The European Refugee Crisis and the Reaction of Labour Market Actors: The Case of Denmark
The present article analyses the first round of tripartite negotiations which took place in early 2016 and focused on the increasing number of refugees which have crossed the Danish borders since 2015. The article discusses the Danish Government’s and the social partners’ interests in these negotiations, the content of the agreement and it’s relation to the Danish labour market model. The article concludes that the actors procedural interests in the tripartite negotiations showed substantial overlap, while the actors substantive interest differed to a greater extent. However, the effects of differences in the substantive interests were reduced because the Government used the ‘bait’ of other negotiation rounds on issues, that especially the trade unions were interest in. This facilitated the negotiation process. Moreover, it is concluded that although the broad tripartite negotiations in Denmark are rare, the agreement still reflects the Danish labour market model. This is so, firstly, because the core of it - the Basic Integration Education (IGU)- was negotiated between the DA and LO, and only afterwards approved by the other actors (the other social partner organizations and the Government). Secondly, because it was modelled on an education scheme found in the collective agreements. And thirdly, because no companies are forced to take part in the IGU, but are granted with bonus if they do. This is in line with the Danish ‘voluntarist’ tradition of active labour market policy, where ‘carrots’ rather than ‘sticks’ are used to engage employers. Regarding the effect of the agreement, the article concludes that the use of carrot rather than sticks raises the question if the IGU will be used extensively and - in combination with existing measures and the other 31 initiatives of the tripartite agreement – will make an important difference. If not, the IGU and the rest of the tripartite agreement might be looked at as ‘much ado about nothing’.