INTRODUCTION: GLOBALIZATION, REGIONALISM, AND LABOR*

2As “globalization threatens established rights of labor through its undermining of state capacity to guarantee those rights,” (Tilly 1995: 4) the need for appending a “social clause” into global economic relations, in the attempt to solve what Munck (2002) calls “the Polanyian dilemma”, has become more pressing. As a result, trade unions almost everywhere in the world find themselves compelled to seek new ways to rebalance their relationship with capital and reconfigure themselves in response to the challenges of the new economic environment. Yet, the biggest challenge is that unions are organized within national territories, and lack the institutional capacity to mobilize effective collective action at the global level. The absence of instruments which would have conferred on labor the power to negotiate the terms of economic restructuring with the ‘authors’ of the global economic regime, constrains unions within the confines of the nation-state as the sole site of struggle and negotiation. Recent strategies embracing novel practices and institutions, such as enterprise-level works councils which provide space for labor to participate in decision-making processes in a company (especially in the metal industry), or exploiting the opportunities available in some sectors (such as maritime) that, thanks to their very nature, allow better coordination and harmonization of labor’s activities across borders, or undertaking global campaigns that aim to raise consumer consciousness to pressure corporations to assume their ‘corporate social responsibility’ (predominantly in the textile and apparel sectors) have produced, to date, but limited and isolated success stories.

3As it becomes clear that the “envelope of nation-state to encapsulate state-capital-labor relations is no more adequate” (Munck 2002: 103), a new mode and conceptualization of social regulation of capital and market is necessary. “Regionalism” provides such an analytical concept to contemplate various dimensions of economic globalization. Indeed, a defining feature of globalization is the reemergence of the regional economy as a unit of economic development, as the latter provides significant advantages in terms of trade and investment location, and can mitigate the effects of market instability produced by globalization (Telo 2001a; Beeson 2007; Deacon et al. 2009). Moreover, regionalism is often believed to be a politically more viable option to tackle global problems, thanks to the “commonality of culture, history, homogeneity of social systems and values, convergence of political and security interests, and the character of domestic coalitions” between certain nations (Hurrell 1995: 56). In this respect, regionalism is not only a strong analytical tool for addressing, but also is an opportunity space for managing uncertainties which spring from global integration of markets, for it endows social actors (capital, labor, and the state) with resources for realizing their needs and competences.

5Regionalism, needless to say, has been in circulation for a long time, particularly in the International Relations (IR) literature. While the idea of regional integration and cooperation dates back centuries, it gained a renewed interest especially in the post-Cold War period with the emergence of the EU, NAFTA, ASEAN, Mercosur and other regional organizations (for a short history of regionalism, see Fawcett 2008). In contrast to earlier studies, which merely focused on political strategies, security and conflict containment concerns, and economic cooperation of nation-states in a bipolar interstate system (see especially Nye 1968; Cantori & Speigel 1970; Nye & Keohane 1972; Keohane & Nye 2001), new regionalism focuses more on recent patterns of international trade and foreign investment, and particularly on the emergence of new regulatory organizations, economic unions, trading blocs, and company strategies that involve region-wide mergers, outsourcing activities and alignments (Telo 2001b; Schulz et al. 2001). In addition to the economic emphasis, the literature also highlights the formation of complex networks of ideas, technology, knowledge and values, and the intensified diffusion of new forms of identity and political attitudes beyond territorial boundaries: a trend which facilitates the organization of like-minded groups across borders, leading to the strengthening of transnational civil society, social movements and common policy formulation (Hurrell 1995: 55; Hettne 2003; Farrell et al. 2005). In this vein, many studies began to focus on the role of regional organizations and transnational epistemic communities in promoting and facilitating various processes of democratization and convergence in different geographies (Whitehead 1996; Pevehouse 2005; Bearce & Bondanella 2007).

7In this regard, this study also contributes to the growing literature on “transnational activism and advocacy networks”, which focuses on how professional groups, consumer organizations, epistemic communities, and other NGOs “argue, persuade, strategize, document, lobby, pressure and complain” to capture the world’s attention on such issues as labor and human rights, gender justice, democratization, poverty, environmental concerns and the like (Keck & Sikkink 1998: viii; Khagram et al. 2002; Tarrow 2005; della Porta & Caiani 2009). This literature often focuses on how domestic actors, who can not find an outlet to voice their demands in the face of state repression, often seek allies with international organizations and join networks that put pressure on governments to change their repressive policies (Risse et al. 1999). As far as labor activism is concerned, these networks go beyond inter-union cooperation, and the problems they address are not necessarily limited to work-site issues or labor-management conflicts, since they create international information exchange forums which bring together union members as well as non-union workers, academics, and other social movement representatives such as religious or environment movements from different countries (Kidder 2002: 274-275). Despite its appeal, one notable shortcoming in this literature is that while it draws attention to such issues as decent work, fair trade, global compact, corporate governance, union feminism, erosion of labor standards, justice campaigns in support of workers in subcontractor sweatshops, and solidarity networks among workers of unions in different countries (Schmidt 2007), the role and impact of regionalism and the opportunities made available by existing regional and international institutions for the benefit of transnational social activism are often undertheorized (Sikkink 2005). This paper addresses this shortcoming, and discusses EU regionalism as a potential opportunity structure for the collaboration and formation of solidarity between Turkish and European labor movements.

8In what follows, I offer a brief discussion on the evolution of social and employment policy in the EU, and demonstrate how developments in this field endowed trade unions with new means to protect their interests. After probing into the EU-level developments, catalyzed both by the EU institutions and organized labor itself, I will turn to the Turkish labor movement and investigate the ways through which it benefits from the EU membership process as far as the improvement of working conditions, collective rights and freedoms is concerned. In other words, by focusing on the pressures from the official EU channels as well as on the intensified relations between the Turkish and European labor movements in the process of accession to the EU, the paper will highlight some of the positive spillover effects of the “Europeanization of industrial relations” on the Turkish labor movement.

I. THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE WORLD OF LABOR

9One may argue that in a political space such as the EU, where the existence of different labor relations systems create a fragmented structure, capital can always find a way to avoid regulations and controls by moving freely across borders. This results in further undermining the conditions of labor as member states strive to attract capital for investment (Streeck 1998). One has to admit that, considering the developments towards establishing a single market and a single currency, the EU has indeed been moving towards a more “efficient” model of capitalism. Although there is an obvious welfare state sacrifice for the sake of competitiveness, there have also been attempts in the EU to recalibrate the power asymmetry between capital and labor since the 1970s. In order to fully grasp this double process, it is necessary to reconsider the developments in the field of social policy in Europe. The analysis of these developments offers an opportunity to examine how regionalism can be beneficial for defending the interests of labor beyond national borders.

Social and Employment Policy in the European Union

11Since then the EU legislation has focused on numerous employment-related issues, some of which include the regulation of the operation of labor markets, devising of sustainable and universal social protection systems, developing a well-functioning social dialogue among social partners, securing workers’ participation in decision-making processes, making employment creation a priority for the member states, guaranteeing decent and fair wages and living standards, providing equal opportunities for women and the disabled, and fighting against discrimination (EC 2002, Mabbett 2000: 251). In what follows, I highlight some of the most important steps taken by the EU that had a significant impact on conditions for European labor over the last two decades.

12Maastricht Treaty in December 1991. As far as labor’s interests were concerned, the protocol was not only securing the rights of workers to health and better working conditions at the European level, but also promoting social dialogue, active employment policies, and social protection and fighting against social exclusion (Celik 2004: 33-36, Gülmez 2003: 34-35).

13Adoption of the Community Social Charter and its incorporation into the Maastrich Treaty could not yet catalyze a vigorous move towards “Social Europe” until the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty, when the Social Charter and Social Policy Agreement were transferred into the Treaty of the European Community. Certain aspects of the Charter

European Social Dialogue

14One fundamental element of the “European Social Model” is the inclusion of the representatives of labor and capital (“social partners”) in the process of policy initiation and formulation. As early as the 1980s, the discussions within the EU regarding the development of a European level industrial relations system were pointing in the direction of creating an environment for social dialogue between “strong and capable” social partners, and this dialogue in time evolved into a regulatory instrument to mediate employment relations and working conditions in Europe (Gold et al. 2007: 9). Accordingly, the Social Dialogue became part of the Social Policy Protocol, annexed to the Treaty of Maastricht, and later incorporated into the Treaty of 1997 which reaffirmed the role of social partners in the EU decision-making process and the adoption of legal instruments for the effective implementation of certain minimum rights for working people (Van Liemt 1998: 244).

15Within this scheme, trade unions, along with employer organizations and other civil society organizations, not only gain the benefit of participating in policy-making processes on various issues, but they also take part in the formulation of legally or contractually binding EU-level directives across a variety of social and employment areas. In other words, social dialogue becomes crucial instrument for labor as it assigns unions a central role in the evolution of the EU’s labor policy, and social partnership endows them with the right to be consulted on decision-making and legislation processes in their national settings as well as in the EU (Eurofound 2009).

16It is hard to assess the concrete outcomes of bi-partite and tri-partite social dialogue at sectoral and cross-sectoral levels in terms of their direct impact on national and transnational employment relations, and especially on the enhancement of the bargaining power of European trade unions. That said, several European-level agreements implemented by directives (such as parental leave, part-time work, and fixed-term contracts) or by private agreements between management and labor (such as violence/harassment and work-related stress), as well as a number of practical initiatives undertaken by the social partners in various sectors (especially in regards to corporate social responsibility standards) are deemed favorable developments for workers of Europe as far as labor market policies and working conditions are concerned.

17More concretely, the promotion of social dialogue by the European Union engendered positive outcomes in many member countries. In Ireland, for instance, joining the EU was among the most significant factors that catalyzed the improvement and effectiveness of the National Economic and Social Council, in which trade unions could negotiate government policies regarding public sector employment, wage levels, social benefits and the provision of public services (House & McGrath 2004: 45-46). Similar developments have taken place in late-joining member countries such as Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal, where official platforms in which negotiations between the representatives of capital, labor and the state take place have traditionally been underdeveloped (Magone 2001). Especially in most Central and East European countries, where labor movements were historically weak, the European accession process forced governments to revive tripartite institutions in which unions could participate in the social and political reform process and bring their demands to the table. At the same time, thanks to the efforts by European Partners to promote the European Social Dialogue across the EU, these unions could strengthen their ties with the trade unions or union confederations of other EU nations as well as with supranational labor organizations such as the ETUC that endowed them with international support in their struggles for forcing governments to adopt measures in favor of labor’s interests such as the fight against unemployment, improvement of working conditions, and adoption of the EU’s Social Charter (Kubicek 2004: 155-156).

18In the light of these developments, there is reason to believe that maintaining a steady social dialogue at national and European levels would result in favorable arrangements for the working populations of Europe, especially in issues such as information and consultation, working hours, workers’ health and safety, vocational and professional training, and anti-discriminatory practices and fundamental rights (Itschert 2003: 138). Thanks to the new opportunity spaces made available by social dialogue, the number of social pacts that aim to resolve disputes over wages or social benefits increased in different sectors across Europe (Donaghey & Teague 2005). In this respect, despite its weaknesses, Europe-wide social dialogue can be considered to have the potential to transpose national level collective bargaining practices to the European level through institutionalization of these pacts at sectoral level. In other words, the existence of more systematic and institutionalized forms of relationships between trade unions and employers’ associations at the EU level can evolve into an embryonic form of a supranational European collective bargaining system (Schulten 2003; Eberwein et al. 2002). In this regard, developments in the social field in the EU breed expectations about the capacity of trade unions to extend their influence in tripartite negotiations and effectively shape employment relations in Europe.

European Works Councils

19EWCs are bodies for employee representation and participation in MNCs operating across Europe. The establishment of EWCs in 1994 was aimed at developing a system of information sharing and consultation with employee representatives at the supranational level. The EWC directive obliges MNCs to establish EWCs to provide a venue for the representatives of employees and management to collaborate on the nature, composition, function and mode of operations and procedures affecting the enterprise and its workforce (Rigby 1999: 33).

21All in all, although they have yet to fully realize their potential to strengthen workers’ rights, EWCs provide European trade unions with the opportunity to compensate for their decline in their ability to counterweigh the increasing internationalization and Europeanization of capital. Trade unions find their coordination capabilities considerably enhanced, especially by working together to exchange experiences, discuss problems, and coordinate their demands through EWCs. In that sense, EWCs help to strengthen trade unions’ and federations’ hands in their relations with companies and the EU Commission (Eberwein et al. 2002: 32). They promote political action and cross-border cooperation among trade unions, especially in the coordination of collective bargaining processes. Indeed, optimistic interpretations regard EWCs as the facilitators of a potential evolution towards a European level collective bargaining practice, which can be interpreted as an embryonic form of a multi-level European system of industrial relations (Telljohann et al. 2009: 20; Lecher et al. 2002; Muller & Platzer 2003).

European Employment Strategy

23The principal goal of the EES is to promote policy coordination between member states to improve employment conditions and strengthen the role of the social partners. Indeed, in the EES, the participation of social partners at the European and national levels is considered crucial for the “governance” of the process. The EES provides some general guidelines that are required to be translated into respective National Action Plans. In this process, too, the participation of national social partners is expected in the design and implementation of employment policies. As such, the EES gives impetus to the creation of social pacts and the completion of bipartite or tripartite agreements on labor market and social security issues.

24As far as the interests of the organized labor are concerned, the EES presents trade unions with the opportunity to find yet another space to voice their concerns and demands at the EU level, especially thanks to the European Trade Union Confederation’s (ETUC) involvement in the EES process, and especially by taking part in the EU Tripartite Social Summit to monitor its progress. In other words, the ways in which employment related issues are tackled by the EU institutions open new venues for trade unions to participate and influence the decision-making processes that affect the lives of workers in the European geography.

25All in all, the above-mentioned employment-related institutions and practices within the EU have become a part of the large body of legislation which the candidate countries have to transpose into their national legislations. As the discussion on Turkey will demonstrate below, these encouraging developments regarding labor rights and freedoms have a spill-over effect on the conditions of working populations in these countries, thanks to the pressure from the EU institutions in the accession process. But before mapping out the ways in which these candidate countries find themselves compelled to improve the conditions of labor, it is also necessary to observe whether the European labor movement can successfully organize beyond national borders, gain certain opportunities and resources to restore its political credibility, and provide protection for workers against the detrimental consequences of economic globalization. For this purpose, in the next section, I probe the ways in which trade unions exploit opportunities that become available in the process of European integration.

Europeanization and Organized Labor

Coordination of Collective Bargaining at the European level

26As the main instruments of monetary policy in member states have slowly shifted from the national to the European level with the establishment of the European Monetary Union (EMU), trade unions found themselves in need of supplementing their national-level struggles for wage policies and working conditions with more vigorous cooperation and coordination with unions in other European countries. Since neither the European Social Dialogue nor EWCs have been able, to date, to produce solid results in wage determination at the European level, the coordination of collective bargaining across borders became even more pressing for trade union.

27European integration indeed provides trade unions with a new space for devising novel policies of cooperation at the regional, sectoral and European levels. By coordinating and harmonizing their strategies at these multiple levels, trade unions can define common bargaining positions and objectives and establish a common agenda to resist the downward pressures on national bargaining systems, wages and working conditions (Traxler et al. 2008: 222). For this purpose, many European industry federations have already begun to set up committees and working groups to develop common strategies on bargaining policy, accumulate information on the collective bargaining experiences of other nations in their sectors, and introduce communication and monitoring systems to share and evaluate progress. One such example is the European Metalworkers Federation’s (EMF) initiatives in the early 1990s to develop a strategy between German and Austrian trade unions involving a system of information exchange, followed by the adoption of common minimum standards on working hours and vocational training. Following this cooperation, the EMF drew up a set of minimum standards to be included in the agreements with European employers during the implementation of EWCs. The EMF also introduced a ‘European coordination rule’, according to which the affiliated unions in all EU countries would target a wage policy of offsetting the rate of inflation and ensuring that workers’ incomes retain a balanced participation in productivity gains. (Sisson et al. 2002: 10-11). Other European industry federations organized in such sectors as textiles, mining, chemical, energy, and finance also began experimenting with harmonizing their national negotiation strategies.

28Whether the coordination of national collective bargaining policies by trade unions will transform itself into a robust EU-level collective bargaining mechanism is one of the most important questions to be explored in the coming years. On the one hand, the integration of markets might give rise to further fragmented, company-specific bargaining arrangements at the transnational level, which, in the last analysis, would cause the the existing national systems to deteriorate and reverse the achievements national unions have won after years of struggle (Crouch 2000; Martin 1999). On the other hand, the positive spillover effects of European integration might lead to a multi-level regulatory framework that includes a European dimension for collective bargaining through the creation of bargaining networks and the coordination of wage bargaining by trade unions and union federations at the European level (Traxler 2003; Sisson & Marginson 2005). While it is still too early to evaluate the outcome of the coordination of collective bargaining strategies, regional integration in the EU is still important for the new prospects and venues it offers to unions to develop fresh methods of transnational organization and cooperation.

European Trade Union Confederation

30Until the mid 1990s, the ETUC’s main policy was focusing on the expansion of the European Social Dialogue, and collective bargaining occupied a very limited place in this endeavor: there were no particular committees or working groups specifically and exclusively working on this issue. This has changed recently, as Schulten indicates (2003: 128), due to the fact that the ETUC became increasingly influenced by other European trade union organizations, and among them especially by the European Industry Federations (EIFs), for whom the fundamental issue had always been collective bargaining. Accordingly, the ETUC began to synchronize the strategies of national trade unions in order to promote EU-level action by adopting resolutions and publishing guidelines for the coordination of collective bargaining, which emphasized, among other things, that nominal wage increases should exceed inflation and be adjusted according to productivity increases (ETUC 2009b). These demands were addressed and met – if only partially – in recent employment strategies crafted by the EU Commission.

31The ETUC regularly organizes demonstrations on the occasion of EU summits or important debates in the European Parliament. One of the biggest demonstrations took place when the services directive (or, the Bolkestein directive) was being discussed in the Parliament in 2006. The ETUC coordinated protest movements with the participation of tens of thousands of people in different parts of Europe. More importantly, ETUC could frame the common interests of trade unions from different member countries, including those of the unions of the then newly-admitted Central and East European countries, which regarded the European level trade union structure as a stronger mechanism to represent their interests at the national and EU levels (Gajewska 2008: 112-113).

32There have always been concerns and criticisms regarding the ETUC’s vision to become a part of a neo-corporatist structure through embracing the idea of Social Dialogue and “social market economy”. Critics maintained that the ETUC was heavily reliant on the Commission’s patronage, which permitted the former a very limited leeway for challenging policies and often ended up undermining the bargaining power of labor by harmonizing the interests of capital and the labor aristocracy (Dolvik & Visser 2001). While these criticisms have some merit, it is still crucial to regard the ETUC as a platform for the organization of labor that transcends traditional national boundaries. The ETUC’s very existence opens up a space for transnationalization of the labor movement in Europe vis-à-vis the transnationalization of capital. By advocating for trade union rights as a part of European industrial relations, pressuring the EU institutions for the inclusion of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into the future Constitution, and demanding high priority for key social objectives such as full employment, the ETUC has become an influential channel for the voices of workers and other popular groups to be heard in EU circles. In that sense, the ETUC stands as a successful case of a “regional response” to economic globalization by gaining a certain level of weight in the political governance of European supranationalism.

33In summary, the discussion in this section demonstrates that the regional integration process in the EU has had positive effects on the European labor movement, first through the institutionalization of new practices and policies that protect and enhance labor rights and working conditions, and second, through the opportunity space it opens for the movement to harmonize, coordinate and transform its strategies to achieve a regional power status vis-à-vis the globalization of capital. In the following section, we will probe into how these dual developments have had a spillover effect on the Turkish labor movement in the course of Turkey’s process of accession to the Union.

II. THE EUROPEAN UNION AND TURKISH LABOR MOVEMENT

34While the European integration process brought about the above-mentioned opportunities as well as challenges for European labor, the enlargement process has had a significant impact on labor movements in candidate countries, including Turkey. On the one hand, since the accession criteria requires these countries to fully adopt the legal body of the EU (acquis communautaire), the candidates have to harmonize their existing labor laws and practices with those of the EU. Accordingly, the new opportunity space that becomes available to European organized labor in the integration process can thus be transposed to candidate countries, where labor often suffers severely from inadequate legislation and poor enforcement – which is particularly true for Turkey. On the other hand, the enlargement process enhances the intensity, extensiveness, rapidity and efficacy of communication channels established between trade unions in candidate countries and their European counterparts. In that sense, the expansion of the European space helps intensify relations between the trade unions of both sides.

35In what follows, I briefly highlight several channels of influence on Turkey gained by EU institutions in the process of EU membership. Following that, I categorize the outcomes of these pressures broadly into two groups: the first group of developments includes the legislative changes to harmonize national laws and regulatory frameworks in line with the acquis, which eventually provide a more favorable environment for Turkish labor to voice its demands. The second group includes new institutional developments, such as the promotion of social dialogue by direct support from the EU Commission, which propel the emergence of new opportunities that Turkish organized labor can capitalize on. Following these remarks, I finally demonstrate the ways in which the accession process helps trade unions in Turkey to improve their solidarity with their European counterparts, and how these strengthened relations invigorate the Turkish labor movement in its effort to broaden labor rights and freedoms.

Pressure from the European Union

Official Channels

Civil Society Initiatives

40In addition to these official channels of pressure on Turkey for improving the labor standards in the country, economic and social civil society actors in the EU also became more active in promoting cooperation with their Turkish counterparts. For this purpose, civil society organizations in the EU began to intensify their relations with their Turkish counterparts through organizing joint workshops and conferences to help the latter enhance their capacity to adapt and contribute to European social dialogue mechanisms and overcome the bottlenecks in Turkey regarding labor issues. These initiatives could sometimes bear fruit through the formation of new non-governmental institutional channels.

Financial Support from the EU

Effects of the Pressure

National Action Programs, Legislative Changes, and Other Projects

46Several legislative changes took place since Turkey was recognized as a candidate for membership. In this regard, the adoption of a new law that regulated the issues of unionization of civil servants (No. 4688) and of the law on the Establishment and Functioning of the Economic and Social Council (No. 4641) in 2001, as well as the enactment of a new Labor Law (No. 4857) in 2003, should be mentioned. In addition, numerous laws and bylaws came into force to bring the existing legislation in line with the EU directives, especially in the fields of labor law (including new regulations on annual paid leave, working times, the Wage Guarantee Fund to protect employees in cases of bankruptcy, child and adolescent labor, the obligations of employers to inform and consult employees, part-time employment, fixed-term contracts), occupational health and safety, combating discrimination, and equal opportunities for men and women (MoLSS, n.d.). Turkey also promised to take steps in the fields of employment policy, the European Social Fund, social inclusion, social protection, reducing the scope of informal economy and undeclared work, prevention of child labor, and parental leave, as these issues were often mentioned in the Regular Reports (NP 2008).

47Other than these legislative changes, several projects have been initiated to meet the main goals of the European Employment Strategy, which include women’s participation in the labor market, employment of young people, enhanced investment in human capital, raising employment rates at all levels of education, and ensuring better functioning and coordination between labor market mechanisms and social protection institutions to facilitate the employability and social integration of disadvantaged persons. One important endeavor in this regard is the preparation of a Joint Assessment Paper of Employment Policy Priorities (JAP). Since 2003, Turkish authorities have been working on drafting JAP, which is expected to provide a general picture of the employment situation in Turkey and highlight challenges and priorities to guide employment and labor market reforms. One of the key priorities addressed in the JAP is to ensure that wage developments, the wage formation system and tax-benefit systems are employment-friendly. Moreover, in line with the European Employment Strategy, the employment policy in Turkey is geared towards promoting a more proactive and preventive approach to employment in order to reinforce social cohesion and inclusion, promote equal opportunities, modernize labor markets, and ensure the availability of resources for human capital investment and social infrastructure (Kintzele 2003).

Social Dialogue

48In addition to above-mentioned developments, the government took several steps to enhance social dialogue between the government, employers, workers and other civil society organizations.

52While the EU regarded the re-establishment of the ESC favorably as a useful forum for consulting social actors to discuss economic and social policy, it also emphasized the fact that the Council did not form an adequate basis for an autonomous tripartite social dialogue. In successive Progress Reports since 2001, the Commission called for more amendments in the law in order to create a more efficacious venue for consultation of employers and trade unions organizations, especially on labor issues. It was clear in these reports, as well as other official documents, that the development of free and genuine social dialogue was deemed by the EU a necessary step for Turkey to broaden the scope of trade union rights and freedoms, especially to eliminate restrictive provisions relating to the right to strike and to collective bargaining. Moreover, the Commission emphasized the importance of developing and strengthening bipartite social dialogue (especially in the private sector), and underscored the necessity of enhancing the social partners’ capacity to assume the roles they would play in the future at EU level. For this purpose, the Progress Reports urged the private sector, public authorities and social partners to show their commitments to social dialogue and take necessary measures to remove obstacles (EC 2003: 89; EC 2004: 112).

53In order to address these criticisms, at the March 2005 meeting of the ESC there was a renewed effort to address the structural deficiencies of the organization. ESC members reached a consensus on drafting a new founding statute for the organization which aimed to reduce the weight of the government while social groups – not necessarily limited to the representatives of workers and employers – could find more venues to voice their demands. Moreover, it was agreed that the Council met at least four times a year, and that representatives of each member social organization in the ESC would become the chair and vice-chair in rotation. This way, it was aimed that the ESC would assume a more constructive role in establishing and strengthening social dialogue (Koray & Çelik 2007: 402-405). Yet, at the time of writing, this draft legislation is still pending.

55All in all, important steps have been taken by the government as a response to the mounting pressure from the EU for labor rights and freedoms in Turkey. Undoubtedly, these developments were the aspirations of organized labor in Turkey for decades. At this critical juncture, these aspirations overlapped with the requirements of EU membership. I will discuss the possible implications of these developments in the final section of this paper, yet at this point it is necessary to underline that the introduction of legal changes and institutionalization of practices such as the social dialogue have begun to change the ways through which state-labor-capital relations take place. While new laws and regulations create a new legal environment in which workers can enjoy new rights and protections, they also find themselves in a more favorable situation to more powerfully – and effectively – voice their demands. In the following section, we will see how the EU process helps Turkish trade unions realize this potential not only through pressing for change in the legal and institutional environment, but also through making available new communication and solidarity channels with the European labor movement.

A New Life for the Labor Movement in Turkey

New Opportunities

Strengthening Solidarity with the European Labor Movement

62All in all, trade unions and confederations in Turkey began to enjoy significantly enhanced union activity and robust cooperation with the European labor movement in the process of accession to the EU. At all levels – union, federation, confederation – the Turkish labor movement could establish new channels of solidarity with organized labor in the EU member states, especially as the Turkish economy became more enmeshed with the European regional economy in the last two decades and the labor conditions in Turkey began to be a matter of concern for European labor. In this regard, the membership process and intensified relations with the EU opened up new possibilities for organized labor in Turkey, which gave the latter novel channels to express its demands at an international platform and use this platform to pressure the Turkish government to take the necessary steps to improve working conditions, union rights and other collective freedoms.

DISCUSSION

63This paper aimed to highlight new developments with regard to employment, working conditions, and the implementation of workers’ collective rights and freedoms in the EU, and focused on Turkey’s membership process to illustrate possible positive implications of these developments on candidate countries. It did not, however, attempt to survey the ever-growing literature which regards social policy as a “stepchild” of European integration and argues that it is currently losing its importance as a policy priority in the EU. Nor did the paper problematize the issue of whether the emerging neo-corporatist structure in Europe, which embraces “social dialogue” as its primary vehicle for achieving the “Social Europe” ideal, indeed pacifies the labor movement and takes away its previous achievements in regards to rights, freedoms and bargaining power.

64These skeptical assessments echo some of the developments in Turkey, too. For instance, although legal changes in the field of labor have clearly improved working conditions and expanded the sphere of rights of workers individually (in areas such as occupational health, safety, information and consultation, unemployment insurance schemes, etc.), it is still too early to evaluate these legal changes and social dialogue projects in terms of their impact on wage levels, union membership, and other collective rights. The fact that it is hard to come up with solid evidence as to whether these unions have found new bargaining power through their “dialogues” feeds suspicions about the usefulness of importing EU laws and practices into the domain of Turkish labor.

65Along similar lines, the observation that the overwhelming majority of social dialogue projects supported by EU grants have been undertaken by the government-friendly HAK-İŞ confederation and its member unions also provokes criticism of the EU process. HAK-İŞ’s position is not surprising and can partly be explained by the fact that, both of them being moderate Islamists, the organic ties between the ruling AKP government and HAK-İŞ confederation contribute to the calm nature of current industrial relations in Turkey. In accordance with the transformation of the Islamist movement in Turkey (from a position radically rejecting modernization and Europeanization as the source of all evil to the Islamic community, to embracing these processes as a strong impetus for human rights, freedom of thought and expression, and the institutionalization of democratic values in Turkey), HAK-İŞ, too, has become a strong supporter of the EU, and saw no harm in benefiting from newly available opportunities from the EU side. On the other side of the coin, since its foundation, HAK-İŞ has adopted a particular view on worker-employer relationship which emphasized “cooperation” and “common interests” rather than “conflict” (Kilic 2005). This stance resonated well with the emphasis by the EU on “social dialogue”, although HAK-İŞ has often preferred to adhere to the most “domesticated” interpretation of social dialogue in its encounters with the government and employers. In the face of these developments, many observers – understandably – raised their eyebrows to the HAK-İŞ’s enthusiasm in embracing social dialogue mechanisms and receiving the lion’s share of EU grants disbursed through government mechanisms, and questioned the overall effectiveness of the EU process on the Turkish labor movement as a whole.

66Although these observations and assessments do offer valuable – and sometimes accurate – insights about the complicated course of the Europeanization of industrial relations and its impact on the Turkish labor movement, they do not necessarily contradict the picture depicted in this article. In other words, in those countries such as Turkey, where the labor movement considerably suffers from the inability to defend workers’ rights and freedoms, the prospect of EU membership offers new venues and instruments to strengthen the position of labor vis-à-vis the strong state and globalized capital. True, the power of unions depends on many other variables, but one can extrapolate from the experiences of European trade unions that the availability of new institutional channels and institutionalization of practices transcend industrial relations as we know them and opens up a new space for a continuous struggle in which unions can fight for workers’ interests. While it is the responsibility of unions to devise new methods and strategies, the new spaces and instruments available to them are also important in themselves.

68One should, of course, be cautious not to suggest that these favorable developments observed in the candidate countries are the natural outcome of the EU accession process, and that they would have inevitably come about no matter how the process had unfolded. True, the prospect of membership and the accession process make new options available for organized labor to make its voice heard and to struggle for its demands. Yet, it is only when trade unions and confederations vigorously embrace these newly available institutions, legal schemes, and practices that they can formulate novel strategies of struggle and pressure governments and employers for the improvement of labor conditions. In this regard, the EU membership process is no silver bullet that is going to solve all the problems workers face, but it only provides the labor movements of candidate countries a new site with novel tools and strategy options through which they can claim their rights. If utilized wisely, such an interaction between the national and supranational levels of organized labor may contribute to the restoring of the legitimacy, credibility and strength of trade unions as societal actors in Turkey, and can compensate for their loss by reinvigorating their political power through supranational connections.