European comapny - Anew institution

The aim of the present study was to conduct field research concerning the level of information both the Greek employers and Greek trade union officials have on the European Company.

Specifically the study has detected:

• the existing level of knowledge on the European Company
• sources of information of the employees
• the present status of participation of employees in decision making process of management
• the level of information of employees on important matters by their company
• the opinion of employees for the European Company / advantages - disadvantages
• other subjects (such as who should participate in the negotiating body, which are the minimum provisions and the rights of the representatives of employees in the management or supervisory bodies)

 2. Methodology

For the compilation of the present study a research was conducted based on a questionnaire and two round tables. The study has a qualitative character.

More than 60 information files and questionnaires were distributed to respective companies with cross borders activities. The results included 11 questionnaires answered by 11 Greek companies which were collected by OBES. Two questionnaires were answered by companies that belong to the same multinational group.

 3. Conclusions

Desk research undertaken has shown that the majority of persons interviewed, most of whom participate actually in EWCs are completely ignorant as far as SE is concerned, or at least were so before the information received and discussions held in the framework of “Une entreprise pour l’ Europe” project. For those, who were informed, information come mostly through the press, trade unions, OBES and in a few cases through their company. Nearly everybody assessed existing information as not sufficient and not adequate.

In the question about how they assess the level of workers’ participation in decision making when it refers to subjects that affect directly them, the dominant answer was “occasionally”, which reflects the non institutionalized status of workers’/employees’ participation in Greece.

A considerable number of persons interviewed express their concern about the balance between advantages and disadvantages of the introduction of SE for employees. It is also worth-noticing that there is a confusion about who has the right to participate in the negotiating body and what are the provisions of the Directive about the rights of the representatives.

It is an undeniable fact that the European Company as a new institution, will face considerable problems in the beginning. In order that it will be successful it should gain the approval of both the employers’ and employees’ side.

Globalization, as a strong independent factor exercises strong pressures to both companies and workers/employees towards adaptation. On the other hand globalization is not a purely and solely economical phenomenon. Thus, an urgent need emerges for the creation and call for a new social status able to face the new social dangers and risks, which surpass by far the old vertical relations that hitherto characterized labor and capital.

Social partners have an important role to play not only through the classical forms of trade unionism but also through new forms of action, new tactics and new methods of pressure in order that they are accustomed with the trade unionism of managing change and to fight for better positions and the interests of workers/employees.

During the discussions in the two round tables the following points of attention have been stressed:

• Representatives coming from all the countries should participate in the negotiating body regardless of the number (or percentage) of employees that work in this country. The presence of representatives will allow the hearing and taking into consideration of different conditions, culture, legislation that may exist.
• All types of employees/workers contracts have to be included in the calculation of the number of workforce by country to participate and benefit from collective bargaining. It is worth-noticing that nowadays there is a tendency for use of flexible work contracts and subcontractors.
• Control has to be exerted to a SE. For this reason the country the SE is registered should be the same as far as both management and taxation are concerned.
• The matter of uniformity of taxation should be checked more carefully. Tax havens within or even outside of the EU (e.g. Netherlands Antilles) may imply the existence of different types of SEs or the concentration of SEs in a limited number of countries.
• Because it is difficult to achieve cohesion of legislation of all EU countries, employees within the same SE should have the same rights following common rules.
• The role of employee representatives should be substantial and not only advisory. The existence of SEs should mark a step forward than that of sole information/ consultation which characterizes the operation of EWCs.
• Both the regulation and the directive need improvement and amendment. They should not be complex but be more tangible for employees.