Advertisement

Positions of Interest Groups Towards Labour Market Reforms in Germany: A Novel Content Analysis of Press Releases

  • Christopher Buss
  • Benedikt Bender
Chapter

Abstract

Unions, employers’ associations, and social welfare organizations can play an important role in reforming labour markets. This study investigates the positions of organized interests towards labour market regulations, active labour market policies, and minimum wages in Germany. It estimates the interest groups’ policy positions with a content analysis of press releases covering the period from 2009 to 2014. It finds that unions pursue different strategies depending on their (potential) membership. The service unions in Germany strongly advocate the minimum wage while industrial unions focus on stricter regulation of atypical employment. The positions of social welfare organizations are shaped by their dual role as representatives of the marginalized and as employers in the social sector.

References

  1. Brenke, K., and K.-U. Müller. 2013. Gesetzlicher Mindestlohn—Kein verteilungspolitisches Allheilmittel. DIW Wochenbericht 39.Google Scholar
  2. Budge, I., H.-D. Klingemann, A. Volkens, J. Bara, and E. Tanenbaum. 2001. Mapping policy preferences: Estimates for parties, electors, and governments, 1945–1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bührer, W. 2000. Auf dem Weg zum Korporatismus?—Der Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie in zeitgeschichtlicher Perspektive. In Unternehmerverbände und Staat in Deutschland, ed. W. Bührer and E. Grande. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  4. Card, D., and A.B. Krueger. 1995. Time-series minimum-wage studies: A meta-analysis. American Economic Review 85 (2): 238–243.Google Scholar
  5. Däubler, T., K. Benoit, S. Mikhaylov, and M. Laver. 2012. Natural sentences as valid units for coded political texts. British Journal of Political Science 42 (04): 937–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davidsson, J.B., and P. Emmenegger. 2012. Insider–outsider dynamics and the reform of job security legislation. In The politics of the new welfare state, ed. G. Bonoli and D. Natali. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2013. Defending the organisation, not the members: Unions and the reform of job security legislation in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research 52 (3): 339–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deutscher Bundestag. 2014. Drucksache 18/2363. Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion DIE LINKE. Google Scholar
  9. DGB. 2006. Resolution ‘Niedriglohnsektor: Lösungen aus gewerkschaftlicher Sicht’. 18th DGB congress.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2015. Anzahl der Mitglieder in den DGB-Gewerkschaften in Deutschland im Zehnjahresvergleich der Jahre 2005 und 2015. Accessed 14 July 2016. http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/5837/umfrage/mitgliederzahlen-der-gewerkschaften/
  11. Dietz, M., A. Kubis, A. Müller, and J. Stegmaier. 2013. Kleine und mittlere Betriebe im Wettbewerb um Fachkräfte. IAB-Kurzbericht, October 2013.Google Scholar
  12. Dörre, K. 2011. Funktionswandel der Gewerkschaften. Von der intermediären zur fraktalen Organisation. In Gewerkschaftliche Modernisierung, ed. T. Haipeter and K. Dörre. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  13. Ebbinghaus, B. 2010. Unions and employers. In The Oxford handbook of the welfare state, ed. F.G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis, H. Obinger, and C. Pierson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Eichhorst, Werner, and Paul Marx. 2011. Reforming German labour market institutions: A dual path to flexibility. Journal of European Social Policy 21 (1): 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emmenegger, P., S. Häusermann, B. Palier, and M. Seeleib-Kaiser, eds. 2012. The age of dualization. The changing face of inequality in deindustrializing societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Franzmann, S. 2006. Locating political parties in policy space. A reanalysis of party manifesto data. Party Politics 12 (2): 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frege, C.M., and J. Kelly. 2003. Union revitalization strategies in comparative perspective. European Journal of Industrial Relations 9 (1): 7–24.Google Scholar
  19. German Federal Administrative Court. 2016. Ruling 8C20.09, 2016.Google Scholar
  20. Grimmer, J., and B.M. Stewart. 2013. Text as data. The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Political Analysis 21 (3): 267–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Häusermann, S. 2010. the politics of welfare state reform in continental Europe. Modernization in hard times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hyman, R. 2007. How can trade unions act strategically? Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 13 (2): 193–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. IAB. 2014. Zeitarbeit in Deutschland. Hohe Dynamik und kurze Beschäftigungsdauern. IAB Kurzbericht, October 2013.Google Scholar
  24. Jahn, E. 2008. Reassessing the wage penalty for temps in Germany. IZA Discussion Paper No. 3663.Google Scholar
  25. Kim, H., and R. Fording. 2002. Government partisanship in Western democracies, 1945–1998. European Journal of Political Research 41: 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kitschelt, H., and P. Rehm. 2006. New social risk and political preferences. In The politics of post-industrial welfare states. Adapting post-war welfare states to new social risks, ed. K. Armingeon and G. Bonoli. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Korpi, W. 1983. The democratic class struggle. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Laver, M., K. Benoit, and J. Garry. 2003. Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review 97 (2): 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lehmann, P., T. Matthieß, N. Merz, S. Regel, and A. Werner. 2015. Manifesto corpus. Berlin: WZB Berlin.Google Scholar
  30. Lindbeck, A., and D.J. Snower. 1988. The insider-outsider theory of employment and unemployment. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Neuendorf, K.A. 2002. The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  32. Neumark, D., J.M.I. Salas, and W. Wascher. 2014. Revisiting the minimum wage-employment debate. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater? ILR Review 67 (3): 608–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Olson, M. 1965. The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Paster, T. 2010. Die Rolle der Arbeitgeber in der Sozialpolitik. In Handbuch Arbeitgeber- und Wirtschaftsverbände in Deutschland, ed. W. Schroeder and B. Weßels. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  35. Peter, G., and J. Wiedemuth. 2003. Tarifliche und gesetzliche Mindeststandards für Erwerbseinkommen—Ansätze der gewerkschaftlichen Diskussion. WSI Mitteilungen, July 2003.Google Scholar
  36. Pierson, P., ed. 2001. The new politics of the welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Raess, D. 2006. Globalization and why the ‘time is ripe’ for the transformation of German industrial relations. Review of International Political Economy 13 (3): 449–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reutter, W., ed. 2012. Verbände und Interessengruppen in den Ländern der Europäischen Union. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  39. Rueda, D. 2005. Insider–Outsider politics in industrialized democracies: The challenge to social democratic parties. American Political Science Review 99 (1): 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schmid, J. 1996. Wohlfahrtsverbände in modernen Wohlfahrtsstaaten. Soziale Dienste in historisch-vergleichender Perspektive. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schmid, J., and J.I. Mansour. 2007. Wohlfahrtsverbände. Interesse und Dienstleistung. In Interessenverbände in Deutschland, ed. T. von Winter and U. Willems. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  42. Schmitter, P., and W. Streeck. 1999. The organization of business interests. Studying the associative action of business in advanced industrial societies. MPIfG Discussion Paper 99/1.Google Scholar
  43. Schulz, A.D. 2010. Organisationen zwischen Markt, Staat und Zivilgesellschaft. Arbeitsmarktförderung von Langzeitarbeitslosen im Deutschen Caritasverband. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Slapin, J.B., and S.-O. Proksch. 2008. A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts. American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 705–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Streeck, W. 1999. Korporatismus in Deutschland. Zwischen Nationalstaat und Europäischer Union. Frankfurt; New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  46. ———. 2005. The sociology of labor markets and trade unions. In The handbook of economic sociology, ed. N.J. Smelser and R. Swedberg. Princeton, NJ; New York: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Tepe, M., and P. Vanhuysse. 2013. Parties, unions and activation strategies: The context-dependent politics of active labour market policy spending. Political Studies 61 (3): 480–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Weßels, B. 2007. Organisierte Interessen und Rot-Grün: Temporäre Beziehungsschwäche oder zunehmende Entkoppelung zwischen Verbänden und Parteien? In Ende des rot-grünen Projektes, ed. C. Egle and R. Zohlnhöfer. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Buss
    • 1
  • Benedikt Bender
    • 2
  1. 1.Sonderfoschungsbereich 884 ‘Political Economy of Reforms’University of MannheimMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische SozialforschungUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations