독일의 “고용기적”과 사회시장경제
The Germany’s “Job Miracle” and the Social Market Economy
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
한때 ‘유럽의 병자’로 폄하되던 독일에서 이루어진 “고용기적”에 대한 세계적인 관심이 모아지고 있다. 본고에서는 이러한 성공이 정부정책보다는 사회동반자관계라는 사회시장경제의 내재적 구성요소 덕분임을 밝히고자 했다. 사회동반자관계는 이차대전 후 독일의 경제적 번영과 사회적 평화에 결정적인 역할을 한 것으로 평가되었다. 그러나 1990년대 중반 이후 이 관계는 퇴조하고 있다는 분석이 꾸준히 제시되었다. 단체협약의 구속력 약화, 노조 조직률 감소, 사용자 단체의 “개방조항” 등이 그 지표로 제시되었다. 그러나 2008년 발발한 글로벌 금융위기를 극복하는 과정에서 사회동반자관계는 노사가 고용안정 목표에 합의하면서 부활했다. 상호 인정의 행위 규범, 비교적 균등한 권력 배분, 단체협약의 강한 구속력이라는 사회동반자관계의 구성요소가 다시 활성화되었다. 노조는 임금인상요구를 자제했고 사용자는 고용보장을 확인해주었다. 독일의 “고용기적”에 결정적으로 기여한 것은 기업의 내부유연성에 기초한 노동시간 단축이었다. 글로벌 금융위기 이전부터 개별 기업은 고용보장을 위해서는 단체협약을 이탈할 수도 있었다. 사업장평의회의 협력 없이는 법과 단체협약에 의한 내부유연성을 활용할 가능성은 전혀 없기 때문에 단축노동을 포함해서 노동시간과 관련된 모든 사안에서 사업장평의회는 공동결정 기회를 적극 활용했다. 금융위기가 발발하자 가장 먼저 잔업이 감소했고, 다음에는 노동시간 계좌가 축소되었고 휴가가 앞당겨졌다. 이를 통해 노동시간 단축의 여지가 소진되자 단축노동이 시작되었다. 글로벌 금융위기가 사회동반자관계와 사회적 대화를 활성화시킨 것은 분명하지만 금융위기 이전부터 진행되던 사회동반자관계와 사회적 대화의 위기 상황을 불식시킨 것은 결코 아니다. 오히려 금융위기가 잦아들면서 다시 사회동반자관계를 더욱 약화시키는 요인으로 작용하는 경우도 있기 때문에 사회동반자관계의 전망이 밝은 것만은 아니다. 고용율 제고를 목표로 설정한 한국 정부는 헌법상의 경제질서인 사회시장경제의 이념과 내용에 부합되는 사회동반자관계를 촉진하는 정책을 전개해야만 소기의 목표를 달성할 수 있을 것이다.
Abstract
The recent “Germany’s job miracle”(Paul Krugman), to which the worldwide public pays in recent years a great attention, is not just a product of a certain type of policy-mix, but is to be explained to be resulted from the social partnership that has been an inherent institutional component of the german Social Market Economy. The social partnership has definitely contributed to the economic prosperity and social stability after the Second World War in Germany. Since the middle of the nineties of the last century, however, the social partnership was experiencing a continuous crisis characterized by the weakening binding force of the collective agreement, the falling labour union organization rate and the so-called “open clause“ of the employer associations. As the global financial crisis of the years 2008~2009 was going on, the social partnership was revived for the bilaterally agreed goal of the job stabilization. This led to more frequent applications of the behaviour norm of mutual recognization, relatively equal power distribution between lapour and capital, and stronger binding force of the collective agreement. The trade unions raised moderate wage claim, while the employers ensured the job security. As a result, despite of 6.7% decrease of the real GDP compared to the OECD average of -4.8%, the unemployment rate decreased from 7.9% at the time of outbreak of the crisis to 7.0% in May 2010. In the same period the OECD average unemployment rate increased from 5.7% to 8.6%. To the german “job miracle”, first of all, the shortening of the working hours decisively contributed on the ground of the firm-internal flexibility. The firms had been admitted not to obey the collective agreement for the purpose of securing the jobs, already before the outbreak of the crisis. The firms could not yet make use of the internal flexibility without the prior approval of the workers’ council, which then apply the co-determination to the negotiations on the working hours for the workers’ interest. As the crisis broke out, the overtime work was diminished at first. The working hours account, then, was contracted, and the earlier vacation was introduced. As the room for the working hour reduction had been exhausted, it began with the introduction of the short-time work scheme that was so effective that it contributed during the sharp recession of -4.9% in 2009 to stabilizing the labour market situation. In the crisis period from the 1. quarter 2008 to the 4. quarter 2009 the working hour reduction led to 3% increase of employment. Besides the short-time work scheme, the negative development of the labour productivity and the skilled labour hoarding belonged to the social partnership labour market institution that might in the short term make an negative impact on the profitability of the firms.
참고문헌 (52)
- Bangs, J., "Social partnership: the wider context", Forum, 48(2), pp.201~208 (2006)
- Bartelheimer, P., "Berichterstattung zur sozioökonomischen Entwicklung in Deutschland. Teilhabe im Umbruch", pp.41~85 (2012)
- Bechmann, S., "20 Jahre deutsche Einheit-ein Vergleich der west- und ostdeutschen Betriebslandschaft im Krisenjahr 2010", IAB-Forschungsbericht, (6) (2010)
- Bispinck, R., "Verbetrieblichung der Tarifpolitik? Aktuelle Tendenzen und Einschätzungen aus Sicht von Betriebsräten und Personalwesen", WSIMitteilungen, 56(3), pp.157~167 (2003)
- Bosch, G., "Work inequalities in the crisis? Evidence from Europe", pp.243~277 (2011)
- Brandt, G.J., "Anpassung an die Krise: Gewerkschaften in den Siebziger Jahren" (1982)
- Brenke, K., "Kurzarbeit: Nützlich in der Krise, aber nun den Ausstieg einleiten", DIW-Wochenbericht, (16) (2010)
- Ellguth, P., "Tarifbindung und betriebliche Interessenvertretung:Ergebnisse aus dem IAB-Betriebspanel 2012", WSI-Mitteilungen, 66(4), pp.281~288 (2013)
- Engelen-Kefer, Ursula, "Deutsches Beschäftigungswunder-Fakt oder Mythos?", Vorwärts (2012)
- Arbeitszeitentwicklung und Krise-eine Zwischenbilanz:IAQArbeitszeit-Monitor 2010, "Franz, C.", ~, pp.IAQ-Report 2010-07 (2010)
- Fuchs, J., "Der Arbeitsmarkt schließt an den vorherigen Aufschwung an", IAB-Kurzbericht, (18) (2010)
- Fürstenberg, F., "Entwicklungen in den industriellen Beziehungen: Ein Überblick", Industrielle Beziehungen, 20(4), pp.304~322 (2013)
- "Geschäftsbericht 2009, 2010"[URL]
- Goldbeck, C.H., "Jenseits von Bier und Tulpen. Sport, Kultur und Soziales in den Niederlanden und Deutschland", pp.87~109 (2011)
- Goldschmidt, N., "Vom Homo oeconomicus zum Homo culturalis. Handlung und Verhalten in der Ökonomie" (2009)
- Trendreport Betriebsrats-wahlen 2010:Zwischenergebnisse kurz nach der Wahl, "Greifenstein, R.", Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, ~ (2010)
- Haipeter, T., "Sozialpartnerschaft in und nach der Krise: Entwicklungen und Perspektiven", Industrielle Beziehungen, 19(4), pp.387~411 (2012)
- Haipeter, T., "Betriebsräte als neue Tarifakteure: zum Wandel der Mitbestimmung bei Tarifabweichungen" (2010)
- Haipeter, T., "Von der Einfluss- zur Mitgliedschaftslogik. Die Arbeitgeberverbände und das System der industriellen Beziehungen in der Metallindustrie", Industrielle Beziehungen, 13(1), pp.21~42 (2006)
- Heinze, R. G., "Interessengruppen und Politik: vom Modell Deutsch-land zur Erosion der Sozialpartnerschaft" (2005)
- ‘Deutsches Beschäftigungswunder’ und flexible Arbeitszeiten, "Herzog-Stein, A.", ~, pp.WSI Diskussionspapier, 169 (2010)
- Höpner, M., "Unternehmensmitbestimmung unter Beschuss. Die Mitbe- stimmungsdebatte im Licht der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung", Industrielle Beziehungen, 11(4), pp.347~379 (2004)
- Huke, R., "Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte", pp.13~14 (2010), Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung
- Hyman, R., "From Collective Bargaining to Social Partnerships:New Roles of the Social Partners in Europe", pp.39~59 (2001)
- Wirtschaftspolitik belebt Konjunktur, "IMK", ~, pp.IMK-Report 45 (2009)
- Kädtler, J., "Editorial: Sozialpartnerschaft in der Krise-Bewährung oder Krise der Sozialpartnerschaft?", Industrielle Beziehungen, 19(4), pp.357~366 (2012)
- Keller, B., "Der aufhaltsame Aufstieg von Berufsverbänden. Bedingungen, Ziele und Folgen", Sozialer Fortschritt, 57(6), pp.163~173 (2008)
- Keller, B., "Atypische Beschäftigung und soziale Risiken. Entwicklung, Strukturen, Regulierung" (2011), Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
- Kelly, J., "Social Partnership Agreements in Britain. Labor Cooperation and Compliance", Industrial Relations, 43(1), pp.267~292 (2004)
- "Koalitionsvertrag zwischen CDU, CSU und FDP vom Oktober 2009", ~
- Krugman, P., "Free to lose", New York Times, November 12, ~ (2009)
- Leiber, S., "Europäische Sozialpolitik und nationale Sozialpartnerschaft" (2005)
- Lesch, H., "Erfassung und Entwicklung von Streiks in OECD-Ländern", iw-Trends, (1) (2009)
- Lessenich, S., "Dynamischer Immobilismus. Kontinuitat und Wandel im deutschen Sozialmodell" (2003)
- Mauer, A., "Betriebliche Beschäftigungs- und Wettbewerbs- bündnisse-Strategie für Krisenbetriebe oder neue regelungspolitische Normalität?", WSIMitteilungen, (8), pp.490~500 (2001)
- Müller, J.W, "Konfliktpartnerschaft. Akteure und Institutionen der industriellen Beziehungen" (1999)
- Neumann, G., "Bündnisse für Arbeit in Deutschland-Ein Überblick", WSI-Mitteilungen, (7), pp.419~429 (2000)
- Employment Outlook, "OECD", ~ (2010)
- "Union membership figures" (2011)[URL]
- Projektgruppe Gemeinschaftsdiagnose, "Zögerliche Belebung-Steigende Staatsschuld, Gemeinschaftsdiagnose Herbst 2009" (2009)
- "Eine Beruhigungspille gegen die Krise" (2009)[URL]
- 10, "Die Zukunft nicht aufs Spiel setzen, Jahresgutachten 2009", pp.2009, Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung
- Schmidt, W., "Sozialer Frieden und Sozialpartnerschaft. Kapital und Arbeit in der Gesellschaftspolitik der westdeutschen Christdemokraten 1945 bis 1953" (1985)
- Schnabel, C. amd Joachim, "Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft in Deutschland: Strukturen, Determinanten und Tendenzen", Industrielle Beziehungen, 14(2), pp.93~96 (2007)
- Schröder, W, "Handbuch Arbeitgeber-und Wirtschaftsverbände in Deutschland", pp.9~25 (2010)
- Streeck, W., "Tarifpolitik im Umbruch", pp.49~82 (2005)
- Turner, L., "Institutions and activism: Crisis and opportunity for a German labor movement in decline", Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 62(3), pp.294~312 (2008)
- Turner, L., "Negotiating the new Germany, Can social partnership survive?" (1997)
- Urban, H. -J., "Niedergang oder Comeback der Gewerkschaften?", Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, (13, pp.14) (2010), 3~7
- Wiesenthal, H., "Zur Entwicklungsdynamik des modernen Kapitalismus", pp.125~149 (1988)
- Die anthropologischen Grundlagen der Sozialen Markt-wirtschaft und der Sozialpartnerschaft-unter besonderer Berüucksichtigung neuerer Forschungsergebnisse, Gutachten für die Chemie-Stiftung Sozialpartner-Akademie (CSSA), "Wörsdörfer, Manuel", ~ (2010)
- Arbeitszeitkonten haben sich bewährt, "Zapf, I.", ~, pp.IAB Kurz bericht, 22 (2010)