Paper presented by the STSRT Voice of the Worker Team at the 2012 STS Roundtable Conference.

1. Direct and indirect participation in
change processes
Worker Voice Paper in construction

2. Why worker voice – direct and
indirect – essential
Early bird principle: involved in the beginning
stages of process means more influence on
design and process, and more time for
anticipation of changes and risks
Potential winners and loosers: TU/WC can cover
loosers and help facilitate winners and process
(social plans, training, job-to-job-transition etc.)
Opportunities for improving job quality and
creation/maintenance of employment

3. Experiences from different countries
Direct = workers covered by the change process
involved:

Proces & idea development

Special knowledge

From design to routine
Indirect: Representatives of workers (trade union,
works council) involved:

Conditions and facilities

Employment protection
Job quality (winners & loosers)
Optimization: Direct&Indirect, not very common

4. 1980-2012, AUS, US, GER, NL
Trade unions in decline, now in all 4 under 20%
density rate (UK down to just more than 25%,
but less 'coverage' than in GER/NL/FR
Work councils with legal richts in GER, NL, not in
Anglo-saxon countries
Scandinavian countries and Belgium (GHENT
countries): over 50% density
General tendency (workers voice group
discussion): also decline of worker voice in
change processes of certain scale

5. Differences 1980's and 20012
More third party involvement in promoting and
facilitating worker voice then:

government programmes still existing in Scandinavia (regional
innovation programmes bringing together many stakeholders,
research output (knowledge production on 'how to do it?'), TYKES
Finland (innovation oriented)

Structural changes towards networks, chains, global production or
service strategies, increse of SME's

diversification of the labour markets (more temps, temporay
contracts, independents)

'hollowing out of the middle' (restructuring analysis Eurofound 2012)

6. Trade unions and WC's – Boxing
and dancing strategies
Certainly when in decline unions have to combine
'boxing' (confrontation, negotiation, conflict) and
'dancing' (co-creation, co-operation, joint
problem solving and learning)
Boxing = win-loose, distrust, recognition and
visibility, certainties about position
Dancing = win-win or loose-loose, trust, long term
uncertainties
More and more unions driven to boxing and leave
indirect participation aside

7. Country sketches

GER: Then 'qualified groupwork' IG Metall,
since cycle time automotive down to less than a
minute due to global manufacturing

AUS: Then Workplace Australia, since Howard
government destruction of a national framework

US: Last 'good examples' date from beginning
2000

NL: Many big projects with both IP and DP
then, now unions more on distance, works
councils still facilities to participate (2007-2007:
Dutch Institue for Social Innovation)

8. Conclusions
To be decided, give us your feedback