Regional social dialogue develops
Download article in original language : PL0307105FPL.DOC
In 2001, new legislation in Poland established regional social dialogue commissions, involving representatives of regional trade union and employers' organisations, regional government and the national government. The role of the 16 commissions is formally a consultative one, but participation in their work is, on the whole, highly regarded by the social partners and by the authorities. This article examines the development of the regional commissions, which were subject to important legislative changes in 2002, and their current position in 2003, drawing on recent research into their impact.
Since its political and economic transformation in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Poland has established a legal framework for social dialogue, taking as its guideline the 1960 International Labour Organisation (ILO) Recommendation No. 113 on consultation (industrial and national levels). This states that 'consultation and cooperation should have the general objective of promoting mutual understanding and good relations between public authorities and employers' and workers' organisations, as well as between these organisations, with a view to developing the economy as a whole or individual branches thereof, improving conditions of work and raising standards of living.'
Formal social dialogue has been underway in Poland since 1994. Initially, it was regulated by a resolution adopted by the cabinet in February of that year concerning the establishment of the national Tripartite Commission for Social and Economic Affairs (Komisja Trójstronna do Spraw Społeczno-Gospodarczych) (PL0210106F). This regulation, however, was regarded as an interim legal measure, and work was pursued on an appropriate Act of parliament. These efforts bore fruit in July 2001 in the shape of the legislative Act regarding the Tripartite Commission for Social and Economic Affairs and the regional social dialogue commissions (Wojewódzkich Komisji Dialogu Społecznego, WKDS). In this way, the scope of social dialogue was extended to include the 16 regions into which Poland is divided. Following an administrative reform which came into force in 1 January 1999, Poland has three levels of state administration; local government, which includes two administrative units - municipalities (gminas, of which there are 2,489) and districts (powiats, of which there are 373); regional government at the level of the regions (voivodships, of which there are 16); and national government.
Before proceeding to examine the regional social dialogue commissions, it should be noted that social dialogue in Poland is also conducted within the framework of many other institutions – 37 central and state-operated organisational units have convened a total of 125 commissions engaging in such dialogue, most of them established in 2002.
Formal and legal basis for social dialogue at regional level
In accordance with the 2001 Act, the regional social dialogue commissions (WKDSs) are composed of the following partners:
- representatives of the regional governor (acting as the representative of the national government);
- delegates of representative trade union organisations (those with at least 500 000 members);
- delegates of representative employers' organisations (those whose members employ at least 300,000 people); and
- representatives of the regional 'marshal' (representing the regional government).
The Act also provides for the invitation of representatives of districts and municipalities from across the region to the WKDS sessions. The proceedings are presided over by the regional governor, who also appoints and dismisses the other WKDS members – a position of considerable power.
According to the Act in its original July 2001 form, each WKDS was to formulate opinions with respect to issues falling within the ambit of trade unions or of employers' organisations, insofar as they were included in the scope of authority of the state administration and local government within the region. This scope of authority has proved to be quite broad, as the regional government wields considerable decision-making powers as regards local development. Accordingly, potential topics for discussion by the WKDSs have ranged far and wide, including the local-level aspects of macroeconomic issues. The Act also provides that, in order for the WKDS to adopt an opinion or take an official position, the consent of all partners involved is needed - where such unanimity is lacking, each of the four partners can express its own view of the matter at hand. At present, there is talk of expanding this provision so that not only each partner represented within a commission, but each organisation comprising the partners' delegations, can take its own position on any given issue.
Under the July 2001 Act, the role of the commissions was purely an advisory one. Their opinions were not in any way binding; rather, they amounted to a form of assessment of the instruments and policies being contemplated by the state administration and by the regional government. This has been cited as explaining the clearly dominant role played on the commission by the regional governor.
Towards the end of 2002, changes were introduced which expanded the scope of the WKDSs’ powers.
The first of these took the form of amendments to the Labour Code whereby, if this is justified by poor financial position of the employer, it may be agreed to suspend application of selected provisions of labour law in specific employing entities (although in no event may such suspension apply to the Labour Code proper) (PL0212108F). Such an agreement may be reached between the employer in question and the trade unions or, where there are no unions active within the employing entity, with a representative of the workforce designated in keeping with in-house rules. Where the latter is the case, the legislation seeks to protect the employees from any high-handed actions by their employer by requiring any agreement concerning suspension of labour law provisions to be approved by the relevant WKDS, in cases where there are no unions active within the employing entity. In this way, partial control over such agreements was delegated to the trade unions represented on the regional commissions. During a conference on 'development of social dialogue at the regional level in Poland – new legal regulations', held by the Ministry of Economy, Labour and Social Policy (Ministerstwo Gospodarki, Pracy I Polityki Społecznej, MGPiPS) in Warsaw in April 2003, trade union representatives from some regions (such as Wielkopolska) stated that they have had opportunity to exercise such control over company agreements and, based on their practical experiences, see this regulation as beneficial from the perspective of employee interests.
The second, more important modification led to expanded authority for the WKDSs, bringing it more in line with that of the national Tripartite Commission. The July 2001 Act defined the primary objective of the national Tripartite Commission as 'reconciling the interests of employees, the interests of employers, and the public good' (article 1.1.) and as 'striving towards the attainment and preservation of social peace' (article 1.2.). As for the WKDSs, the Act provided for an opinion-making capacity only, as discussed above. However, an amendment of the Act effected in December 2002 significantly enlarged the authority of the WKDSs. Under the amended statutory provisions, the regional social dialogue commissions now 'may consider social or and/or economic issues occasioning conflicts between employers and employees, should it consider these issues to be of material significance to the preservation of social peace' (article 17a.1). Issues of this sort may be introduced onto the WKDSs’ agenda not only by any party sitting thereon, but also by 'trade unions and employer organisations not included on the regional social dialogue commissions, by public administration bodies, and by the parties concerned' (article 17b.1).
Important efforts are currently being made to make the WKDSs a platform for fostering a culture of dialogue and of compromise. Documents drafted by the Ministry of Economy, Labour and Social Policy place much emphasis on the need to shape this culture and to reinforce mutual trust among the social partners. This need is highlighted particularly in the context of eligibility criteria for receiving certain funds. For example, according to a Ministry document prepared during the establishment of the commissions: 'given that the basis for development of the regions lies in regional programmes benefiting from financial assistance from the state, there arises the need for partnership with respect to the strategic tasks specified in the programmes for support ... Partnership is an indispensable prerequisite for financial support by the state as well as out of the EU structural funds. Creative partnership, in its turn, is predicated on mutual understanding and trust of the participants' (Information on the scope of the activities of regional social dialogue commissions, Social Dialogue Commission, MPiPS, February 2002).
Research into regional social dialogue
A research team headed by Andrzej Zybertowicz, a sociologist at the University of Toruń (Uniwersytet im. Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu), has recently carried out a study entitled Social dialogue at the regional level (A Zybertowicz, M Spławski and D Wicenty, UNDP, Toruń 2003), commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme in Poland.
The first issue addressed by the study is the perception of social dialogue and regional dialogue in Poland. The study involved a representative national sample of the adult population and was carried out in May 2003. The results indicate that the concept of 'social dialogue' is not rooted very firmly in the collective consciousness of Poles; for more than a third of the respondents, it carried no connotations whatsoever. Among the older respondents (aged 60 and above), inhabitants of rural areas, and people with only primary and basic vocational education, between 50% and 52% declared that the term carries no connotations for them. A mere 21% of the respondents associated social dialogue with negotiations between employees and their employers. This result can be explained at least in part by the general lack of interest in social dialogue on the part of the mass media. The research team analysed daily newspapers from the perspective of their coverage of social dialogue, and it turned out that this coverage approaches nil, in the national press as well as in the local dailies: 'in the five dailies analysed, the phrase - social dialogue - appeared a total of eight times in the space of one and a half years.' These findings led the authors to conclude that the 'effective operation of WKDSs – an operation which results in prevention of social unrest – has no media appeal, but absence from the public sphere reduces legitimisation and thus, in the longer term, reduces the effectiveness of WKDS work.'
The report also presented research carried out among members of the WKDSs. While the data obtained was not representative, it provides the basis for some preliminary conclusions. In the view of a majority of the respondents (64.3%), regional dialogue has had only a small impact on the resolution of local problems, while 28.6% of the respondents believe this impact to be limited/average. While no respondents went so far as to rate this impact as high, only 3.6% were so pessimistic as to state that regional dialogue has been completely ineffective. Two-thirds of the respondents believe that attitudes based on compromise and on purposeful, matter-of-fact cooperation predominate among the members of the WKDSs (only 17.9% spoke of 'perfunctory' or 'pretend' activity). As a result, 39.3% of the respondents declared that, in the course of work within the regional commissions, an increase of trust among their members has been observed (this was in line with the researchers’ expectations). The remaining respondents rated the level of trust as remaining constant, while none found that the level of trust has fallen. This allowed the researchers to posit that there has been an 'increase of social capital' in the course of regional dialogue.
When asked what, in their perception, has been the greatest success of the WKDS, more than half of the respondents (53%) stated that the very fact that talks were commenced and duly carried on without disputes and conflicts amounted to a success in and of itself. Among respondent WKDS members, 12% stated that the commission had been able to end conflicts, and the same percentage recalled some local problem which had been resolved through joint effort.
Working on the basis of these data and of a scattering of other sources, the researchers conclude that the view that social dialogue in Poland is on the wane is exaggerated. While it is true enough that knowledge about social dialogue and its prestige in society at large are low, this situation stands a chance of improvement, 'for although real effects are few, a climate conducive to further talks has been maintained within the WKDSs. A decided majority of the respondents are convinced that social dialogue is the most effective form for resolution of problems.' The WKDSs, however, are said to be plagued by:
- a dearth of the financial resources needed for resolution of local problems; and
- a lack of legal instruments commensurate with their set task of preserving social peace.
These difficulties are reportedly compounded by the absence of a single clearly defined administrative centre charged with regional policy (there is said to be a hazy division of authority between national government and the regional governments). As a result, observers find that the representative of the national government, in the person of the regional governor, is exerting an inordinate amount of influence on operation of the WKDSs. Regional government, in the meantime, is proving to be the weakest link in the WKDS. There has, furthermore, arisen a certain tension between the objectives of the regional dialogue and the absence of decision-making capacities for the WKDS. It is for this reason that the researchers make the following appeal: 'it should be considered whether there does not exist limited subject areas in which the WKDS could receive decision-making powers.'
Finally, a wide discrepancy in the operation of WKDSs in different regions should be mentioned. Some are active commissions which incorporate many working groups, while others are quite passive. Most of the commissions are regarded as being pervaded with a spirit of cooperation, but others have seen their activity hampered by withdrawals in protest by trade unions. Differences also prevail in the level of trust between the members of different commissions.
Commentary
Despite the various limitations of an institutional as well as cultural nature, the regional dialogue – now with a track record of over one year under the current legislative regime – is gradually developing. To a large extent, this is the result of policies pursued by the current Minister of the Economy, Labour, and of Social Policy, Jerzy Hausner. The continuation of fairly intensive dialogue pursued within the national Tripartite Commission, bringing together leaders of trade unions and of employers' organisations, has been exerting a positive effect on the work of the regional commissions. This opens opportunities for the gradual shaping of a culture of dialogue and compromise in Poland. It should be borne in mind, however, that regional dialogue represents but the first step, and that it may easily be neglected and discontinued. In order to avoid such a turn of events, time will be needed during which the WKDSs could be fortified with a new scope of authority and with the right to share in decision-making with respect to funds for the resolution of regional problems. In such circumstances, social dialogue would also counteract corruption at the local level. (Juliusz Gardawski, Institute of Public Affairs [Instytut Spraw Publicznych, ISP] and Warsaw School of Economics [Szkola Główna Handlowa, SGH])