İşçi Sendikaları ile İşsizlik Sigortası Arasındaki Köprü: Ghent Sistemi

Abstract

Abstract

In recent years, union density rates have been declining particularly in European countries; but only Belgium, Finland, Sweden and Denmark have experienced steady or increasing gains. One can assume that there is a negative correlation between unemployment rate and union density rate, except these four countries. While trade unions are in a deep and dramatic crisis and even there is a hot debate on trade unions’ future in most of the European countries, this exceptional position of four countries is mainly due to their common unemployment insurance system. Only Belgium, Finland, Sweden and Denmark have this voluntary unemployment insurance system that is so-called Ghent system. The unemployment insurance funds are set up and administered by trade unions and members of these funs are generally unionised employees in Ghent system. Thus, Ghent system has a significant influence to build a close relationship between union membership and unemployment insurance and also trade unions actually use unemployment insurance as a recruitment vehicle in Ghent system. But with loosening the relationship between union membership and unemployment insurance in 1990s, union density rates has began to decrease in Ghent countries

Keywords

• Ghent system, unemployment insurance, trade unionism

References

1. -Ben-Israel, Gideon ve Fisher, Hanna. (1992). “Trade Unions in the Future: Organizational Strategies in a Changing Environment”, IIRA 9 th World Congress Proceedings, Vol:II, Sydney, ss.85-98.
2. -Blaschke, Sabine. (2000). “Union Density and European Integration: Diverging Convergence”, European Journal of Industrial Relations. Vol:6, No: 2, ss.217-236.
3. -Böckerman, Petri ve Uusitalo, Rope. (2005). “Union Membership and the Erosion of the Ghent System”: Lessons From Finland", Labour Institute for Economic Research Discussion Papers 213, ss. 1-30.
4. -Checchi, Daniele ve Lucifora Claudio. (2002). “Unions and Labour Market Institutions in Europe”, Universita delgi Studi di Milano Working Paper No: 16.2002, ss.1-65.
5. -Çelik, Aziz. (30.10.2005). “Marx Bu Sınavdan Çakardı”, Radikal.
6. -Dilik, Sait. (1991). Sosyal Güvenlik. Ankara: Kamu-İş.
7. -Ebbinghaus, Bernhard ve Visser, Jelle. (1999). “When Institutions Matter Union Growth and Decline in Western Europe, 1950-1995”, European Sociological Review. Vol:15, No: 2, ss. 135-158.
8. -Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. (1985). Politics Against Markets. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

9. -Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
10. -Haberfeld, Yitchak. (July 1995). “Why Do Workers Join Unions? The Case of Israel”, Industrial and Labour Relations Review. Vol: 48, No:4, ss.656-670.
11. -Hatland, Aksel. (1998). “The Changing Balance Between Incentives and Economic Security in Scandinavian Unemployment Benefit Schemes”, ISSA Research Conference on Social Security. Jerusalem, ss.1-12.
12. -Holmlund, Betil. (March 1998). “Unemployment Insurance in Theory and Practice”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics. Vol: 100, No:1, ss.113-141.
13. -Jokivuori, Pertti. (Spring 2006). “Trade Union Density and Unemployment Insurance in Finland”, Transfer. Vol:12, No:1, ss.83-87.
14. -Kjellberg, Anders. (Spring 2006). “The Swedish Unemployment Insurance-Will the Ghent System Survive?”, Transfer. Vol:12, No:1, ss. 87-99.
15. -Klandermans, Bert. (September 1986). “Psychology and Trade Union Participation: Joining, Acting, Quitting”, Journal of Occupational Psychology. Vol: 59, Issue: 3, ss. 189-204.
16. -Lesch, Hagen. (4/2004). “Trade Union Density in International Comparison”, CESifo Forum, ss.12-18.
17. -Lind, Jens. (2004). “The Restructuring of the Ghent Model in Denmark and Consequences for the Trade Unions”, Transfer. Vol: 10, No: 4, ss.621-62524 . -Lind, Jens. (2006). “The Ghent System in the Nordic Countries- Still a Vehicle for Trade Unions to Recruit Members?”, Industrial Relations in Europe Conference (IREC). The Future of Social Models. (Ed. M. Stanojević ve J.N. Bergoĉ). Conference Proceedings, University of Ljubljana.
18. -Mares, Isabela. (June 2000). “Strategic Alliances and Social Policy Reform: Unemployment Insurance in Comparative Perspective”, Politics & Society. Vol: 28, No: 2, ss. 223-244.
19. Özdemir, Süleyman. (2004). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Refah Devleti. İstanbul: İTO Yayın No: 2004-69.
20. -Rothstein, Bo. (1992). “Labour Market Institutions and Working-Class Strength”, Structuring Politics. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. (Ed. Sven Steinmo, Kathleen Thelen ve Frank Longstreth). UK: Cambridge University Press, ss.33-56.
21. -Scheuer, Steen. (1998). “Denmark: A less Regulated Model”, Changing Industrial Relations in Europe. (Ed. Anthony Ferner& Richard Hyman). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, ss.143-170.
22. -Schnabel, Claus. (2003). “Determinants of Trade Union Membership”, International Handbook of Trade Unions. (Ed. John Addison ve Claus Schnabel). UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, ss.13-44.
23. -Scruggs, Lyle. (June 2002). “The Ghent System and Union Membership in Europe, 1970-1996”, Political Research Quarterly. Vol: 55, No: 2, ss.275-297.
24. -Uçkan, Banu. (Temmuz-Eylül 2001). “Sendika Güvenliğinin Teorik Çerçevesi ve Endüstri İlişkileri Sistemine Etkisi”, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi. Cilt: 56, No: 3, ss.157-176.
25. -Vandaele, Kurt. (2006). “A Report From the Homeland of the Ghent System: The Relationship Between Unemployment and Trade Union Membership in Belgium”, Transfer. Vol: 13, No: 4, ss. 647-657.
26. -Visser, Jelle. (January 2006). “Union Membership Statistics in 24 Countries”, Monthly Labor Review, ss. 38-49.
27. -Western, Bruce. (April 1993). “Postwar Unionization in Eighteen Advanced Capitalist Countries”, American Sociological Review. Vol:58, No:2, ss.266-282.
28. -Western, Bruce. (1999). Between Class and Market. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
29. -Yazgan, Turan. (1992). İktisatçılar İçin Sosyal Güvenlik Ders Notları. İstanbul: Kutyay.
30. -http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/2006- 2007/europe/denmark.html- 27.02.2007-.
31. -Eiro. (2002(a)). “Industrial relations in the EU Member States and candidate countries”, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/07/feature/tn0207104f.html12.05.2007-
32. -Eiro. (2002(b)). “Government liberalises unemployment insurance funds”, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/09/feature/dk0209102f.html-04.03.2007-.
33. -Eiro. (2005(b)). “Changes in national collective bargaining systems since 1990”, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2005/03/study/tn0503102s.html-12.05.2007-
34. -Eiro. (2005(b)). “Independent unemployment insurance fund 'undermining unions'”, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2005/10/feature/fi0510202f.html01.03.2007-.