Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T07:41:45.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Voluntary Unemployment Insurance and Trade Union Membership: Investigating the Connections in Denmark and Sweden

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2008

JOCHEN CLASEN  and
ELKE VIEBROCK
JOCHEN CLASEN
Affiliation:
[Contact author] School of Social and Political Studies, University of Edinburgh email: jochen.clasen@ed.ac.uk.
ELKE VIEBROCK
Affiliation:
Centre for International Public Health Policy, University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The high rate of trade union membership in Nordic countries is often attributed to the way in which unemployment insurance is organised: that is, as a voluntary scheme which is administered by trade union-linked funds (the so-called Ghent system). However, since trade unions and unemployment insurance funds are formally independent from each other, and alternatives to traditional trade union-linked unemployment funds are available, it is far from clear why the more expensive option of a dual membership in trade union and unemployment insurance is generally favoured. Comparing current characteristics and the operation of the Ghent system in Denmark and Sweden, the article identifies incentives for joining an unemployment insurance fund per se and, secondly, factors which make such a dual membership appealing. It shows that some of these apply to both countries, such as the strong identification with trade unions or the lack of a transparent institutional separation, while others are country-specific, such as job search support in Denmark and access to improved benefit provision in Sweden.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 433 - 451
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albrechtsen, H. (2004), ‘The broken link – do trade unions represent the interests of the unemployed? Evidence from the UK, Germany and Denmark within the framework of the European Employment Strategy’, Transfer, 10: 4, 569–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arbejdsdirektoratet (2005), Benchmarking af arbejdsløshedskasserne 2005, Copenhagen: Arbejdsdirektoratet.Google Scholar
Björklund, A. and Holmlund, B. (1991), ‘The economics of unemployment insurance: the case of Sweden’, in Björklund, A., Haveman, R. H., Hollister, R. and Holmlund, B. (eds), Labour Market Policy and Unemployment Insurance, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bredgaard, T. and Larsen, F. (2005), ‘Flexicurity and older workers on the Danish labour market’, in Bredgaard, T. and Larsen, F. (eds), Employment Policy from Different Angles, Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing.Google Scholar
Crouch, C. (2000), ‘Employment, industrial relations and social policy: new life in an old connection’, in Manning, N. and Shaw, I. (eds), New Risks, New Welfare: Signposts for Social Policy, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
DWP (Department of Work and Pensions) (2006), Quarterly Statistical Summary, August 2006.Google Scholar
Ebbinghaus, B. and Visser, J. (1999), ‘When institutions matter: union growth and decline in Western Europe, 1950–1995’, European Sociological Review, 15: 2, 135–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebbinghaus, B. and Visser, J. (2000), Trade Unions in Western Europe since 1945, London: Macmillan/Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EIROnline (2007) ‘Government to impose mandatory membership of unemployment insurance fund’, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2007/06/articles/se0706039i.html, accessed 3 August 2007.Google Scholar
Engblom, S. (2005), ‘Unemployment benefit eligibility conditions and the administrative capacity of the public employment service – lessons from Sweden and the Republic of Serbia’, paper presented at the Second Global Labour Forum, New Delhi, 13–14 December.Google Scholar
Hancké, B. (1993), ‘Trade union density in Europe 1960–1990: rediscovering the locals’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 31: 4, 593–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, H. (2003), Time Series of APW-Calculations: Module for Denmark 1994–2001, Copenhagen: Danish National Institute of Social Research (SFI).Google Scholar
Hatland, A. (1998), ‘The changing balance between incentives and economic security in Scandinavian unemployment benefit schemes’, paper presented at the ISSA Research Conference on Social Security, Jerusalem, January.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HM Treasury (2006), Budget 2006: Report, London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
IAF (Inspektionen för arbetslöshetsförsäkringen) (2005), IAF 2004 – Annual Report for the First Year, Katrineholm: IAF.Google Scholar
IAF (Inspektionen för arbetslöshetsförsäkringen) (2007), IAF Annual Report 2006, Katrineholm: IAF.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, H. (2002), Consensus, Cooperation and Conflict – The Policy Making Process in Denmark, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kjellberg, A. (2006), ‘The Swedish unemployment insurance – will the Ghent system survive?’, Transfer, 12: 1, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, S. (2006), ‘Gewerkschaften und Wohlfahrtsstaat: Das Gent-System’, WSI Mitteilungen, 2: 79–85.Google Scholar
Lind, J. (2001), ‘Dänemark: Immer noch das Jahrhundert der Gewerkschaften!’, in Waddington, J. and Hoffmann, R. (eds), Zwischen Kontinuität und Modernisierung, Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.Google Scholar
Lind, J. (2004), ‘The restructuring of the Ghent model in Denmark and consequences for the trade unions’, Transfer 10: 4, 621–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundgren, B. (2006), ‘Recent development in unemployment insurance in Sweden’, International Experts Workshop of the ISSA Technical Commission on Unemployment Insurance and Employment Maintenance, Brussels, 10–11 April.Google Scholar
Madsen, P. K. (2006), ‘How can it possibly fly? The paradox of a dynamic labour market in a Scandinavian welfare state’, in Campbell, J. L., Hall, J. A. and Pedersen, O. K. (eds), National Identity and a Variety of Capitalism: The Case of Denmark, Montreal: McGill University Press.Google Scholar
Neumann, G., Pedersen, P. J. and Westergard-Nielsen, N. (1991), ‘Long-run international trends in aggregate unionization’, European Journal of Political Economy, 7: 3, 249–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nørgaard, A. S. (1997), The Politics of Institutional Control: Corporatism in Danish Occupational Safety and Health Regulation and Unemployment Insurance, 1870–1995, Aarhus: Politica.Google Scholar
Olson, M. (1965), The Logic of Collective Action, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2004), Employment Outlook 2004, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2006), ‘Benefits and wages: gross/net replacement rates, country specific files and tax/benefit models’ (latest update: March 2006), OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
Parsons, D. O., Tranæs, T. and Lilleør, H. B. (2003), Voluntary Public Unemployment Insurance, Copenhagen: Social Forskningsinstituttet.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, B. (1992), ‘Marxism and institutional analysis: working-class strength and welfare development in Sweden’, in Ashford, D. E. (ed.), History and Context in Comparative Public Policy, Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Scruggs, L. (2002), ‘The Ghent system and union membership in Europe, 1970–1996’, Political Research Quarterly 55: 2, 275–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scruggs, L. (2007), ‘Welfare state generosity across space and time’, in Clasen, J. and Siegel, N. A. (eds), Investigating Welfare State Change: The Dependent Variable Problem in Comparative Analysis, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Scruggs, L. and Lange, P. (2001), ‘Unemployment and union density’, in Bormeo, N. (ed.), Unemployment in the New Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shalev, M. (2007), ‘Limits and alternatives to multiple regression in comparative research’, Comparative Social Research, 24: 261–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjögren Lindquist, G. and Wadensjö, E. (2006), National Social Insurance – Not the Whole Picture: Supplementary Compensation in Case of Loss of Income, Stockholm: Ministry of Finance.Google Scholar
Statistisches Bundesamt (2005), Statistisches Jahrbuch, Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland.Google Scholar
Timonen, V. (2003), Restructuring the Welfare State: Globalisation and Social Policy Reform in Finland and Sweden, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Viebrock, E. (2004), ‘The role of trade unions as intermediary institutions in unemployment insurance: a European comparison’, Ph.D. dissertation, European University Institute, Florence.Google Scholar
Visser, J. (2006) ‘Union membership statistics in 24 countries’, Monthly Labor Review, 129: 1, 38–49.Google Scholar
Western, B. (1993), ‘Postwar unionization in eighteen advanced capitalist countries’, American Sociological Review, 58: 2, 266–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Western, B. (1997), Between Class and Markets. Postwar Unionization in the Capitalist Democracies, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar