An
International
Conference
on
‘RESOCIALIZING
EUROPE
AND
THE
MUTUALIZATION
OF
RISKS
TO
WORKERS’
18­19
May
2012
–
UCL
Faculty
of
Laws,
London
A.
The
idea
behind
the
conference.
The
policy
deficit
undermining
Social
Europe.
The
notion
of
(de)­mutualization.
Terms
such
as
‘Social
Europe’,
the
‘European
Social
Dimension’,
‘European
Social
Model’,
and,
more
recently,
‘European
Social
Pact’,
have
long
resided
in
the
political
and
regulatory
lexicon
of
European
integration.
Ever
since
the
1974
Social
Action
Programme,
the
EEC/EC/EU
has
aspired
to
broaden
its
regulatory
ambitions
beyond
the
strict
confines
of
market
and
economic
integration,
focussing
on
the
‘improvement
of
living
and
working
conditions
so
as
to
make
possible
their
harmonization
while
the
improvement
is
being
maintained’.
In
the
1980s
and
1990s,
Delors’
idea
of
‘Europe
Sociale’
emerged
as
a
strong
catalyst
for
further
harmonization
in
the
social
field,
and
for
a
growing
involvement
of
both
sides
of
industry
in
shaping
the
process
of
integration.
These
social
ambitions
and
aspirations
were
reflected
in
successive
Treaty
amendments,
social
policy
agendae,
and
the
production
of
several
regulatory
instruments,
mostly
Directives,
aimed
at
harmonizing
working
conditions
across
the
EU
Member
States.
But
arguably,
after
reaching
a
climax
in
2000
with
the
inclusion
of
a
‘Solidarity’
chapter
in
the
Charter
of
Fundamental
Rights,
the
social
profile
of
the
EU
has
entered
a
deep
period
of
crisis,
one
may
say
a
phase
of
‘social
eurosklerosis’.
Neither
the
Treaty
of
Nice
nor
the
Treaty
of
Lisbon
have
brought
any
substantive
additions
to
the
social
policy
competencies
of
the
EU.
Most
of
the
social
policy
instruments
adopted
in
the
first
decade
of
the
21st
century,
had
either
been
in
the
legislative
pipeline
of
the
EU
for
numerous
years,
or
they
were
mere
amendments
of
already
existing
directives.
The
EU
lawmaking
process
in
the
social
policy
field,
including
‘social
dialogue’,
has
faltered
more
than
once,
most
visibly
with
the
failed
adoption
of
a
new
working
time
Directive
in
2009.
Even
discrimination
law,
the
traditional
flagship
of
‘Social
Europe’
has
stumbled
on
a
number
of
hurdles,
as
demonstrated
by
the
current
stalemate
surrounding
the
Proposal
for
a
Council
Directive
on
implementing
the
principle
of
equal
treatment
between
persons
irrespective
of
religion
or
belief,
disability,
age
or
sexual
orientation
(COM(2008)0426
final).
The
few
regulatory
ambitions
envisaged
by
the
2006
Green
Paper
‘Modernizing
Labour
Law
to
meet
the
challenges
of
the
21st
century’
resulted
in
the
disappointing
conclusion
that
‘the
Commission
does
not
propose
any
new
legislative
initiatives’
(Press
release
IP/07/1584).
Instead
most
of
the
EU
activities
have
concentrated
on
the
coordination
–
and,
according
to
many
(Freedland
et
al
2007,
Ashiagbor
2005),
deregulation
‐
of
national
employment
policies
(through
the
OMC
and
the
EES/Lisbon
process),
failing
to
transform
Europe
into
the
‘most
dynamic
economy….’,
as
originally
envisaged
by
the
Lisbon
Agenda.
The
Court
of
Justice
has
been
criticised
for
further
eroding
national
labour
relations
systems,
particularly
when
balancing
EU
economic
freedoms
against
national
(and
arguably
international)
fundamental
social
rights,
for
instance
in
cases
such
as
Viking
and
Laval.
More
than
three
years
after
these
decisions,
the
Commission
is
still
trying
to
come
to
terms
with
their
intended
and
unintended
deregulatory
effects
(see
the
discussions
surrounding
the
‘Monti
II’
regulation).
The
current
deepening
of
the
economic
crisis
–
and
the
social
conditions
attached
to
the
‘bail
out’/aid
packages
offered
to
countries
like
Greece,
are
a
further
aspect
of
the
continuing
social
retrenchment
an
demutualization
of
social
rights
in
Europe.
In
2010,
the
European
Parliament
openly
acknowledged
with
‘disappointment
that
the
EU
employment
law
package
and
the
[…]
directives
on
fixed‐
term,
part‐time
and
temporary
agency
work
do
not
adequately
address
the
precarious
nature
of
employment’
(European
Parliament
resolution
of
19
October
2010
on
precarious
women
workers
(2010/2018(INI)).
Even
the
Commission
admitted
that
‘the
sense
of
disillusionment
felt
by
some
towards
the
internal
market
may
also
be
the
result
of
the
perception
that
successive
liberalizations
have
been
carried
out
at
the
cost
of
the
social
rights
acquired
by
various
economic
operators’
(‘Towards
a
Single
Market
Act’,
2010).
But
while
these
statements
may
indicate
some
soul‐searching
amongst
EU
institutions,
the
Social
Europe
project
remains,
to
use
a
euphemism,
stagnant.
A Conference on ‘Resocialising Europe and the Mutualization of Risks to Workers’
1
The
status
quo
is
arguably
one
in
which
workers
once
again
appear
to
shoulder
most
of
the
risks
attendant
upon
the
making
and
execution
of
arrangements
for
the
doing
of
work,
and
associated
with
their
particular
personal
work
situation
in
the
labour
market
at
large.
We
define
this
status
quo
as
one
in
which
a
process
of
de‐mutualization
of
work
related
risks
is
seriously
undermining
the
hard‐fought
and
hard‐earned
social
acquis
that
national
social
law,
and
Social
Europe
itself,
once
aspired
to
provide.
And
we
advocate
a
reversal
of
the
this
trend
in
favour
of
a
process
of
fair‐mutualization
of
these
risks,
so
as
to
disperse
them
away
from
workers,
and
share
them
more
equitably
between
employers,
the
state,
but
also
consumers,
and
society
at
large.
B.
The
project.
A
two­day,
workshop­based,
international
conference
The
Labour
Rights
Institute
of
UCL
(LRI),
with
the
financial
support
provided
by
the
British
Academy
Conference
Grant
(Grant
No.
CS110461)
and
by
a
number
of
other
stakeholders,
seeks
to
bring
together
an
interdisciplinary
group
of
experts
from
the
UK
and
the
rest
of
Europe
to
discuss
whether
this
current
phase
of
‘social
eurosklerosis’
is
likely
to
become
a
permanent
feature
of
the
EU,
or
whether
new
regulatory
trajectories
could
and
ought
to
be
pursued.
The
conference
will
be
organised
around
5
key
thematic
workshops
that
will
explore
the
following
themes:
‘Social
Europe’;
‘Working
Conditions’;
‘Equalities’;
‘Collective
Rights’;
‘New
Frontiers’.
While
obviously
preponderant
in
the
third
thematic
workshop,
it
is
envisaged
that
the
human
rights
and
the
gender
equality
discourses
will
be
crosscutting
themes,
as
also
advocated
by
the
recent
Commission
document
‘Strategy
for
the
effective
implementation
of
the
Charter
of
Fundamental
Rights
by
the
European
Union’
(COM
(2010)
573
final).
Each
workshop
will
involve
the
discussion
of
papers
circulated
in
advance
amongst
the
participants.
Workshops
will
bring
together
presenters
and
discussants
from
various
social
sciences.
Authors
will
be
asked
to
provide
analytical
papers,
with
strong
normative
elements,
exploring
particular
questions
and
aspects
of
the
larger
‘Resocializing
Europe’
theme.
While
it
is
envisaged
that
the
majority
of
contributors
will
be
labour
law
experts,
at
a
national
and
European
level,
we
will
also
involve
labour
economist,
political
scientists,
trade
union
officials,
and
political
figures.
The
conference
aspires
to
provide
a
gender
and
intergenerational
balance.
Not
all
those
invited
and
participating
to
the
conference
will
be
expected
to
present
papers,
and
it
is
hoped
that
A Conference on ‘Resocialising Europe and the Mutualization of Risks to Workers’
2
some
may
accept
to
contribute
to
its
success
as
chairs
of
thematic
workshops
or
as
discussants.
C.
People
involved
–
dates
The
main
organisers
of
the
conference
will
be
the
UCL
LRI
co‐ordinators
(Dr.
Ingrid
Boccardi,
Dr.
Nicola
Countouris,
Prof.
John
Hendy
QC,
Dr.
Virginia
Mantouvalou,
Dr.
Colm
O’Cinneide),
and
Prof.
Mark
Freeldand
(Oxford).
It
is
expected
that
the
conference
will
take
place
over
two
days,
on
a
Friday
and
Saturday,
either
on
Fr
18­Sat
19
2012,
in
London,
in
the
Dennys
Holland
Lecture
Theatre,
at
the
Faculty
of
Laws
of
UCL.
C.
Dissemination
plans
In
terms
of
dissemination,
we
are
planning
to
avail
ourselves
of
three
different
sources.
We
will
publish
preliminary
papers
as
LRI
on‐line
Working
Papers
(accessible
to
participants
only).
We
also
envisage
publishing
an
edited
book
with
Cambridge
University
Press
(discussions
with
the
relevant
commissioning
editor
have
already
taken
place),
with
Mark
Freedland
and
Nicola
Countouris
as
editors,
and
if
necessary
arrangements
could
be
made
for
a
‘special
issue’
of
a
major
European
law
journal
on
this
topic.
Finally
we
envisage
publishing
the
more
normative
conclusions
of
the
conference
on
a
subsidiary
blog
on
‘Resocialising
Europe
–
a
Manifesto’
connected
to
the
LRI
main
web‐site
and
open
to
contributions
from
the
wider
public
for
a
period
of
six
months.
D.
Who
to
contact
For
any
queries
pertaining
to
the
organisational
aspects
of
the
conference
you
can
contact,
as
your
first
port
of
call,
Dr.
Nicola
Countouris
at
n.countouris@ucl.ac.uk
.
You
can
also
contact
any
of
the
other
organisers.
The
LRI
administrator
is
Mrs
Deborah
Burns.
She
can
be
contacted
via
email
at
deborah.burns@ucl.ac.uk
.
A Conference on ‘Resocialising Europe and the Mutualization of Risks to Workers’
3
For
further
information
on
the
LRI,
please
click
on
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/lri/index.shtml
The
Faculty’s
address
is:
Faculty
of
Laws
University
College
London
Bentham
House
Endsleigh
Gardens
London
WC1H
0EG
E.
Acknowledgements
We
gratefully
acknowledge
the
support
of:
• British
Academy
http://www.britac.ac.uk/
• UCL
Centre
for
Law
and
Governance
in
Europe
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/clge/
• Old
Square
Chambers
• UCL
European
Institute
A Conference on ‘Resocialising Europe and the Mutualization of Risks to Workers’
4