Advertisement

The Impact of Industrial Relations on the Structure of Supplementary Pensions in Scandinavia

  • Einar Overbye

Abstract

The Scandinavian countries are sometimes described as “institutional” welfare states, implying that there is no room for private (supplementary/voluntary) welfare provisions alongside public welfare. This is wrong, at least in the case of pensions. Private pensions are alive and well both in Sweden, Norway and Denmark. However, the scope as well as the structure of private pension provision varies. This chapter describes the differing features of private pensions in Scandinavia, and links these differences to differences in trade union structure, collective bargaining-agreements plus differences in the degree of a functioning market for occupational pensions.

Keywords

Collective Bargaining Pension Fund Industrial Relation Pension Plan Pension Scheme 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Encel, D., 1990. “Superannuation”. In Diary of social legislation and policy, 12-17, Australia: National Institute of Economic and Industry Research.Google Scholar
  2. Hatland, A., 1986. The future of Norwegian social insurance. Oslo: Oslo University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Hippe, J. and A. W. Pedersen, 1988. For lang og tro tjeneste. Pensjoner i arbeidsmarkedet. Oslo: FAFO-report No 084.Google Scholar
  4. Könberg, B., 1994. Ett pemionssystem för framtiden. Hovuddragen i Pensionsarbetsgruppens förslag. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  5. Lazear, E., 1986. “Retirement from the labor force”. In O. Ashenfelter and R. Layard (eds): Handbook of Labor Economics VII. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  6. NOSOSCO, 1995. Social security in the Nordic countries. Scope, expenditure and financing 1993. Nordic Social Statistical Committee report No. 2, Copenhagen: Nordic Ministry Council.Google Scholar
  7. OECD, 1992. Historical statistics 1960—1990. OECD: Paris.Google Scholar
  8. Observatoire des Retraites, 1995. “Collectively agreed supplementary pension schemes”. La lettre de l’observatoire des retraites, 7:6–7, Paris: 6 rue Bouchardon.Google Scholar
  9. Overbye, E. 1996. “Pension politics in the Nordic countries: A case study”. International Political Science Review 17,1:67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sahin, I., 1989. Private pensions and employee mobility. New York: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  11. Scheuer, S., 1990. “LO’s strukturdebat”. Politica 4:470–84.Google Scholar
  12. St John, S. and T. Ashton, 1993. Private pensions in New Zealand-can they avert the crisis? Wellington: The Institute of Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  13. The World Bank, 1994. Averting the old age crisis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. von Nordheim Nielsen, F., 1990. The long shadows of the past. Scandinavian pension politics in the 1980s. Paper presented at the XII World Congress of Sociology, Madrid June 9-13.Google Scholar
  15. Wadensjoe, E., 1997. Social security reform in Sweden. Paper presented at the 1997 World Congress of Gerontology, Adelaide, August 19–23 August.Google Scholar
  16. Wending, W., C. A. Crabb-Velez and M. Carlsen, 1986. The regulatory impact on pensions. Wisconsin: The International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Einar Overbye
    • 1
  1. 1.NOVA Norwegian Social ResearchNorway

Personalised recommendations