Solidarity with whom? Why organised labour is losing ground in Continental pension politics
Solidarity with whom? Why organised labour is losing ground in Continental pension politics
复制标题
与谁团结？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Silja Häusermann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Silja Häusermann
这篇文章解释了为什么在瑞士和德国养老金制度的改革中，有组织的劳工的力量在过去三十年中逐渐消失。后工业化给欧洲大陆福利国家的养老金政策议程带来了两组不同的改革问题：削减现有的福利水平，以及新的后工业社会风险群体的养老金覆盖范围。最近的养老金改革越来越多地将这两种措施联合收割机纳入一揽子政策--“现代化妥协”--以通过选择性的扩张性改革要素来补偿紧缩。欧洲大陆的工会对后工业化现代化的重视程度低于左翼政党--特别是社会民主党和绿色政党。因此，劳工运动和左翼政党之间的距离，以及劳工内部的异质性，增加和“现代化的妥协”往往分裂左翼和边缘化工会。实证分析依赖于1972年至2003年期间的八项重大养老金改革的编码行为者立场。
This article explains why the power of organised labour in the reform of Swiss and German pension regimes has faded over the last three decades. Postindustrialisation has brought two different sets of reform issues onto the pension policy agendas of Continental European welfare states: retrenchment of existing benefit levels, and the pension coverage of new, postindustrial social risk groups. Recent pension reforms increasingly combine these two types of measures in encompassing policy packages –‘modernising compromises’– in order to compensate for retrenchment with selective expansive reform elements. Continental trade unions attach a lower importance to postindustrial modernisation than do the left-wing parties – notably the Social Democrats and the Green parties. Consequently, the distance between the labour movement and the left-wing parties, as well as intra-labour heterogeneity, increase and ‘modernising compromises’ tend to divide the left and to marginalise trade unions. The empirical analysis relies on coded actor positions from eight major pension reforms between 1972 and 2003.