrepancy in the representation of national level partnership at the enterprise strata, addressing issues surrounding the unattainability of benefits of social partnership with respect to trade unions and limitations of the economic benefits such as in training, information and support to employers’ and employees’ representatives and provision of encouragement (O’Donnell & O’Reardon, 2000).
Another important contribution of the social partnership was in the widening inclusion in the partnership process by the establishment of the NESF. In 1993, the government as a result of the impressive contributions of the social partnership, established a new partnership body, the National Economic and Social forum (NESF) with its membership encompassing trade unions, employer association and farmers organisations, and representative of the community and voluntary sectors and of the main political parties in Ireland, which had been outside the partnership structure originally. The trend of change was also seen in the widening of membership of NESC to include a representative from the Irish National organisation of the unemployed (INOU) among the Government nominees.
The Gross Domestic Product over the decade of 1986 through 1996, increased by about 4.9percent, compared to an OECD average of 2.4percent. Employment grew by 1.8percent per year compared to an OECD average of 1.0percent and an EU average of 0.3percent. Between 1993 and 1996, the GNP rose by 7.5percent per year and employment by 4.0percent per year. The debt/GDP ratio fell drastically to 76percent by 1996 from 1986 value of 117percent. In the Irish State, inflation had fallen below the EU average. There was correction of public finances and improved economic growth and performance.
The Irish Council for Social Housing became a member of the community and voluntary pillar of social partnership since 2003 after the ratification of sustaining progress. Having identified affordability and supply as the unaddressed areas within the housing sector, the ICSH in 2006 during the social partnership forum influenced the deliberation of issues of housing (including RAS) especially in terms of continued high demand for social housing due to lack of affordability for private housing, the fall in the provision of State land for social housing, the reduction in the national social housing stock, the persistence of homelessness nationally despite an increase in services, and accommodation for the homeless and imminent rise in demand for elderly sheltered housing due to an ageing population and the continued need for housing for people with disabilities (ICSH, 2009).
Limitations of social partnership: wider perspectives in Europe
Regardless of the impact of social partners in policy-making the works of Huzzard et al (2004) titled ‘strategic unionism and partnership: boxing and dancing’?, Steven Boyd, Scottish trade union congress, STUC in 2002 titled partnership working, European social partnership models and the Trade union congress, TUC and the work foundation in September 2004 titled ‘Trade union and employee involving in public services reform’, evaluate the limitations of social partnership in the context of policy making decisions (Bang, 2006). Bang argues while referring to the work of Huzzard that as long as employers stick to short term interests, that are securing the fastest and greater return on capital, the room for social partnership is limited if not non-existent.
Conclusion
Social partnership over the years in Ireland has maintained a consistent and relevant consensus-led strategic framework in areas of macroeconomic policy, austerity measure and structural adjustment programmes and income distribution (O’Donnell, 1993, 1998; NESC 1996). The achievements of these economic policies go beyond the outcomes of the agreements to collaborations in policy making. The achievements and limits of social partnership have been analysed in numerous studies of economic performance, industrial relations, unemployment and poverty, although there will remain a concern of the influence of social partnership on social policies.
Finally, the impact of partnership on policy is complex, variable and contingent in nature (O’Donnell & Thomas, 1998).
References
Bangs, J. (2006). Social Partnership: the wider context. Forum: Vol. 48 Number 2, pp 201-208. Available at http://www.wwwords.co.uk/pdf/validate.asp?j=forum&volume=48&issue=2&year=2006&article=11_bangs_forum_48_2_web. (Accessed 01/02/2009).
Ahern, B. (2005). Evaluation and evidence-based policy-making: getting the evidence into policy making. Speech delivered by Taoiseach at NESF/UCD Conference, Dublin. Available at http://www.bettergov.ie/attached_files/.../Evidence%20based%20policy%20making%20speech%. (Accessed 01/02/2009).
Boyd, S. (2002). Partnership Working, European Social Partnership Models. Scottish Trade Union Congress. Available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/publications/2004/05/19376/37359. (Accessed 01/02/2009).
Huzzard, T., Gregory, D., & Scott, R. (2004). (Eds) Strategic Unionism and Partnership: boxing and dancing? London: Palgrave Macmillan
Irish Council for Social Housing: Social Partnership. Available at http://www.icsh.ie/eng/policy/social_partnership. (Accessed 01/02/2009).
O’Donnell, R.& O’Reardon, C.(2000). Social Partnership in Ireland’s Economic Transformation. From Social Pacts in Europe-New Dynamics, Edited by Giuseppe Fajertag and Phillipe Pochet, European Trade Union Institute/Observatoire Social European, Brussels. Available at http://www.nesc.ie/dynamic/docs/Social%20Partnership%20in%20Ireland's%20Economic%20T (Accessed 01/02/2009).
O’Donnell, R., & Thomas, D. (1998). Partnership and Policy-making. Review of chapter 7 of Social Policy in Ireland: principles, practice and problems: Sean Healy and Brigid Reynolds. Available at http://www.nesc.ie/dynamic/docs/PARTNERSHIP%20AND%20POLICY-MAKING.doc. (Accessed 01/02/2009).
The Trades Union Congress & The Work Foundation (2004). Trade Union and Employee Involvement in Public Services Reform. London: Cabinet Office, Office for Public Services Reform.