To Extend or Not to Extend: Explaining the Divergent Use of Statutory Bargaining Extensions in the Netherlands and Germany

26 Pages Posted: 8 Sep 2020

See all articles by Thomas Paster

Thomas Paster

Roskilde University

Dennie Oude Nijhuis

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Maximilian Kiecker

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Date Written: September 2020

Abstract

Employee coverage by multi‐employer bargaining declined since the 1980s in many countries, but countries differ in the extent of that decline. These differences are due, in part, to statutory coverage extension. We analyse the use of statutory coverage extension in two countries, Germany and the Netherlands. Agreements are extended frequently in the Netherlands, where coverage remained stable as a result, but sparingly in Germany, where coverage eroded. The article shows that different employer attitudes are the main cause of this difference. These differences in employer attitudes result from (a) different perceptions of the effects of wage competition by non‐organized firms on organized firms and (b) differences in employer views on the appropriateness of state compulsion.

Suggested Citation

Paster, Thomas and Oude Nijhuis, Dennie and Kiecker, Maximilian, To Extend or Not to Extend: Explaining the Divergent Use of Statutory Bargaining Extensions in the Netherlands and Germany (September 2020). British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 58, Issue 3, pp. 532-557, 2020, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3686668 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12514

Thomas Paster (Contact Author)

Roskilde University ( email )

Universitetsvej 1
P.O. Box 260
Roskilde, DK-4000
Denmark

HOME PAGE: http://www.thomaspaster.wordpress.com/

Dennie Oude Nijhuis

affiliation not provided to SSRN

No Address Available

Maximilian Kiecker

affiliation not provided to SSRN

No Address Available

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
0
Abstract Views
56
PlumX Metrics