(Counter-)Narrating European integration

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-122
Author(s):  
Martin Seeliger

In order to maintain social standards within the European Union, trade unions have to overcome national differences to form common political positions. Especially against the background of the recent enlargement rounds, the crafting of such positions has become a daunting task. In this context, the European Services Directive has posed an important challenge to trade unions: The so-called ‘country of origin principle’ implied that workers were supposed to be employed in line with the standards of the sending- and not the receiving country. After lengthy discussions between representatives from Eastern and Western Europe, the trade unionists managed to form a joint political line and forced the European Commission to remove the principle. In order to challenge the hegemonic neoliberal narrative of the common market bringing freedom and prosperity to the countries of Europe, the article will show how the counternarrative of a European Social Model served as a reference frame for this joint position.

2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Jones

This article makes a contribution to discussion on the neo-liberal reshaping of education in Western Europe. It argues for a greater attentiveness on the part of education researchers to collective social actors such as trade unions and social movements. Making use of concepts from Gramsci and from Poulantzas, it suggests that such actors had a formative role in the making of post-war education systems, and that reducing their influence is now an important objective of governments across the European Union. Focusing on educational conflict in England, France and Italy, it explores the extent to which traditions associated with post-war reform continue to possess political vitality.


2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 251-257
Author(s):  
Igor Trupac ◽  
Elen Twrdy

With the European Union growing eastwards and with the establishment of important production facilities in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the hinterland potential is bound to grow even more. The strategic goal of the Port of Koper is to become one of the best ports in the Southern Europe, to develop from a handling port into a commodity distributional centre. Penetrating and exploiting these markets demands cooperation (integration) with the existing inland terminals (logistic centres) and establishing of new ones positioned between Eastern and Western Europe. This paper aims to present and analyse: (I) supply chains of the flow of goods through the Port of Koper to/from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, (II) the current state and strategies to optimize the flow of goods, (III) market potential, investments in new terminals and capacities. KEY WORDS: Port of Koper, strategies, goals, supply chains, integration, new terminals, market potential, investments


2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 226-239
Author(s):  
Corradi Laura

Abstract An important edited collection on US and European migration policies as vehicles or factors of institutional racism are dealt with in this review-essay. In the context of recent literature on migration, Pietro Basso’s State Racism proposes a specifically Marxist approach and represents a sharp critical analysis of the ongoing surge in racism sweeping across Western Europe and North America by offering an investigation into the authoritarian, racialising, and elitist drift of Western democracies and societies. Particular importance is given to the spread of hostility towards migrants among native workers, often due to a condition of isolation, weakness, and vulnerabilities produced by the failures of trade unions and political organisations of the working class. The essays in the collection point towards ways in which these can be effectively thwarted and blocked by renewing collective struggles and solidarity, arguing that solidarity can stimulate the development of anti-racism based on the unity of the working class, capable of combating all types of discrimination through self-organisation, equality, and cooperation between migrant and native workers in the common struggle to assert needs and rights. At the present conjuncture, workers across borders can be the carriers of a new form of civilisation, liberated from the supremacy of the commodity and of money, from the exploitation of labour, and from racism and sexism.


2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 633-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Engle

In Viking and Laval, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) adjudicated the rights of labor and capital mobility under E.U. law. Both cases strengthen the single European market through economic liberalization to generate greater prosperity for all Europeans as part of the process of European economic and political integration. Labor and capital mobility create greater prosperity for all through more rational market exchanges. Free trade is good for goods and is even better for labor. A liberalized and fully mobilized labor market results in more productivity and greater wealth in the European polity, as well as interdependence, and thereby deeper integration resulting in greater understanding and less conflict. The decisions, wrongly criticized by some as “bad for workers” are justified by the fact that they will benefit workers in Eastern Europe, consumers in Western Europe, and the Community as a whole by deepening integration. A key challenge for the European Union is to economically anchor and deepen the political restructuring of Eastern Europe by enabling the natural labor and capital movements which an open marketplace generates. Europe does this not with the failed neo-liberal model which has ravaged the wealth of the United States and squandered it in illusory booms based on consumer borrowing and deficit spending to fund war for oil. Rather, Europe is developing a neo-corporatist social model. This article uses the Viking and Laval cases as examples of this development.


1952 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-142

Responding to an invitation issued in May 1951, fourteen members of the Congress of the United States met in Strasbourg on November 20, 1951 in a special session with twenty members of the Council of Europe. The United States delegation included Senators Benton, Green, Henrickson, Hickenlooper, Humphrey, McMahon and Wiley and Representatives Cox, Ellsworth, Judd, Keating, O'Toole, Reams and Smith. Council representatives were Mssrs. Spaak (Belgium), Brentano (Germany), Boothby (United Kingdom), Crosbie (Ireland), Gerstenmaier (Germany), Glenvil-Hall (United Kingdom), Jacini (Italy), Kieft (Netherlands), Mercouris (Greece), de Menthon (France), Moe (Norway), Mollet (France), Ohlin (Sweden), Parri (Italy), Reynaud (France), Schmid (Germany), Treves (Italy), Urguplu (Turkey), de VallePoussin (Belgium), and Lord Layton (United Kingdom). The session was to discuss “the European Union, its problems, progress, prospects, and place in the Western world”; specifically the agenda included: 1) the economic aspects of rearmament; 2) the political aspects of European defense; 3) the dollar gap and trade between eastern and western Europe; and 4) the problem of refugees and emigration.


SAGE Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 215824401769516
Author(s):  
Dorian Aliu ◽  
Ayten Akatay ◽  
Armando Aliu ◽  
Umut Eroglu

The aim of this research is to examine the public policy influences on academic investigations that contain a substantial convergence among human resource management–industrial relations and corporate social responsibility–stakeholder approach by means of using bibliometric and content analyses of relevant publications in the Scopus and ScienceDirect databases. Totally, 160 publications were subject to bibliometric, cluster, and summative content analyses. In this context, this study claims that public policy in the EU influences academic investigations and scholars. The investigation draws attention to the importance of active participation of different public institutions and key stakeholders (e.g., trade unions, works councils, academic associations) that prepare a basis for collaboration, solidarity, and communication for strengthening EU social model, social dialogue, collective bargaining, and the protection of social rights. The research findings illuminate the fact that European public policies have significant effects on shaping and encouraging investigations that are considered within the scope of IR–HRM and CSR–SA. One of the most crucial recommendations of this study is that the investigations which are out of this framework can be considered quite idealistic. Therefore, researchers may attempt to publish more scientific investigations in frame of IR–HRM and CSR–SA to enhance the comprehensiveness and depth of these two clusters.


2010 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Hyman

In 2005 the “Constitutional Treaty” designed to restructure the governance of the European Union (EU) was rejected in popular referendums in France and the Netherlands. Subsequently only in Ireland was a referendum held on the Lisbon Treaty, which reinstated most elements in the previous version, in June 2008. Again a negative result threw the EU into crisis, though a second Irish vote in October 2009 yielded a different result. The “no” votes reflected a familiar pattern of popular rejection of initiatives on European integration. This article provides an overview of such referendums in western Europe, focusing in particular on the role of national trade unions in popular votes on EU accession and on Treaty revisions. It discusses trade union intervention in a dozen countries which held referendums since the Single European Act in the 1980s (and in the United Kingdom, which did not). It is evident that while mainstream trade unions (or at least their leaders) have usually endorsed the integration process, in most countries where referendums have been held their members have voted otherwise. This has been particularly evident among manual workers. Sometimes popular attitudes have been strongly influenced by narrowly nationalistic arguments, but rejection has often been based on “progressive” rather than “reactionary” grounds. In particular, the justified view that the EU in its current direction is encouraging a neoliberal, pro-capitalist drift in social and economic policy has underlain a left-wing critique of further integration. But having assented to the underlying architecture of actually existing Europeanization, unions have rarely shown the will to mobilize offensively around an alternative vision of social Europe. This has left the field open to right-wing nationalists (and to fringe left-wing parties with only a limited electoral base) to campaign in the “no” camp during referendums. Popular attitudes are malleable, but it requires a major strategic re-orientation if unions are to reconnect with their members in order to build a popular movement for a genuinely social Europe.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-77
Author(s):  
Dina Bolokan

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic brought into focus how nationstates manage to shut down borders while maintaining flexible labor recruitment. This challenging situation provoked more public discussion around inequalities within the agricultural and agrifood sector. However, reflections around labor conditions have remained limited. I argue that instead of merely pointing to certain aspects of the current labor conditions and demanding more regulations, a different point of departure is urgently needed. Through a genealogical approach to recruitment and rotation, this article aims to further politicize the discussion around the current recruitment infrastructure in the agricultural and agrifood sectors in Europe. I do this with my research on labor migration from Moldova to the European Union and Switzerland, where I consider the hypermobile life trajectories of workers within the agricultural sector. I am interested in the structures, goals and biopolitical implications as well as the involved ideologies that accompany the laws and regulations of the legal framework of such hypermobility between “Eastern” and “Western” Europe. I show how the involved citizenship laws and circular migration policies reveal entanglements through time and space that lead to neocolonial and post-Soviet regimes of labor control within Europe.


Author(s):  
Martin A. Schain

The impact of immigration on socioeconomic stability, the challenge of integration, and issues surrounding citizenship has generated the interest of scholars for years. The literature is generally focused on the challenge (rather than the benefits) of immigration for social cohesion, identity, and the well-established rules of citizenship. For social scientists and analysts in Western Europe and the United States, the destabilizing aspects of immigration appear to have largely displaced class as a way of understanding sources of political instability. Scholarly interest in questions of immigrant integration on the one hand and naturalization and citizenship on the other, first emerged in the social sciences in the 1960s. In the United States, integration and citizenship questions have often been explored in the context of race relations. In Europe, the debates on issues of citizenship have been much more influenced by questions of identity and integration. As interest grew in comparison, scholars increasingly turned their attention to national differences that crystallized around national models for integration. However, such models are not always in congruence with aspects of public policy. There are a number of research directions that scholars may consider with respect to immigrant integration, naturalization, and citizenship, such as the relationship between immigrant integration and class analysis, the careful development of theories of policy change, the role of the European Union in the policy process, and the impact of integration and citizenship on the political system.


2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Crowley

With expansion of the European Union (EU), the transformation of industrial relations in Eastern Europe becomes increasingly important. Studies on labor relations in post-communist countries have flourished in recent years, yet these studies have not reached a consensus on what they seek to explain. Is labor in post-communist societies weak or (in some countries) strong? And strong or weak compared to what? To the extent labor is weak, what would explain this weakness? This study demonstrates that labor is indeed a weak social and political actor in post-communist societies, especially when compared to labor in Western Europe. The article examines a number of hypotheses that have been proposed to explain labor’s weakness, concluding that the institutional and ideological legacies of the communist period best explain this overall weakness. Because labor in post-communist societies more resembles American-style flexibility than the European “social model,” the ability to extend the European model to new EU entrants is questioned.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document