Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization: Insights from the Case of Vocational Training in Germany
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13 Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization Insights from the Case of Vocational Training in Germany Marius R. Busemeyer Marius R. Busemeyer Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization: Insights from the Case of Vocational Training in Germany MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13 Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne August 2011 MPIfG Discussion Paper ISSN 0944-2073 (Print) ISSN 1864-4325 (Internet) © 2011 by the author(s) Marius R. Busemeyer is Professor of Political Science in the Department of Politics and Public Administration at the University of Konstanz. [email protected] MPIfG Discussion Papers are refereed scholarly papers of the kind that are publishable in a peer-reviewed disciplinary journal. Their objective is to contribute to the cumulative improvement of theoretical knowl- edge. The papers can be ordered from the institute for a small fee (hard copies) or downloaded free of charge (PDF). Downloads www.mpifg.de Go to Publications / Discussion Papers Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies Paulstr. 3 | 50676 Cologne | Germany Tel. +49 221 2767-0 Fax +49 221 2767-555 www.mpifg.de [email protected] Busemeyer: Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization iii Abstract The literature notes an increasing trend towards labor market stratification and dual- ization in coordinated market economies such as Germany. Labor market insiders and insider-oriented cross-class coalitions are usually identified as the driving forces behind these developments. This paper adds to this perspective by identifying different varieties of cross-class coalitions. On the basis of three case studies from the field of vocational training policy in Germany, two kinds of coalitions are identified: a conservative cross- class coalition of unions and employers that is against state intrusion into the domain of firm-based training, and a segmentalist cross-class coalition of social democratic government actors and business that is promoting an incremental flexibilization of the system against union opposition. In an alternating manner, both coalitions block the large-scale change that would be the most effective in countering dualization. Hence, they tacitly support dualization by drift. Zusammenfassung Die einschlägige Literatur befindet, dass in koordinierten Marktwirtschaften wie zum Beispiel Deutschland die Stratifizierung und Dualisierung von Arbeitsmärkten zu- nimmt. Als Triebkräfte hinter diesen Prozessen werden häufig Arbeitsmarkt-„Insider“ und auf die Interessen dieser Insider hin orientierte klassenübergreifende Koalitionen aus Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern identifiziert. Dieses Papier entwickelt eine neue Perspektive auf diesen Zusammenhang, indem es zeigt, dass es unterschiedliche Vari- ationen von klassenübergreifenden Koalitionen gibt. Auf der Grundlage von drei Fall- studien aus der deutschen Berufsbildungspolitik werden zwei Koalitionstypen identifi- ziert: (1) eine konservative Koalition aus Arbeitgebern und Gewerkschaften, die gegen das Eindringen des Staates und für die Bewahrung der Eigenständigkeit der betriebli- chen Ausbildung eintritt; (2) eine segmentalistische Koalition aus Teilen der Arbeitge- berschaft und sozialdemokratischen Regierungsmitgliedern, die gegen den Widerstand der Gewerkschaften eine inkrementelle Flexibilisierung und Modernisierung des Sys- tems betreibt. In wechselseitiger Weise verhindern beide Koalitionen die Durchsetzung großer Systemänderungen, obwohl diese am effektivsten wären, um dem Trend zur Du- alisierung entgegenzuwirken. iv MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13 Contents 1 Introduction: Motivation and research question 1 2 Conventional wisdom on the politics of institutional change in contemporary political economies 5 3 The politics of dualization in the German vocational training system 8 The reintroduction of two-year apprenticeships 9 The failed attempt to introduce a training levy 12 The reform of the Vocational Education and Training Act 15 4 Discussion 17 The role of government parties in the politics of institutional change 18 Coalitional patterns in the politics of training reform 19 The role of business in training reform 21 The outcome: Dualization by drift 24 5 Conclusions and outlook 25 References 27 Busemeyer: Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization 1 Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization: Insights from the Case of Vocational Training in Germany 1 Introduction: Motivation and research question The German vocational training system has long been regarded as a successful model (Culpepper 1999; Crouch et al. 1999; Finegold/Soskice 1988; Green 2001). The strong involvement of employers in initial vocational education and training, usually in the form of workplace-based apprenticeships and embedded in a supportive institution- al infrastructure of associations and public policies, promotes smooth transitions for youth from training to work and low levels of youth unemployment (Allmendinger 1989; Gangl 2003). Employers are additionally involved in the process of reforming and updating commonly accepted vocational certificates (Ausbildungsordnungen) in cooperation with unions and state actors, ensuring a tight fit between employers’ skill demands and the content of training and thus enabling firms to excel in strategies of “diversified quality production” (Streeck 1992), as documented by the competitiveness of the German export economy in high-quality manufacturing and chemicals. In recent years, however, the German vocational training system has come under pres- sure (Busemeyer 2009; Culpepper/Thelen 2008; Thelen 2007). For example, critics point to the difficulty of adapting a training system rooted in manufacturing to the needs of a service and knowledge economy (Anderson/Hassel 2007; Culpepper/Thelen 2008), the rising costs of training associated with increases in apprenticeship pay (Wagner 1999) and how workplace-based training systems such as the German one can discriminate on the basis of gender and/or migrant status (Estévez-Abe 2006, 2011). These criticisms do highlight certain weaknesses of the German training system, though some seem more relevant than others (see Busemeyer 2009: 62–77 for a more detailed discussion). With regard to the motivation for the research question addressed in this paper, the most important development in recent years has been a persistent lack of training slots and, as a consequence, the rise of the so-called “transition system” (Baethge et al. 2007). The number of youths in need of an apprenticeship (commonly referred to as the “de- mand”) first began to outstrip the number of training slots offered by firms (the “sup- ply”) in the 1980s, and this has intensified over the years. Figure 1 presents data on the percentage of young people pursuing various alternative educational pathways (1992 until 2008). The line at the top displays the percentage of young people who take up an apprenticeship in the dual system after leaving secondary school. The data show that I would like to thank Anke Hassel, Silja Häusermann, Ronen Mandelkern, Cathie Jo Martin, Wolf- gang Streeck, Kathleen Thelen, and Christine Trampusch for valuable comments on previous ver- sions of this paper. 2 MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13 Figure 1 Percentage of school-leavers pursuing different educational pathways Percent 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Dual training system Educational pathways leading to basic vocational qualifications (“transition system”) Tertiary enrollment rate Fully qualifying school-based vocational education and training Youth unemployment (below the age of 20) Source: BMBF (2010: 25). this educational pathway is still the most important for the majority of young people in Germany, although the percentage of entries into university is increasing (second line from bottom). The dominance of workplace-based training is also evident if we look at the percentage of entries into full-time, school-based vocational education (fourth line from the top in Figure 1), which is slightly increasing as well, but starts from a much low- er base. In contrast to the other educational pathways, the number of entries into dual apprenticeship training is declining, which corresponds to a decreasing share of firms willing to offer training slots (Busemeyer 2009: 41, 44; Thelen/Busemeyer 2008: 10–11). The most dramatic effect of this development is the strong increase in the number of entries into the so-called “transition system” (second line from top in Figure 1). The ostensible purpose of this system is to compensate for temporary shortfalls in the mar- ket for apprenticeship training and to ease the transition from school to vocational training. Contrary to what the name suggests, however, the transition system is not a well-planned system, but a complex arrangement of more or less coordinated training Busemeyer: Varieties of Cross-Class Coalitions in the Politics of Dualization 3 and qualification instruments (Baethge et al. 2007), whose only commonality is that they do not lead to certified vocational qualifications. According to surveys among ap- prenticeship applicants, most young people would clearly have preferred to have started an apprenticeship directly after leaving school rather than to have been pushed into the “waiting