L
E
X
ONOMICA
Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 125-137, December 2016
Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A Portuguese Overview
N
OÉMIA
B
ESSA
V
ILELA
,
J
OSÉ
C
ARAMELO
G
OMES
&
N
ATACHA
S
ILVA
4
Abstract: Due to the increasing competition on the labour market, the
search for new approaches to labour legislations led to the creation and
adoption, in some countries, of so called “flexicurity”. “Flexicurity”
became top of the list in the policy agenda in the European Union, but
there is doubt that such an agenda for encompassing labour market reform
providing not employment. As sources are used “flexicurity” models, in
countries where it has already been successfully implemented, as well as
Eurostat data, information made available by the European Commission,
as well as doctrinal and research papers. Portuguese jurisdiction is
considered by national legal doctrine as a closed model. Heavy regulation
and constitutional constraints drive an almost unanimous rejection of the
possibility to introduce the concept at national level. This article's goal is
to discuss the ways the concept could be introduced in the Portuguese
jurisdiction. Would the model effectively create security, or would it result
in precarity?
K
EYWORDS
: • labour • flexicurity • security • flexibility • employment
C
ORRESPONDENCE
A
DDRESS
: Noémia Bessa Vilela, LLM, Researcher at IJP, Portucalense
Institute for Legal Research; Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 541/619, 4200-072 Porto,
Portugal, e-mail: noemia@upt.pt, José Caramelo Gomes, PhD. Full professor at Universidade
Portucalense Infante D. Henrique, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 541/619, 4200-072
Porto, Portugal, e-mail: caramelo.gomes@upt.pt, Natacha Silva, PhD, Assistant Professor at
Universidade Portucalense Infante D. Henrique, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida,
541/619, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal, e-mail: natachac@upt.pt
DOI 10.18690/18557147.8.2.125-137(2016), UDC: 331.5:349.227(469)
ISSN 1855-7147 Print / 1855-7155 On-line © 2016 LeXonomica (Maribor)
Available at http://journals.um.si/index.php/lexonomica.
126
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
1
Introduction to “flexicurity”
Globalisation creates new opportunities for growth and employment but also brings
challenges and problems such as job displacement and job loss, as well as increased
stresses and strains at the workplaces exposed to increasing global competition (Auer,
2006: 17). The pros and cons of globalisation are in fact unfairly distributed between
winners and losers within countries even when a country as a whole is a winner in
globalisation (Auer et al., 2004: 85–87). It is also said that competition creates a more
flexible market. In order to keep up with the needs of such market changes, new
policies have arisen, out of which we chose to study “flexicurity”.
“Flexicurity” is a means to reinforce the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy, create
more and better jobs, modernise labour markets, and promote good work through new
forms of flexibility and security to increase adaptability, employment, and social
cohesion. It involves the deliberate combination of flexible and reliable contractual
arrangements, comprehensive lifelong learning strategies, effective active labour market
policies, and modern, adequate and sustainable social protection systems. Its
approaches are not about one single labour market or working life model, nor about a
single policy strategy: they should be tailored to the specific circumstances of each
Member State. Implies a balance between rights and responsibilities of all concerned.
Based on the common principles, each Member State should develop its own
”flexicurity” arrangements. Progress should be effectively monitored and promote more
open, responsive and inclusive labour markets overcoming segmentation. It concerns
both those in work and those out of work. The inactive, the unemployed, those in
undeclared work, in unstable employment, or at the margins of the labour market need
to be provided with better opportunities, economic incentives and supportive measures
for easier access to work or stepping-stones to assist progress into stable and legally
secure employment. Support should be available to all those in employment to remain
employable, progress and manage transitions both in work and between jobs. Internal
(within the enterprise) as well as external “flexicurity” are equally important and should
be promoted. Sufficient contractual flexibility must be accompanied by secure
transitions from job to job. Upward mobility needs to be facilitated, as well as between
unemployment or inactivity and work. High quality and productive workplaces, good
organization of work, and continuous upgrading of skills are also essential. Social
protection should provide incentives and support for job transitions and access to new
employment. It should support gender equality, by promoting equal access to quality
employment for women and men and offering measures to reconcile work, family, and
private life and requires a climate of trust and broadly-based dialogue among all
stakeholders, where all are prepared and intend to take responsibility for change to (or
“intending to”) socially balanced policies. While public authorities retain an overall
responsibility, the involvement of social partners in the design and implementation of
“flexicurity” policies through social dialogue and collective bargaining is of crucial
importance. It requires a cost-effective allocation of resources and should remain fully
compatible with sound and financially sustainable public budgets. It should also aim at
a fair distribution of costs and benefits, especially between businesses, public
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
127
authorities and individuals, with particular attention to the specific situation of SMEs
(OECD, 2004).
“Flexicurity” in Europe has become a popular topic when the subject is
(un)employment. The Danish labour market and its model is an excellent example of
successful implementation of “flexicurity”. It's a combination of both labour market
flexibility and social security. Its purpose is to gather various kinds of flexibility with
different degrees of security.
In Denmark, the main focus is on security in employment and income combined with
flexibility in relation to the hiring and firing of workers
(Atkinson, 1984: 11–14).
“There are four different kinds of flexibility:
-
numerical flexibility – adjustment of the number of employees;
-
functional flexibility – flexibility between work tasks;
-
working time flexibility;
-
pay level flexibility.
There are four different kinds of security:
-
job security: remaining in the same job;
-
employment security: staying employed, but not necessarily in the same job;
-
income security upon unemployment or illness;
-
combination security: the possibility of combining work life and private life
through, for instance, parental leave schemes and special schemes for senior
employees”.
“Flexicurity
”
is a word which has been widely spread in the last years. The sudden
apparition of such term is deeply related to the fact that the world has been undergoing
a continuous economic crisis, and it reflects in the capability of obtaining and
maintaining a secure job position. This concept, which emerged in the Netherlands in
the mid-90s, carries within itself two presumptions. The first is the presumption that
high levels of flexibility are necessary in order to compete successfully in a globalized
market and the second is that high levels of flexibility are needed in order to afford high
levels of security - when it comes to securing employment.
The word “flexicurity” carries, hence, the concept of both flexibility and security. Even
thou one might say they can’t coexist; the reality is that they are not only compatible
but can also support one another, in a symbiotic relation. Flexibility shouldn’t be looked
at as being a monopoly of the employers, just as well as security should not be totally in
the scope of the powers of the employees. It is well known that stability in the
employment relation and the satisfaction and loyalty of employees are an advantage to
both the employees themselves and their employers, as levels of productivity tend to be
higher when workers are satisfied. It’s also no news that the employees have also been
trying to find ways to adjust their work to their personal and family life, being willing
to have a more flexible way of organizing work.
128
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
One could easily understand that if flexibility causes satisfaction and satisfaction causes
higher levels of productivity, it also creates security instead of preventing it (as might
have been concluded in an initial approach, under the conceived perspective that there
would be conflicting interests).
2
Historical Background
The concept “flexicurity” appeared for the first time in the Netherlands in the mid-
1990s. It isn’t, however, a concept that was only to be adopted in the Dutch labour
market.
“Flexicurity” is a policy strategy that aims to enhance labour market, labour relations
and work organization flexibility (labour mobility, fixed-term contracts) on the one
hand, and employment and income security, in particular of the sensitive social groups
that are located at the margin of labour market on the other (Wilthagen, 2004: 169).
This first definition applies, mainly, to the Netherlands, where “flexicurity” was first
implemented.
It’s also noted (Wilthagen, 2004: 170) that there is a more comprehensive definition:
“flexicurity” aims to strengthen the labour market position of sensitive social groups
(unskilled, young and older employees, women, immigrants, minorities etc.) and to
promote high labour market participation and social inclusion, providing at the same
time numerical, functional and wage flexibility that facilitates the in time adjustment of
labour markets to the rapid pace of the challenging global changes, upgrading
productivity and, therefore, increasing competitiveness. There has been a clear intent to
mingle flexibility with security at the level of the policy discourse at EU level.
The Commission’s Green paper from 1997 titled “Partnership for a New Organization
of Work
1
”, which states: “The key issue for employees, management, the social partners
and policy makers alike is to strike the right balance between flexibility and security”.
This will arise especially in connection with the Lisbon Strategy (2010).
In March 2000, EU heads of state and governments agreed on making the EU "the most
competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of
sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion."
2
It
was agreed that to achieve this goal, an overall strategy should be applied. It aimed at:
preparing the transition to a knowledge-based economy and society by better policies
for the information society and R&D, as well as by stepping up the process of structural
reform for competitiveness and innovation and by completing the internal market;
modernizing the European social model, investing in people and combating social
exclusion; sustaining the healthy economic outlook and favorable growth prospects by
applying an appropriate macroeconomic policy mix.
Reconfirmed on its follow-up EU2020 strategy – in 2005 the EU renewed the Lisbon
Strategy
3
. It aimed to achieve economic growth, better jobs and social cohesion, making
the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world.
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
129
The Brussels European Council
4
, in March 2006, calls on member states to “direct
special attention to the key challenge of “flexicurity” (balancing flexibility and
security)” and invites them “to pursue in accordance with their individual labour
market situations, reforms in labour market and social policies under an integrated
‘flexicurity’ approach, adequately adapted to specific institutional environments and
taking into account labour market segmentation”
5
. Later, in 2008, the Brussels
European Council underlines that “flexicurity” helps both the employees and the
employers to seize the opportunities – and challenges - globalization offers.
Furthermore, since flexibility and security are mutually reinforcing throughout the
lifelong circle, intergenerational solidarity should be considered within all four
components of “flexicurity”. This is concluded in 2012 with a report for final evaluation
of flexicurity, 2007–2010.
6
“Globalization” and “Europeanization” originated enormous changing processes in
several fields. The different countries, because of the different state of the national
economy; of the capacity of the established institutional structures and the policy
initiatives introduced, took, or are still taking, different periods of time to adapt to the
rapid change of economic environment and the technological developments. It’s well
known that the promotion and implementation of reforms are bound to the dynamics of
political interaction.
Convincing the governments and the population (and when it comes to labour, also the
professional unions) of the adequate and necessary reform initiatives is, most of the
times, time-consuming and not always fruitful. In every reform, but especially when the
narrow interests of large groups of the electorate are affected (e.g. labour market and
welfare state reform), governments face a difficult task in their effort to persuade the
public and keep the electoral majority on their side - or it may cost re-election.
It is of great significance, in Europe, the welfare state as an instrument for
accomplishing the desirable social cohesion and an expression of solidarity, in
fulfilment of the European values. The employees should be offered essential protection
assuring the necessary income security in order to obtain the requisite qualifications to
confront the new challenges, help them remain inside the labour market, and balance
career and family and social responsibilities.
3
From “flexicurity” to “flexicarity”
At first, and due to its outstanding success, as seen in the Nordic “flexicurity”
experience, the idea of a flexible labour market and high social security, has been cited
by OECD as a role model for other European countries (OECD, 2004).
The EU, then, postulates a congruent combination of flexibility and security - of both
employers and employees - in the labour market as an adequate model capable of
achieving the objective of making the EU “the world’s most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy”. Initially stated in The Lisbon strategy and reconfirmed on
its follow-up EU2020 strategy.
130
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
“Flexicurity” appears to be an appealing concept for it may be seen as a way to
restoring a positive link between competitiveness and social protection.
There is
notwithstanding
a serious and well-founded fear concerning the application or
implementation of such an ideally positive change. The question which obviously arises
is: Is it possible to apply flexibility, or will it be nothing but giving the employers
ground for enslavement, exploitation? John Monks says that “To prevent “flexicurity”
to become “flexploitation” the Commission should take responsibility for shaping a
strong social dimension to the internal market, guaranteeing worker’s rights and
worker’s security.”
There is no consensual opinion regarding ‘“flexicurity”; some are that defend it should
be implemented: “Flexicurity” is an appealing concept because it offers a way to restore
a positive link between competitiveness and social protection. Globalization and
technological progress require responsiveness to deliver their full benefits and hence
finding new ways to combine social protection, and economic flexibility is fundamental
to more and higher-productivity jobs
7
.
Others believe there is an evil intent behind the implementation of “flexicurity”: “The
real agenda hiding behind ”flexicurity” simply seems to be the dismantling of job
protection....”
8
.
In 2008, with the starting of the ongoing financial crisis, “flexicurity” disappeared from
the agenda of EU as no safeguarding of the workers could be foreseen in such model.
The »TROIKA« took over some countries such as Spain and Portugal, and necessary
adaptations to social security models were foreseen (Heyes, Hasting, 2016: 4), as well
as changes is labour law, as we will explain bellow, regarding Portugal, and its labour
law.
Even though at first “flexicurity” looked like a shining bright solution for market
problems, after the European Commission, DG Employment, Social Affairs and
Inclusion organised an expert hearing on 'Labour market transitions' in June 2016. The
conclusion was that “Flexicurity” does not create either flexibility or security and the
previous option, of implementing it, was dropped as “Some experts opted for
(re)establishing labour market resilience and fairness by dropping the flexicurity
concept and adopting an alternative approach based on social rights and job quality”.
In fact, the conclusion is that there is no need to create or reinvent labour law rules that
already exist and are working in full steam. It can be looked at as the perfect model that
was everything but perfect.
Perspectives have changed, in 2013, the OCDE report showed that not even in
Denmark, security in the labour market was achieved through this model as Denmark
does not have a labour market that is particularly flexible and Danish job protection is
not very much below the levels of job protection registered in France and Italy,
countries that do not apply such model.
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
131
Based on the estimates done in 2004, Denmark could indeed be characterised as having
a flexible labour market, with the degree of job protection as low as in the UK and
Ireland and substantially below continental countries such Germany or France. But
those conclusions just changed in this new report. Was it but a statistical illusion?, one
may ask.
Some authors added a twist to the concept, having created a new, and one might say,
more accurate one… “flexicarity”, as it results in precarity rather than in security
(Agustin, 2009: 22–26, Hansen, 2007a: 88–93), as it only foresees the state-market
relations and on social security, and not on the state family relations or on services
(Hansen, 2007a: 91).
Also regarding gender perspective, many flaws were found in the security aspect of the
model. The non-existence of effective childcare services, that should, in fact be
provided by the employee, if not the State, make this concept not applicable to women
who play not only the role of workers but also of caretakers for their own children. The
same applies to man who play both roles (Emerek, 2008: 5).
The overall conclusion is that the model fails to meet its goals, even in those countries
where it had proved to have been effectively successful at first.
4
A Portuguese Overview
The model, that now seems to have never worked in any European Country, for the
above-mentioned reasons, would never be implemented in the Portuguese jurisdiction.
This analysis may have generated discussion on different ways as rigid labour systems
might change to accept and test the concept. To do so, the depth legal analysis of the
pertaining rules is performed. Hermeneutical techniques are used to do so.
Portuguese jurisdiction is considered by national legal doctrine as a closed model.
Heavy regulation and constitutional constraints drive an almost unanimous rejection of
the possibility to introduce the concept at the national level.
Within the Portuguese context, “flexicurity” has only very been submitted for
discussion when was first recommended by the EU. The subject was first approached as
a seminar held by the Ministry of Employment and Social Solidarity. Right away, it
became a controversial issue being immediate opposition declared by CGTP-IN, thee
major union confederation existing in Portugal, which promoted a ‘general strike’. In
Portugal, the promotion of general strikes are a usual reaction from the Unions, in
accordance with its traditional culture of opposition and confrontation - to fight against
the implementation of “flexicurity”
9
.
In the scope of private labour law, the Labour Code currently in force was approved by
Law no. 7/2009 of 12 February and since then has been the subject of several legislative
changes that are very relevant to the lives of workers, On the one hand, on the basis of
132
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
divergent analyses and, on the other hand, in particular the workers, in the light of the
numerous legislative changes which took place within the public administration.
Of particular note are the following:
-
Law no. 53/2011, of 14 October, which established a new compensation
system in various forms of termination of employment contract, applicable
only to new employment contracts.
-
Law No 3/2012 of 10 January establishing a system for the extraordinary
renewal of fixed-term employment contracts, as well as the system and method
of calculating the compensation applicable to contracts subject to such
renewal.
-
Law no. 23/2012 of 25 June, which amended 64 articles of the Code, with
emphasis on those relating to bank hour, payment of supplementary work and
holidays, compensatory rest, compulsory holidays, compensation for collective
dismissal, dismissal for termination of employment and maladaptation, as well
as the declaration of nullity of the norms of collective agreements that establish
higher amounts than those of the Code in respect to the due compensation for
collective dismissal, termination of employment and maladaptation. This law
therefore consecrated a package with enormous and serious negative effects on
the individual and collective rights of workers and their associations of class.
-
Law no. 69/2013, of August 30, which adjusted the amount of compensation
that is due in case of termination of employment contract.
-
Law No 76/2013 of 7 November, which established a system of extraordinary
renewal of fixed-term employment contracts, as well as the system and method
of calculating the compensation applicable to contracts subject to such
renewal.
-
Law no. 48-A / 2014, of July 31, which extended the period of suspension of
the provisions of instruments of collective labour regulation and labour
contract clauses.
-
Law no. 27/2014, of 8 May, which amended the Code with regard to the
criteria for choosing workers in dismissal for dismissal of the job and for
maladaptation.
-
Law no. 55/2014, of 25 August, which amended the deadlines for collective
bargaining agreements and the deadline for contracts of employment, thus
changing collective bargaining regulations once again.
As for the Portuguese case, the biggest “NO” when it comes to implementing
“flexicurity” is related to its CRP – Constitution of the Portuguese Republic,
10
not
Labour Code in particular. Portuguese legislation is considered (mainly due to Article
53 of the Constitution) highly inflexible and protective, even if it has become clearer
and clearer that believe this labour stiffness to more apparent than real, as employees
have been given more and more grounds to justify fair dismissal.
Portuguese legal system is bound to its constitution, as “It enshrines the fundamental
rights that pertain to citizens, the essential principles that govern the Portuguese State,
and the major political guidelines with which the latter's entities and organs must
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
133
comply. It also lays down the rules for organizing political power. In other words, it
establishes the structure of the state and defines the competencies of the main entities
that exercise sovereign power (the President and the Assembly of the Republic, the
Government, and the Courts), and regulates the way in which they relate to one
another.”
11
What
this means in that all laws ought to respect what is stated in the
Constitution, or they will be considered invalid, due to unconstitutionality, subject to
prior appreciation by the Constitutional Court.
The constitution is divided into parts, the
part that will be addressed is Part 1, which relates to the fundamental principles.
On Part I, Title II Chapter III of the Constitution can be found the articles that relate to
Labour.
The Constitution, as noted in the previous paragraph is divided into parts, the
part that will be addressed is Part 1, which relates to the fundamental principles.
The rights and guarantees hereby foreseen prevent (constitutionally speaking) the
employers from the dismissal of employees without appropriate cause. Their rights are
to be applied transversally to all employees, under the constitutional understanding of
what an employee is. A subordinated, who works under the direction and authority of
someone else, regardless of the category of the (private or public entity) or the legal
nature of its relationship.
It is significant that the first constitutionally enshrined right in respect of freedoms and
guarantees of workers is the right to job security. The significance of this guarantee is
obvious, resulting in apparent refusal of the right of free or discretionary dismissal by
employers withdrawing its control in labour relations. After obtaining a job, the
employee is entitled to keep it, unless fair cause, the employer cannot terminate it in its
sole discretion. This constitutional
prohibition generates
illegality -
for
unconstitutionality - and the consequent annulment of all acts if the dismissal lacks in
fair cause. It’s up the State to ensure that this constitutional prohibition is observed (
Costa, 2009:
123–144)
.
There are also some requirements when it comes to accessing if a particular dismissal
did – or not- lack fair cause. Those are the principal of the legal definition of fair
dismissal as for the facts and the legal rules that constitute fair dismissal, the
inadmissibility of absolute causes of dismissal, therefore violating rights, freedoms and
guarantees, being only admissible particular circumstances to be presented as a cause in
each individual case.
Portuguese employers, often with the connivance of the state,
have found ways to overcome the text of the law causing the labour market to become
more fluid.
Portuguese culture is strongly consensual, which means that, in the case of
confrontation, is easily accepted a rescission by agreement if when the employer uses of
more perverse and evil means to cause the initial conflict. I have this has been used,
more frequently than advisable, an easy and cheap way to overcome individual and
collective disputes between employees and employers
12
.
Other problems arise when
deciding on changing the path of things in the Portuguese Legal System.
134
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
In Portugal, this process would have to pass through the social dialogue and collective
bargaining that would involve negotiations or joint discussions between the
Government, the trade unions
13
and employers' (Santos, 2007: 145–185) has
constitutional recognition on Articles 56/2-d of the Constitution and own institutional
setting: the Permanent Commission for Social Dialogue, part of the Economic and
Social Council.
The Constitution lists in Art. 56, “rights of trade unions”, which mostly corresponds to
the participatory roles in many areas and instances. Moreover, the exercise of
“collective bargaining rights”. Are being, however, when the issue at hand the first to
oppose this new form of flexibility and security. Are of the opinion that it would only
cause more ease in redundancy and increased unemployment.
The Portuguese labour law is created in a way that precarity would not be a reality –
even though it is – hence, the risks of this Danish model would always prevent its
aplication.
5
Conclusion
We are facing a worldwide change of paradigms; new challenges are emerging from the
global – new – demands of economy and sustainability. The trade-off between
employment protection by firms and labour market protection by the state and the social
partners requires bargaining on an enlarged agenda that includes both adjustment
concerns of companies and security concerns of workers. In any case, globalisation will
increase, rather than decrease, the need for insurance against labour market risks and for
protected transitions (Agell, 1999: F144, Auer et al., 2004: 69–70, Heyes, Hasting
2016: 1).
With the recent conclusions of the OCDE regarding the results of the actual
implementation of “flexicurity” in the northern countries, it was actually a wize
decision that such model was not tested or imposed in Portugal.
Still, in Portugal, without a constitutional change there would be no possibility of
implemented, at full speed the concept of “flexicurity”, the truth is that flexibility is,
and has been, a constant in our labour system. As it is, “it would deregulate the labour
market, undermining it, even more, knowing in advance that there are no conditions to
ensure, in those circumstances, a social security system that protects workers. It would
not bring any added value for economic development”.
We were never working towards “flexicurity”. As the concept, in itself, is a mixture of
two other concepts: flexibility and security (as seen above). With the actual crisis, no
security is granted. The Portuguese economy - due to the globalised crisis, and other
political and particular circumstances – and Portuguese Social Security found it
impossible to grant the access to the opportunities available, for unemployed people, in
those other countries, Nordic and culturally different countries where, in fact,
“flexicurity” was – at first - a success.
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
135
Would it have been put into motion, this flexibility, would have operated without any
protection for the worker, especially regarding the reintegration into the labour market
of workers over the age of 45, particularly low-skilled, cannot be obtained and,
consequently, would not grant any security, who would have seen gutted all rights and
safety, the working harbour, constitutionally guaranteed, without any security
component, which allowed the worker to get a subsidy of unemployment –
compensation - and appropriate training to their rehabilitation, causing not only
unemployment but also precarity in labour relations.
We dare to say that the Portuguese model would clearly be a model of precarity, rather
than security.
Notes
1
Partnership for a New Organisation of Work - Green Paper. Document drawn up on the basis of
COM (97) 128 final, 16 April 1997. Bulletin of the European Union, Supplement 4/97. [EU
Commission - COM Document].
2
In Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000, Presidency Conclusions, available online
at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm (accessed November 2016).
3
Europe
2020,
Europe's
growth
strategy
available
online
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/europe_2020_explained.pdf (accessed November 2016).
4
Commission staff working document - Accompanying the Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Towards Common Principles of Flexicurity:
More and better jobs through flexibility and security - Impact Assessment {COM(2007) 359
final}
{SEC(2007)
862}
available
online
at:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52007SC0861 (accessed November 2016).
5
For the full text see Council of the European Union, Presidency Conclusions 7775/1/2006 REV
1.
6
Evaluation of flexicurity 2007-2010: Final Report A report by ICF GHK to European
Commission, Directorate-General Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities
(VC/2011/0682),
available
online
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=10018&langId=en (accessed November 2016).
7
M. Stocker, advisor to Business Europe, in Euro Activ, September 2007.
8
“The real agenda hiding behind 'flexicurity' simply seems to be the dismantling of job
protection, thereby giving employers even more power to press for lower wages and reduce
workers'
flexibility”.
(R.
Janssen,
Euro-Activ,
2007),
available
online
at:
https://www.euractiv.com/section/social-europe-jobs/news/interview-social-partners-still-at-odds-
over-flexicurity/.
9
Opinion of UGT, available online at: http://www.ugt.pt/parecer_28_03_2007.pdf (accessed
November 2016).
10
Constitution of the Portuguese Republic available online, in English at :
https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Portugal_2005.pdf (accessed November 2016).
11
República Portuguesa, available online at: http://www.portugal.gov.pt/en/portuguese-
democracy/a-constituicao-da-republica/a-constituicao-da-republica.aspx
(accessed
November
2016).
12
TRABALHO E RELAÇÕES LABORAIS, available online at: http://cies.iscte-
iul.pt/destaques/documents/ForumCIES2009_4.pdf ( accessed November 2016)
13
UGT and CGTP.
136
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
References
Agell, J. (1999) On the benefits from rigid labor markets: norms, market failures, and social
insurance, Economic Journal, 109 (453), pp. 143–164.
Auer, P. (2006) Protected Mobility for Employment and Decent Work: Labour Market Security
in a Globalized World, Journal of Industrial Relations, 48(1), pp. 21–40.
Auer, P., Efendioglu, U. & Leschke, J. (2004) Active Labour Market Policies around the World:
Coping with the consequences of Globalisation (Geneva: Employment Strategy).
Atkinson, J. (1984) Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower Management, IMS Report
No. 89 (Brighton: Institute of Manpower Studies). Retrieved from http://www.employment-
studies.co.uk/system/files/resources/files/89.pdf
Constituição da República Portuguesa. Retrieved from http://www.portugal.gov.pt/en/portuguese-
democracy/a-constituicao-da-republica/a-constituicao-da-republica.aspx
Costa, H. A. (2009) A flexisegurança em Portugal desafios e dilemas da sua aplicação. Revista
Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 86, pp. 123–144.
Employment in Europe 2006. EC (European Commission) - Office for Official Publication of the
European
Communities:
Luxembourg.
Retrieved
from
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/situation_in_europe/c
11336_en.htm
Emerek, R (2008) Highly developed flexicurity – less developed gender mainstreaming. A report
from the Danish labour market (Luxembourg: European Commission).
Hansen, L. L. (2007a): From Flexicurity to Flexicarity? Gendered Perspectives on the Danish
model, Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), pp. 88–93.
Heyes, J. Hastings, T. (2016.) Where now for flexicurity? Retrieved online at:
http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Global-Brief-3-Where-now-for-
flexicurity.pdf
Jensen, C. (2008) Employment relations in Denmark: Explaining flexicurity. Annual meeting of
the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting. Boston. Retrieved from
http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p240930_index.html
New EU report shows active labour policy can increase employment rate despite low growth, EC
(European Commission). Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/emplweb/news/news_en.cfm?id=81.
Pareceres da UGT. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.ugt.pt/parecer_28_03_2007.pdf
Santos, R. S. (2007) O papel dos parceiros sociais na flexisegurança. Cadernos de Emprego e
Relações de Trabalho, pp. 145–185.
Security in labour markets: Combining flexibility with security for decent work. (2007)
Economic and Labour Market Papers, Employment Analysis and Research Unit, Economic
and Labour Market Analysis Department. Geneva.
Towards Common Principles of ‘flexicurity’: More and better jobs through flexibility and
security (2007) EC (European Commission) - Communication from the Commission to the
Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee
of
the
Regions.
Retrieved
from
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/news/2007/jun/’flexicurity’_en.pdf
Trabalho e relações laborais.
Retrieved from http://www.cies.iscte.pt/destaques/documents/ForumCIES2009_4.pdf
Wilthagen, T., Tros, F. H. (s/d). The Concept of Flexicurity: A New Approach to Regulating
Employment and Labour Markets. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1133932
Working Together for Growth and Jobs - Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs (2005–
2008). EC (European Commission) - Office for Official Publication of the European
Communities:
Luxembourg.
Retrieved
from
L
E
X
ONOMICA
N. Bessa Vilela, J. Caramelo Gomes & N. Silva: Flexicurity or Flexicarity? - A
Portuguese Overview
137
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/eu2020/growth_and_j
obs/c11325_en.htm
EC - Second hearing on labour market transitions - revisiting flexicurity ( 2016). Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=pt&catId=88&eventsId=1135&furtherEvents=yes
Dostları ilə paylaş: |