Business and Welfare. Preferences and collective action in the Netherlands

In recent decades, trade unions and employers’ associations in European countries have come under pressure: do they still have enough support from members and the wider society, and do they still have effective influence in social policies at different levels (national, sectoral and company levels)? Although the Netherlands does have a quite rich tradition in national social dialogue and a stable collective bargaining structure, we have seen the functioning and impact of the Dutch macro-corporatist model stagnating in the 2000s and 2010s. This country report in the BAWEU Project addresses two main questions. Firstly, what are employers’ (associations) preferences in social policies in the Netherlands nowadays and how can we understand this? Secondly, what collective role do employers’ associations play in the post-industrial era and how is collective action among employers in the Netherlands developing? Key dimensions for assessing preferences in welfare policies are (i) level of spending, (ii) public versus private welfare provisions, (iii) universal versus occupational approaches and (iv) orientation towards social risks of protection versus social investment. In this report we use a mixed-method methodology in analysing literature and social partners’ documents and in-depth interviews with social partners’ representatives at the national level, employers’ associations in three sectors and their counterparts, and representatives of multinational companies and Ministries (October 2021-September 2022). In the annex of this report, the qualitative data from interviews and documents are complemented by some data from the BAWEU-survey. An important note here is that these survey data are not representative because of low response rates, but we have tried to mirror the survey results with the findings from the interviews and documents’ analyses.

Who? The structure of the Dutch economy has changed over the last two decades. The proportions of workers in industry and in consumer services have fallen, while the proportions in the smart growth services (including IT) and welfare and public services have grown. Related to these structural changes, business is asking more for workers with general skills (at high as well as low levels) and less for workers with specific skills. One feature of the Netherlands is that labour market participation by women grew further from a relative disadvantaged position in the past, and that the share of self-employed persons has grown much more than in most other European countries. Another important feature of the Dutch economy is the large prevalence of both small (< 10 employees) and large companies (> 250 employees), together with high rates of employment in multinational companies (around 39% of total employment in the Netherlands is in foreign and Dutch multinationals). Another characteristic is the relatively high level of organisation among employers in the Netherlands. Nevertheless, there is a very high sectoral variation in memberships: estimates range from 13% among IT companies to 79% among firms in agriculture. A finding of concern is that firms in the growing service sectors show far lower membership levels than firms in traditional (shrinking) sectors. Also the representation of the growing numbers of self-employed in social dialogue structures is fragmentised in the Netherlands.

What? The welfare state in the Netherlands is built upon the joined involvement of government and social partners. The country is characterised by a mixed-model of public welfare provisions and private additions (especially collectively arranged in sectors, but also in companies). In general, the positions of businesses in the Netherlands have long been framed in terms of cost-containment in the public and private spheres. The investigations for this report show the following pressing topics for employers' associations (from more to lower pressing): firstly pensions, secondly labour market policies, then vocational educational training (VET) and finally family policies. Support for increased investments in VET is growing in the current situation of labour scarcities. Cost-containment for business is still an important position in all social fields. During the last years, spending in specific public welfare arrangements seems to be more supported among employers' associations and their rank-and-file: specifically temporary public subsidies for early retirement plans, public-private investments in VET/Life Long Learning and more public funding for childcare. Although The ‘strategic industrial agenda’ in the metal industry is a recent example of increased collective action through public-private partnerships in VET and labour market policies. Sectoral variations in employers' positions and collective actions continue to be high, although it cannot be concluded from the interviews that this degree of variation is increasing. Neither have we found any empirical evidence for the assumption that multinationals have fundamentally different preferences than non-multinationals. Their lobbies in relation to social policies are coordinated by established employers' associations.

How? The top employers’ organisations in the Netherlands – VNO-NCW, MKB Nederland and LTO Nederland – have established institutional positions in the Dutch macro-corporatist model in the wake of WW II, together with the trade union federations (tripartite Socio-Economic Council and bipartite Labour Foundation). While social dialogue has faced fluctuating commitments among employers since the 1980s, collective bargaining structures in the sectors have shown more continuity for employers (although with more instability on the side of trade unions). After seven years without an overarching national Social Pact, the national business associations have been involved in more bi- and tripartite dialogue and agreements on occupational pensions, flexible labour markets and childcare in recent years. Employers also organise collective action in the field of VET, but more independently from trade unions. Section 3 will explore the reasons for the decline in the impact of social dialogue over recent decades, but will also explore the beneficial factors behind the assumed ‘revival’ of the Dutch corporative economy in the current years. Since the pandemic, employers’ associations seem to have strengthened their internal and external coordination at the national level, and are reconsidering their former agendas as well. Impact of social dialogue is not only dependent on employers’ commitment, but also on trade unions’ power and positions, the political landscapes and interactions between employers, unions and the government.