Transnational labour solidarity commitment to cooperation within the european trade union movement

The book examines the integration of the European trade union movementand explores the prospects for European or transnational solidarity amongworkers.Contrary to much existing research

The book examines the integration of the European trade union movementand explores the prospects for European or transnational solidarity amongworkers.

Contrary to much existing research and despite national differences, Gajewskaexamines how trade unions cooperate and the forms in which this coopera-tion takes place Drawing on four case studies illustrating experiences ofPolish, German, British, Latvian and Swedish trade unions in various sectorsand workers’ representatives at a multinational company, this book investi-gates the conditions under which trade unions and workers formulate theirinterests in non-national/regional terms, and analyzes the character, limits andpotentials of solidarity in a transnational context

Seeking to generate a new theory of European integration of labour and tocontribute to sociological approaches on the European integration and Eur-opeanization of society, this book will be of interest to students and scholars

of European politics, European integration, labour/industrial relations, tradeunionism and sociology

Katarzyna Gajewska is currently a postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centerfor Study of Democracy (ZDEMO) at Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Ger-many, having completed her PhD at the University of Bremen Her articleshave been published in Comparative European Politics, European Journal ofIndustrial Relations, and Industrial Relations Journal

1 Russian Messianism

Third Rome, revolution,

Communism and after

Peter J.S Duncan

2 European Integration and the

Postmodern Condition

Governance, democracy, identity

Peter van Ham

3 Nationalism in Italian Politics

The stories of the Northern

League, 1980–2000

Damian Tambini

4 International Intervention in the

Balkans since 1995

Edited by Peter Siani-Davies

5 Widening the European Union

The politics of institutional

change and reform

Edited by Bernard Steunenberg

6 Institutional Challenges in the

European Union

Edited by Madeleine Hosli,

Adrian van Deemen and

Mika Widgrén

7 Europe Unbound

Enlarging and reshaping the

boundaries of the European

Union

Edited by Jan Zielonka

8 Ethnic Cleansing in the BalkansNationalism and the destruction

of traditionCathie Carmichael

9 Democracy and Enlargement inPost-Communist EuropeThe democratisation of thegeneral public infifteen Centraland Eastern European countries,

1991–98Christian W Haerpfer

10 Private Sector Involvement inthe Euro

The power of ideasStefan Collignon andDaniela Schwarzer

11 Europe

A Nietzschean perspectiveStefan Elbe

12 European Union and E-VotingAddressing the EuropeanParliament’s internet votingchallenge

Edited by Alexander H Trechseland Fernando Mendez

13 European Union CouncilPresidencies

A comparative perspectiveEdited by Ole Elgström

Bengt Jacobsson, Per Lægreid

and Ove K Pedersen

18 European Union Enlargement

20 Gendering Spanish Democracy

Monica Threlfall, Christine

Cousins and Celia Valiente

21 European Union Negotiations

Processes, networks and

Edited by Richard Robyn

Discourse, governmentality andEuropean integration

William Walters andJens Henrik Haahr

25 Territory and TerrorConflicting nationalisms in theBasque country

Jan Mansvelt Beck

26 Multilateralism, German ForeignPolicy and Central EuropeClaus Hofhansel

27 Popular Protest in East GermanyGareth Dale

28 Germany’s Foreign Policy TowardsPoland and the Czech RepublicOstpolitik revisited

Karl Cordell and Stefan Wolff

29 KosovoThe politics of identity and spaceDenisa Kostovicova

30 The Politics of European UnionEnlargement

Theoretical approachesEdited by Frank Schimmelfennigand Ulrich Sedelmeier

31 Europeanizing SocialDemocracy?

The rise of the party ofEuropean socialistsSimon Lightfoot

32 Conflict and Change in EUBudgetary Politics

Johannes Lindner

33 Gibraltar, Identity and EmpireE.G Archer

34 Governance StoriesMark Bevir and R.A.W Rhodes

1991 until the present

Carole Hodge

36 The Eastern Enlargement of the

European Union

John O’Brennan

37 Values and Principles in

European Union Foreign Policy

Edited by Sonia Lucarelli and

Ian Manners

38 European Union and the Making

of a Wider Northern Europe

Pami Aalto

39 Democracy in the European Union

Towards the emergence of a

public sphere

Edited by Liana Giorgi, Ingmar

Von Homeyer and Wayne Parsons

40 European Union Peacebuilding

and Policing

Michael Merlingen with

Rasa Ostrauskaite

41 The Conservative Party and

European Integration since 1945

At the heart of Europe?

N.J Crowson

42 E-Government in Europe

Re-booting the state

Edited by Paul G Nixon and

Vassiliki N Koutrakou

43 EU Foreign and Interior Policies

Cross-pillar politics and the

social construction of sovereignty

Stephan Stetter

44 Policy Transfer in European

Union Governance

Regulating the utilities

Simon Bulmer, David Dolowitz,

Peter Humphreys and

Stephen Padgett

Political PartiesPower and organizationaladaptation

Edited by Thomas Poguntke,Nicholas Aylott, ElisabethCarter, Robert Ladrech andKurt Richard Luther

46 Citizenship in Nordic WelfareStates

Dynamics of choice, duties andparticipation in a changing EuropeEdited by Bjørn Hvinden andHåkan Johansson

47 National Parliaments within theEnlarged European UnionFrom victims of integration tocompetitive actors?

Edited by John O’Brennan andTapio Raunio

48 Britain, Ireland and NorthernIreland since 1980

The totality of relationshipsEamonn O’Kane

49 The EU and the EuropeanSecurity Strategy

Forging a global EuropeEdited by Sven Biscop andJan Joel Andersson

50 European Security and DefencePolicy

An implementation perspectiveEdited by Michael Merlingen andRasa Ostrauskaite.

51 Women and British Party PoliticsDescriptive, substantive andsymbolic representationSarah Childs

52 The Selection of Ministers inEurope

Hiring andfiringEdited by Keith Dowding andPatrick Dumont

Europe’s new foreign policy

Katarzyna Gajewska

Transnational Labour Solidarity

Mechanisms of commitment to cooperation within the European trade union movement

Katarzyna Gajewska

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada

by Routledge

270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2009 Katarzyna Gajewska

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

A catalog record for this book has been requested

ISBN 978-0-415-48098-7 (hbk)

ISBN 978-0-203-87835-4 (ebk)

This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2009.

To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s

collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.

ISBN 0-203-87835-3 Master e-book ISBN

List of illustrations xii

2 Analytical categories in conceptualizing solidaristic behaviour 30

4 The vertical dimension of Europeanization of the trade union

5 Interaction and action as transformational mechanisms 106

6 Framing solidarity: interests, identification and reciprocity 133

7 Situational mechanisms: market integration and trade unions 163

4 Framing of the Service Directive by the OPZZ 99

5 Framing of the Service Directive by NSZZ Solidarnos´c´ 100

Table

This book could not have been written without the willingness of my viewees I am very grateful for the time and trust they gave me Working onthe fourth case study required particular generosity of the participants, intime, trust and logistics This manuscript is based on PhD thesis I have written

inter-at the University of Bremen I would like to thank for the generous funding bythe Volkswagen Foundation (distributed by Graduate School of Social Sciences)which gave me optimal conditions for pursuing research

I was fortunate to receive an excellent education at European UniversityViadrina in Frankfurt (Oder) and at the Central European University in Buda-pest I creatively thrived on this later on Especially meeting Jan Erk (LeidenUniversity, CEU at that time) on my academic way encouraged me andequipped with self-confidence to get ahead

I owe special thanks to my first supervisor, Prof Dr Ulrike Liebert whocontributed to the turning points in the process of writing Cumulative super-vision provided by Professor Liebert, Professor John Kelly and Dr MichaelFichter turned out to be very productive I profited a lot from each perspec-tive and consultations gave my writing a considerable push Additionally, theproject was commented by other scholars like Bo Strath, Richard Hyman,and Phillippe Schmitter Especially the workshops in the frame of EuropeanSolidarities project organized by Bo Strath helped me to re-consider my argu-ment Furthermore, I had a lot of opportunities to get feedback from mycolleagues and scholars in Bremen That being said, I am the one to be blamedfor all the imperfections

I would like to mention the hospitality of Gosia and Asaf in England andhelp by Dace Nanne Zwagerman accompanied me through part of the writ-ing process providing emotional support, assistance and distraction, andmasterly handling my whimsical nature Meanwhile, he should be awarded aMaster in Patience

I dedicate this book to my grandmother, Teresa Róz.ankowska

Berlin, July 2008

The publishers would like to acknowledge previously published materialand to thank the following for permission to reprint their material:

Cambridge University Press for kind permission to reprint afigure (Figure 1)adapted from Hedström, P and Swedberg, R (1998)‘Social mechanisms: anintroductory essay’, in P Hedström and R Swedberg (eds) Social Mechanisms:

an Analytical Approach to Social Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, pp 1–31

Gajewska, K (2008)‘The emergence of a European Labour protest ment?’ http://online.sagepub.com The final, definitive version of this paperhas been published in European Journal of Industrial Relations 14 (1) by SagePublications Ltd, all rights reserved © 2008

move-Gajewska, K (2008) ‘Polish trade unions for a European cause: case ofService Directive’, in J Kusznir and H Pleines (eds) Trade Unions from Post-Socialist Member States in EU Governance, Stuttgart: Ibidem, pp 89–104.P.I.E Peter Lang for kind permission to reprint material from Gajewska,

K (2007)‘Common Market – Common Labour Interests?’ in L Magnussonand B Stråth (eds) European Solidarities Tensions and Contentions of aConcept, Brussels: P.I.E Peter Lang, pp 217–33 P.I.E Peter Lang © 2007

Amicus Amicus the union

ATTAC Association pour la taxation des transactions pour l’aide

aux citoyens (Association for the Taxation of FinancialTransactions for the Aid of Citizens)

Budowlani Zwia˛zek Zawodowy ‘Budowlani’ (Polish Construction

Trade Union)BWI Building and Wood Workers’ International

Byggnads Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet (Swedish Building

Workers’ Union)CDU Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (Christian

Democratic Union of Germany)CEE Central and Eastern Europe

DGB Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund (German Trade Union

Confederation)ECJ European Court of Justice

EEF European Employee Forum (EWC at GM)

EFBWW European Federation of Building and Wood WorkersEFFAT European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism

Trade UnionsEIF(s) European Industry Federation(s)

EMCEF European Mine, Chemical and Energy Workers’

FederationEMF European Metalworkers’ Federation

EPP-ED Group of the European People’s Party (Christian

Democrats) and European Democrats in the EuropeanParliament

ETUC European Trade Union Confederation

ETUCE European Trade Union Committee for Education

EWC(s) European Works Council(s)

GM General Motors

GMB Britain’s General Union

GoG Gegenwehr ohne Grenzen, parteiunabhängige Gruppe bei

GM/Opel-Bochum (Defence without Limits, aparty-neutral group at GM/Opel Bochum plant)Greens-EFA Greens– the European Free Alliance in the European

ParliamentGUE/NGL Group of the European United Left– Nordic Green

LeftICFTU International Confederation of Free Trade UnionsIFBWW International Federation of Building and Wood Workers

IF Metall Industrifacket Metall (Swedish Metal Workers’ Trade

Union)

IG BAU Industriegewerkschaft Bauen-Agrar-Umwelt (German

Union for Construction, Agriculture and Environment)

IG Metall Industriegewerkschaft Metall (German Metalworkers’

Union)IND/DEM Independence/Democracy Group in the European

ParliamentITUC Interregional Trade Union Council

LBAS Latvijas Brı-vo arodbiedrı-bu savienı-ba (Free Trade Union

Confederation of Latvia)LCA Latvijas Celtnieku arodbiedrı-ba (Latvian Construction

Workers’ Trade Union)

LO Landsorganisationen i Sverige (Swedish Trade Union

Confederation)MEP(s) Member(s) of European Parliament

MNC(s) Multinational corporation(s)

NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement

NFBWW Nordic Federation of Building and Wood WorkersNPD Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (National

Democratic Party of Germany)NSZZ Solidarnos´c´ Niezalez.ny Samorza˛dny Zwia˛zek Zawodowy ‘Solidarnos´c´’

(Independent and Self-Governing Trade UnionSolidarnos´c´)

OPZZ Ogólnopolskie Porozumienie Zwia˛zków Zawodowych

(All Poland Alliance of Trade Unions)PAP Polska Agencja Prasowa (Polish Press Agency)

PES Party of European Socialists

SEIU Service Employees International Union

SPD Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (Social

Democratic Party of Germany)T&G Transport and General Workers Union

UCATT Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians

UEN Union for Europe of the Nations Group

UNICE Union des Conféderations de l’Industrie et des

Employeurs d’Europe (Union of Industrial andEmployers’ Confederations of Europe)

UNISON The Public Service Union

ver.di Vereinte Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft (German United

Services Union)ZNP Zwia˛zek Nauczycielstwa Polskiego (Polish Teachers’

Union)ZZG Zwia˛zek Zawodowy Górników w Polsce (Polish Miners’

Union)

The current state of debate on the integration of the European trade unionmovement stresses that differences and competition pressure hinder its devel-opment Workers from different countries, especially the high and low stan-dard countries, have been placed into interest conflicts and competitiverelations due to outsourcing, global sourcing, contracting and subcontracting(Hoffmann 2002: 128; Hudson 1999: 57) The establishment of Economic andMonetary Union (EMU) prompted trade unions into competition and nationalstrategies (Martin and Ross 2001a: 146) Competitive pressure is imposed onworkers by the strategy of management in multinational companies to play

off workers from different plants against each other (Galgóczi et al 2005;Hancké 2000; Tuckman and Whittal 2002; Wills 2001) Domestic workingstandards are undermined within the construction sector with the help offoreign workers (Kahmann 2006) On the other hand, solidarity among Eur-opean workers is not predicted in the discussion on the future of the integra-tion of European labour Inner cleavages based on different national interestsare a dominant diagnosis in the debate on the future of the integration ofEuropean workers (Ebbinghaus and Visser 1996: 5; Koch-Baumgarten 1999;Martin and Ross 2001ab; Meardi 2002; Streeck 1998, 1999; Visser 1998).The different interests of workers from rich and poor countries and structures

of trade unionism have been indicated as hindering labour interest representation

at the European level since the early stages (Streeck and Schmitter 1991:139f.; Visser and Ebbinghaus 1994: 222; Marks and McAdam 1996; Turner1996) Overcoming of this cleavage in interests is assumed to foster capacityfor action at the EU level and the defence of labour standards and socialpolicy (Dølvik 1997: 28; Ebbinghaus and Visser 1996: 1; Schulten 2004) Due

to the Eastern enlargement in 2004, the cleavages are supposed to becomeeven deeper (Meardi 2002) and the enlarged market poses new challenges forthe trade unions (Kvist 2004; Marginson and Taxler 2005; Vaughan-Whitehead2003; Visser and Ebbinghaus 1994: 207) Therefore, the new member statesshould also be included in the scope of analysis I would like to re-examinethe‘divide’ within European trade unionism that is assumed by other scholars.Whereas the scholars who concentrate on labour and trade unions point to

a cleavage and lack of interest in action at the European level, a study coming

from the tradition of social movement research presents a strikingly differentpicture As an overview of the events based on online sources indicates (Gajewska2008b: 111, Tab 1), the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) mobi-lized tens of thousands of trade unionists in different places to call for Eur-opean workers’ rights each year between 2000 and 2006 This contradictionshould be a starting point in re-considering previous research and assump-tions that conclude a lack of solidarity within the European trade unionmovement.

Although contributions in thefield of cooperation have until now stressed alack of solidarity this is not the only scenario imaginable Alternative argu-ments can be derived, both from theories on market integration as well as fromempirical examples– as my case studies will illustrate Most approaches ana-lyzing the prospects and practice of European labour integration stress theinstitutional differences and political economic factors that hinder cooperation.They are right in theirfindings: the structural conditions inevitably play a role intrade union cooperation However, the same structural factor– namely marketintegration– is predicted either to lead workers towards competition (Streeck1999), or to bring about a strengthening of union ties1(Burgoon and Jacoby2004: 854 summarize the argument of Cox 1972) Lloyd Ulman (1975) arguesthat market processes such as integration, increased capital mobility and thecompetitive pressure imposed on labour impel trade unions to bargain acrossbroader geographical scope (summarized by Ebbinghaus and Visser 1996: 8).The latter scenario can also be derived from Polányi’s (1957[1944]) concept ofdouble movement The work of Polányi is an encompassing theory of therelation between market expansion and society It conceptualizes both marketformation as well as the societal reaction to it Although it refers to the for-mation of national markets, I see a possible theoretical contribution in applyinghis concepts to regional transnational market integration Consistent with thistheory, I also predict cooperation as a reaction to market integration Thisargument contrasts with the majority of conceptualizations on the topic.One should re-consider the arguments against transnational solidarity pre-sented in prior contributions The existing literature points to contradictinginterests that hinder cooperation, especially between rich and poor countries.Other obstacles are divergent institutional legacies and path-dependencies, whichhave an impact on identities and preferences Furthermore, a vertical dividewithin the trade unions is assumed: the lower levels of trade union structurebeing less internationally oriented than the top leadership and the Europeantrade union organizations This is supposed to inhibit a truly internationalengagement

The positive examples of transnational solidarity I analyze in this book reflectthe differences among the trade unions However, they do not confirm theassumption that differences necessarily preclude cooperation and solidarity Theexample of mobilization against the Service Directive in 2006, where the Easternand Western trade unions were presumed to have different interests, shows thatthe interests cannot be derived from calculus on economic competitiveness

(first case) The example of cooperation among plants’ representatives trates that although the plants might engage in competition, workers’ repre-sentatives can change their strategy over time and start to cooperate (fourthcase) A conflict over exploited Latvian workers in Sweden, referred to below

illus-as the Laval cillus-ase, revealed that the institutional framework influences thepreferences in transnational cooperation but also that the actors learn toestablish new ways and informal institutions in transnational cooperation(third case) The history of conflict between German and Polish trade unionsalso shows that the relations can change and that the lower level of tradeunion structures can actually be more internationalist than its leadership(second case) I consider my examples to be critical cases and will argue thatthey reveal tendencies that will spread

Contrary to the usual assumptions, trade unions – despite their differences –are sometimes ready to cooperate and mobilize I would like to explore thisoption andfind out what the bases of solidarity are in the transnational con-text and competition As solidarity might not necessarily be derived from theinterests based on the institutional and economic factors according to politicaleconomy and institutional approaches (Streeck 1999; Visser and Ebbinghaus1994), I see a need for undertaking an explorative analysis of the interests andmotivations in cases where workers actually decide to cooperate I will inves-tigate the conditions under which trade unions and workers formulate theirinterests in non-national/regional terms and analyze character, limits andpotentials of solidarity Consistent with this aim, I will focus also on the rela-tions between represented and representatives in the vertical dimension of thetrade union movement to assess its impact on transnational solidarity Thediscrepancy between the theories and practice of transnational cooperationbrings me to formulate the following research questions that will be addressed

by this study:

1 Considering the assumption of other scholars that the trade unions from

different countries have contradicting interests and that this precludescooperation, one should ask whether the trade unions do indeed have dif-ferent interests, or, if this should be true, under what conditions theirinterests change or coalesce Another question is whether the differinginterests really do hinder cooperation

2 The assumption that the institutional legacies or path dependencies hindercooperation raises doubts in the backdrop of my examples I will investi-gate whether the diverging institutional and structural contexts really dopreclude cooperation and where they do not constitute an obstacle Fur-thermore, the question about change despite the legacies arises in thecontext of this argument

3 The vertical divide within trade unions is rather assessed by the scholarsthan confirmed by research There is indeed some evidence that the work-ers tend towards exclusionist competitive thinking against workers fromother countries However, it has not been investigated whether the vertical

divide, assuming that it exists at all, has an impact on their internationalengagement and in what way How do the trade unions and their organi-zational structures deal with the vertical dimension of their decisionmaking in thefield of international issues?

4 Having identified that the assumptions about factors supposed to precludecooperation might not be confirmed in the reality of cooperation, I do notwant to limit my contribution to disconfirming the other theories; I alsoinvestigate what actually drives cooperation I am interested in the mechan-isms behind solidarity or lack of cooperation I would like to re-examinethe link between the structural level and action The literature lists differ-ences rather than analyzing how and why solidarity develops This book isgoing to re-examine the ongoing assumptions and predictions and investigatethe process of change towards solidarity and the motivation for solidaristicbehaviour

My argument is that the structural factors do matter for the trade unions indecision making on solidarity, but also that they cannot be a sole base forpredictions on the behaviour and interests of the actors involved, such as tradeunions The choices are influenced by other mechanisms than simply assessingthe structural factors The notion of interest should be re-considered critically.Interests cannot be treated as givens;first they have to be defined This pre-mise implies that my approach is not a structural one: neither cooperation norcompetition can be predicted from the economic structures the workers areembedded in I argue that the structural factors are interlinked with mechanisms

at the level of cognition and relations among trade unions when generatingcertain behaviour We can learn much about the mobilization and influencepotential at the European Union (EU) level, and indirectly European inte-gration, by investigating labour’s interest formulation process in situations wherethe interests derived from a political economy approach are supposed to conflict

The outline of the book

The following seven chapters will elaborate on the above-stated researchobjectives using four cases of transnational solidarity as an empirical basis.The first chapter will present the arguments against transnational solidaritycontained in the literature on the topic It will also point to limitations ofpresent Europeanization theories in explaining the positive outcomes I willargue for a research perspective conceptualizing solidarity as action and notinstitutional changes, which is more context sensitive than other assessments.The case study method will be further outlined as a suitable tool for answer-ing my set of questions and case selection The case selection corresponds tothe arguments presented in the literature Finally, the generalizability of mystudy and methods will be described

The second chapter will introduce analytical categories guiding the analysis

of empirical material The theoretical groundings of the book will be introduced,

focusing on the rational choice theory and mechanisms approach As the unit

of analysis is solidarity defined as action, I will ask what kind of mechanismsbrought it about The general frame of macro-micro-macro mechanisms will

be further developed, adapting the conceptual tools of social movement research.Also the theories of solidarity and the grand theory of societal reaction tomarket expansion by Polányi (1957[1944]) will be utilized to conceptualize thesolidaristic behaviour This analytical frame composed of the situational,action formation and transformational mechanisms will guide further analysisand be filled with conceptual and empirical details gained through analysis.This procedure is consistent with the method of analytic narrative, whichcombines model-based and inductive logic of research and presentation offindings (Levi 1997) Furthermore, I will build on the conceptualization ofvertical mobilization to investigate the vertical divide and solutions to it.The third chapter will introduce the four case studies briefly describedabove: 1) participation of Polish trade unions in the European demonstrationagainst the Service Directive; 2) Polish–German trade unions’ relations andthe change over time; 3) the Laval case– a conflict involving Latvian workersand Swedish trade unions with the focus on change of the relations betweenthe Latvian and Swedish trade unions; 4) cooperation among workers’ repre-sentatives from plants belonging to a multinational company in a situation ofcompetition I will show the choices of trade unions in the context of thealternative framing of the situation I will also trace change in the latter case.This will illustrate that transnational solidarity is not an obvious result.The fourth chapter starts with an analysis of the cases with the focus onanalytically relevant aspects In this chapter, the vertical dimension of coop-eration is analyzed, which corresponds to the argument of other scholars whostress a vertical divide on international issues I show both its potentials andlimitations The impact of European-level organizational structures on thecommitment to solidarity is described The limits of vertical coordinationacross the structures of workers’ interest representation with the focus ontransnational solidarity are assessed However, the chapter also shows that theassumed vertical divide where the top level of trade unions is more inter-nationally oriented can be the reverse: the internationalization might comefrom below Furthermore, the framing in communication of European issues

to the workforce is analyzed and the potential of bridging the Europeaninterests to the workforce exemplified

The horizontal dimension of solidarity and cooperation is the topic of thefifth chapter It also points to the organizational structures as venues where tradeunions are brought together to interact The role and character of interactiontraced in the empirical analysis differs from previous conceptualizations ofinteraction in the Europeanization theory The importance of differences andthe way the trade unions deal with differences is examined Furthermore, theaction itself as a critical juncture in trade union relations is highlighted, whichleads to a discussion of hypotheses according to which the path-dependenciesnegatively influence the prospects of European solidarity among trade unions

The sixth chapter analyzes the way transnational solidarity is framed Itfocuses on the apparent contradiction between competition and solidarity.The interests pursued by trade unions while engaging in transnational soli-darity are inductively derived The character of identification and possiblecontradictions evolving from‘multi-level’ belonging are described The chap-ter analyzes the perception of reciprocity by the actors Reciprocity is a gen-eral principle that the trade unionists perceive in the social reality Thisprinciple sustains transnational cooperation, which is motivated by reward-seeking Reciprocity is an incentive for cooperation as well as a norm reg-ulating and sanctioning trade union behaviour in the transnational sphere,where binding agreements and institutional measures are weakly developed.The last empirical chapter brings the structural factors back into the ana-lysis It illustrates how the developments in European market integration wereaddressed by the trade unions in terms of transnational cooperation It showsthat the trade unions have changed their attitudes over the years The changecorresponds to the character of stages of market integration The con-ceptualization derived from Polányi (1957[1944]) proves useful for an under-standing of the trajectory of trade union integration The structural changesthat influence decision making of the trade unions are traced in the way theyframed their choices in the field of transnational cooperation The linkbetween the market expansion and transnational solidarity is established.Conclusion will summarize the argument and provide a broader outlook onthe book by contextualizing its findings It also considers a possible con-tribution of the project for European Studies and proposes to look at presentfindings from a different perspective.

The definition of European transnational solidarity and how to measure itwill be elaborated on in this chapter The character of European solidarity isactually a subject of inductive analysis Nevertheless, a basic definition ofsolidarity and its expression needs to be elaborated onfirst I will contrast theunderstanding of solidarity in this study with the implicit assumptions made

by other scholars I will argue in favour of a context-sensitive consideration ofsolidarity in contrast to the national bias contained in other studies Anotherobjective of this chapter is to present how one can generalize on thefindings.The case selection criteria correspond to the theoretical assumptions made byother scholars I will summarize the debate with a focus on the factors thatare supposed to hinder transnational engagement

Thefirst subchapter includes a presentation of the present literature on thecooperation of trade unions within the context of European integration Theobstacles to cooperation have been taken into account for case selection.Furthermore, I will outline the conceptualization of cooperation and inte-gration in Europeanization theories to highlight my own contribution I willpresent my arguments in favour of conceptualizing solidarity as action andrelations between trade unions instead of assessing it based on analysis ofinstitutional or legal measures or survey-like questions on attitudes Then Iwill discuss the appropriateness of the case study method in answering myresearch questions and reveal rationales behind choosing the cases The cor-respondence of my cases to the present literature on trade union cooperationwill be further highlighted Then I will explain the generalizability of thefindings by describing the epistemology, presentation of data and representa-tiveness of cases Finally, a short description of data sources and interviewmethod will be presented

Obstacles for cooperation and limitations of other theories

I will summarize the obstacles for transnational solidarity that are assumed

by other scholars in this subchapter This will contextualize the contribution

of myfindings in the debate Furthermore, the factors hindering cooperationhave been taken into account in case selection to ensure correspondence of

the study to the debate and increase the generalizability of thefindings I will alsodescribe how Europeanization literature would explain the positive examples tohighlight my own contribution in the context of the theories of Europeanization.Cooperation is not predicted in the literature Authors argue for this sce-nario in different ways Three types of argument according to which transna-tional solidarity is not predicted are mostly emphasized: 1) contradictinginterests; 2) institutional–cultural differences and path-dependencies; and 3)vertical divide Structural and institutional differences are indicated to shapethe interests of countries and implicitly workers in the transnational dimen-sion Generally, it is assumed that the integration of European trade unionswas initiated by the European Commission and the differences in cultures,interests and institutional backgrounds was an incentive for the trade unions

to integrate in a limited way (Martin and Ross 2001a) In the last part I willderive from the literature on Europeanization how it would explain positiveexamples The present theories might account for the explanation to a certainextent; but an extension and specification of mechanisms is still lacking in thecontext of trade union solidarity We need to take into account the differentcharacter of this interest group

Contradicting interests

Contradicting interests of the trade unions from rich and poor countries areindicated as an obstacle to cooperation The conflict in the transnationalsphere can be defined by the trade unions in two contradicting ways: as class-

or territory-based interests The latter option is more frequently indicated inthe debate on European labour Streeck (1998, 1999) predicts a re-definition

of conflict in the transnational context due to increased competition pressure

in the area of goods, services, capital and labour markets Since member states

differ in terms of their capitalism regimes and institutional design, potentialharmonization at the EU level will have a different effect on the individualmembers and therefore it is difficult to achieve National or subnational (inlarge countries) communities aim at‘joint competitive and productive success’rather than at protection and redistribution Solidarity is defined as the commonpursuit of productivity and competitiveness Identities and interests are shaped

on the basis of sectoral specialization The communities tend to achieve aninternal homogeneity and cohesion, which is enabled through ‘mechanicalsolidarity’ (Durkheim 1965) This implies cross-class alliances Therefore, Streeckcoins the terms ‘productive’ and ‘competitive’ solidarity This tendency towardsreformulating the traditional notion of solidarity on the part of national orsubnational communities can, however, vary in its intensity between thecountries It still remains an open question to which extent the trade unionsinternalize the competitive pressure and orientate on cross-class coalitions.1

Different interests of national unions are seen as an obstacle in the integration

of labour The trade unions remain oriented towards national economicinterests while acting at the supranational level They are not able to formulate

transnational common interests (Keller 1997) ‘Long-term international darity and opposition is difficult to organize and to maintain in view of rational,self-interested action of each national union’ (ibid: 256) From the perspective

soli-of trade unions from countries with high standards, action at the Europeanlevel does not hold the promise of any advantages against the nationalsystem On the other hand, trade unions coming from low-standard countriesfind the high aim exaggerated and unrealistic (Streeck and Schmitter 1991:140) The single currency forces unions to accept wage and social spendingreductions The regions with stronger unions are predicted to lose competi-tiveness to regions with weaker ones This would lead them to the acceptance

of labour-cost reductions (Martin and Ross 2001b: 70) The problem of tradicting interests seems to be even more acute in the context of Easternenlargement Meardi (2002: 92ff.) analyses the impact on the social partners

con-in the wake of enlargement Western unions are afraid of the effects of ern enlargement and their main concern seems to be free labour movement.Therefore, a conflict between Eastern and Western trade unions will emerge

East-He even prophesizes that there is a prospect for the development of alliancesbetween Western labour and Eastern employers and accordingly betweenEastern labour and Western employers

Institutional diversity and path-dependencies

The different institutional backgrounds of the trade unions and the different

‘cultures’ are supposed to make integration difficult The interests and tutional–cultural differences of trade unions from old and new Easternmember states are predicted to be significant The embedment of trade unions

insti-in national contexts does not only determinsti-ine their economic insti-interests but alsogenerates a framework for their strategy, resources and mobilization potential(Ebbinghaus and Visser 1994: 236; Lillie and Greer 2007; Lillie and MartinezLucio 2004; Timming and Veersma 2007; Wagner 2005)

The institutional embedment in the national context is an obstacle to ment in international affairs The trade unions tend to prefer national solutions

engage-It is argued that the trade unions with sufficient resources for internationalengagement, such as the German or Swedish ones, would be less interested incooperation because of their reliance on their domestic opportunities for influ-ence Those with a weaker position in their national context might be moreinterested in forms of international cooperation but their resources are limited(Ebbinghaus and Visser 1994: 233ff.) This is also confirmed by the empiricalstudy based on interviews on the trade unions’ attitudes towards Europeancooperation (Bieler 2006) One can derive the tactics and constraints of tradeunions with regard to international cooperation from the type of industrialrelations that define their position in the domestic arena and incentives forcooperation.2

Institutional factors do not only influence the incentives for engagement ininternational cooperation but also its quality and possibilities Gollbach (2005)

analyzes the implementation of collective bargaining partnership and nation between Belgium, the Netherlands and Nordrhein-Westfalen in themetalworking sector This study is symptomatic of the problems derived fromthe institutional features of the trade unions Divergent ideological profiles ofthe trade unions are reflected in the way the trade unions see their role in theproductivity enhancement of the company and they perceive the threat ofrelocations to low-wage countries Based on the experience from the collectivebargaining partnership between Belgium, the Netherlands and Nordrhein-Westfalen, he identifies obstacles for the Europeanization of trade unionism.Different ideologies that impact on the relations to the employers and under-standing of the collective bargaining politics allow only a basic consensus andthe interpretation possibilities result in different arrangements (ibid).

coordi-Also problems of cooperation could be expected when the differences in thetrade union orientations and legacies of trade unions are taken into account

A comparative approach to the trade unions identifies different types of nationaltrade unionism, such as business unionism, unions oriented towards nationalsocial dialogue and the radical oppositional type of unions The national dif-ferences are grounded in history and would be difficult to change (Hyman2001) Those different types imply different ways the trade unions might dealwith transnational issues For instance, trade unions oriented towards coop-eration with management might deal differently with international issues thantrade unions with a more oppositional orientation

A difference or divide between East and West has been detected by researchersoccupied with the post-Communist trade unions in the Central Eastern coun-tries Eastern trade unions are described by scholars as being set apart fromthe Western ones due to their Communist legacies The differences are inter-preted beyond their economic interests (Crowley 2004; Meardi 2000; Ost2000).3Nevertheless, NSZZ Solidarnos´c´ underwent a process of change (Ost

2002, 2006) and trade unions at the plant level do not necessarily pursue acompetition strategy (Meardi 2004) The structural factors are stressed overthe cultural legacies and character of the trade union movement (Bohle andGreskovits 2006; Meardi 2006)

Vertical problem

Another argument against transnational solidarity points out that the tradeunion movement achieved a unity from above that is, however, not reflected atthe lower levels of trade union organization Besides the problem of diversitythat can be called horizontal, a vertical‘divide’ is also addressed Supposedly,

it might hinder or influence transnational cooperation On the one hand, therepresentatives of the unions acting in the transnational sphere have to dealwith their different interests and backgrounds among each other On the otherhand, they have to act at the national level and are accountable to the mem-bership of the trade union4 These two dimensions are conceptualized as atwofold internal problem: of horizontal and of vertical integration (Visser and

Ebbinghaus 1994) Even if there is a consensus at the European or nationallevel about cooperation, this is no guarantee that the lower levels will commit

to it in the long run Hyman (2004) argues that ‘[T]his lack of articulationbetween bureaucratic, institutionalised solidarity and a collective sense ofmutuality is one reason why bodies such as the ICFTU and the ETUC pack

so limited a punch’ (ibid: 42).5 Imig and Tarrow (2001: 21) point to a articulation and isolation problem between the EU-based and national inter-est groups My research addresses this argument

dis-Although factors that might contribute to a developing of solidarity havebeen identified,6the bulk of the literature points to the lack of solidarity amongworkers Workers face the same‘multinational corporate employer’ and sharedisappointment with the measures of national governments Cross-nationalcomparative studies have revealed that there is a surprising convergence in theconsciousness of conflict at the workplace (class consciousness defined as a rela-tion) (cp overview by Meardi 2000: 31) Nevertheless, they are still polarized

by the inequalities between the countries, which are still much greater thanthose within the countries (Silver 2003: 8ff.) This might push them towardsdrawing up boundaries on a national basis and cooperating with nationalauthorities rather than forming an international class alliance (ibid: 21ff.)

A tendency towards antagonistic attitudes among workers is confirmed byempirical studies Meardi (2000) compares Polish and Italian workers’ classconsciousness Communist past and legacy caused re-definition of class con-flict and pro-market orientation (ibid: 7) There is evidence of stereotypingand lack of cooperation between the unions (ibid: 163ff.) However, he alsopoints to the role of management in hindering it (ibid: 170) Polish workersperceived a lack of solidarity from the Italian side (ibid: 165) Zeuner et al.(2007, see also Fichter 2008) found an unexpectedly high level of support forright-wing ideology among the members of German trade unions For instance,

30 per cent of trade union members in the sample agreed with the statementthat the foremost task of the trade union is to defend jobs for the Germans(ibid: 40) When the members of the trade unions and non-members are com-pared, the data reveal even more right extremism in the former group Forinstance, 34 per cent of unskilled trade union members had right-wing attitudes

in comparison to 18 per cent of non-members of the same group Skilled bers and members drawn from middle management accounted for a higherlevel of right-wing attitudes, respectively 20 per cent as against 18 per centamong non-members, and 14 per cent as against 7 per cent (Fichter 2008: 71).This tendency might also be a challenge for the trade unions and influenceinternational cooperation I will analyze how the trade unions deal with it.The above summarized arguments and empiricalfindings illustrate that thecooperation and solidarity among the trade unions is far from obvious Thismakes the investigation of the cases of solidarity and change of attitude par-ticularly interesting Seeing the discrepancy between the empirical findingsand the theoretical accounts on lack of solidarity leads to the question whe-ther the trade unions really have different interests and whether interests preclude

mem-solidarity A further question is whether the institutional differences or cies or other divergences derived from the geographic heterogeneity actually doesmake cooperation impossible One should also examine whether the verticaldivide really exists and whether it has an impact on the international engagement

lega-of trade unions The obstacles identified here have been taken into account

in the selection of the cases I have chosen critical cases that correspond tothe above-presented arguments and do not confirm the predicted outcome ofnon-solidarity This should be a starting point in re-considering the presentdebate

Explaining cooperation with Europeanization approaches

Despite the obstacles to cooperation and the prediction of different interests,cooperation is possible and examples of transnational solidarity are docu-mented This leads me to elaborate on another prediction on the development

of solidarity in the context of market integration I will call it transnational orEuropean solidarity, which is opposite to the competitive solidarity in thetransnational context Although the contributions focused on the trade unionsrather stress the lack of solidarity, one can derive more positive scenarios fromthe literature on Europeanization However, the ongoing theories are not able

to explain and do not occupy themselves with trade union solidarity withinthe European context in an encompassing way Therefore, my study should beseen as a contribution to the Europeanization of social groups, taking thespecificity of the labour into account Inductive analysis of the processes willenrich our understanding of transnational solidarity and the prospects for theEuropeanization of labour

Contrary to Imig and Tarrow (2001), I will focus on intra-group relations andintegration and not on the relations between interest groups or social movementsand European institutions in my empirical investigation They can explain whycertain social movements choose specific strategies; however, the internal processwithin the movement is beyond the scope of this analysis.7Although it is valu-able to analyze the trade union movement as an actor acting in the politicalsystem of the European Union, to conclude its unity is over presumptuous, asMartin and Ross’s (2001b) contribution shows Therefore, the inner processeswithin the trade union movement should be investigatedfirst I propose studyingthe European integration of labour beyond the European or national level as it

is often done in a sociological perspective in European studies.8The limits of thetwo major theories: intergovernmentalism and functionalism–institutionalism,which have been adapted to the study of the European integration of labour(see Dølvik 1997: 16 for overview), are reasons for establishing a new analyticalmodel that will guide analysis and generalization of thefindings

Intergovernmentalism would imply the competitive strategy of nationaltrade unions An alternative to this view would be a development of solidarityamong the workers from different countries Haas (1968) predicts that eco-nomic integration will be followed by social integration He views the future

integration of labour at the supranational level as a reaction to the building ofthe common market He believes it to be a natural process, which resemblesthe establishing of interest groups at the national level (ibid: 386ff.) It canexplain why institutional arrangements are created at the supranational level

to represent interests The emergence of solidarities and cooperation is dicted but not conceptualized in his approach One can ask more in-depthwhat exactly brings the trade unions towards more cooperation What kind ofevents or changes bring about more integration on the side of trade unions?The above-summarized studies illustrate that solidarity is not an automaticreaction to the political integration An answer to the question whether otherthan European-level organizational structures, such as bilateral cooperationfor instance, will also develop as a reaction to the political integration is notclear from this conceptualization

pre-Dølvik (1997) conceptualizes Europeanization as‘upstream’ changes in thebehaviour of national and European trade union actors, aimed at influencingdevelopments at the European level (ibid: 9) He focuses also mainly on thenational-level actors acting at the European level The actual interests of thetrade unions cannot be clearly derived from this approach: whether labour isgoing to legitimize the integration project following socialization with the EUelites, as feared by Hyman (2005b) or Gobin (2003), or develop a criticalstance Furthermore, these theories seem to be class-blind They do not reflect

on the class-based differences in which groups represent their interests, aselaborated in the theory on the logic of collective action where capital andlabour are contrasted in this respect It is more difficult for labour to for-mulate common interests or realize them (Offe and Wiesenthal 1980) I willoffer an inductive analysis of what the process of developing solidarity lookslike and what the interests are about

The theories of international relations and European integration conceptualize

on the processes of developing identity and common interests among theactors in transnational settings An assumption of the constructivist approach

is that the norms are converging in the transnational arena due to the vists’ participation in transnational networks (Risse 2004: 161f.) Applying theconstructivist approach, one would expect that participation in the interna-tional institutional structures and informal networks will influence the waythe trade unions formulate their interests The growing convergence in con-structing trade union interests and identity as a result of participating at theEU-level would adduce to the claim of social constructivism.9The questionremains what are the mechanisms behind this change

acti-The institutional account identified the role of collective learning, nalization and persuasion, which lead to a reformulation of interests in aprocess of interaction This has been taken up in the studies on Europeanintegration where the role of deliberation and social construction is stressed(Checkel 2001: 556f.) The role of argumentative communication is crucial forthe outcomes The argumentative communication is a ‘social process ofinteraction that involves changing attitudes about cause and effect in the

inter-absence of overt coercion’ (ibid: 562) However, the social constructivism andinstitutional approaches are too generic on the processes that bring the chan-ges about Checkel (in Checkel and Moravcsik 2001) criticized studies based

on this theoretical tradition because they assume processes from outcomes.Therefore, it is difficult to distinguish them from the attitudes Interaction is one

of the analytical categories I am going to examine I will, however, analyze itsrole from the actors’ point of view and show its different functions

Another argument presented in the literature is about the structural factorsthat bring the trade unions to cooperate Whereas I acknowledge the role ofstructural factors, I am going to trace more in depth the impact of structuralchanges on the development of solidarity However, in my view one shouldalso take into account other mechanisms interlinked with the recognizing ofstructural factors As already presented above, depending on the theory onesubscribes to, the same structural change is predicted to have two opposite

effects, although both theories derive the reaction from the rationality of theactors Therefore, what is rational for the actors should be inductively inves-tigated and not automatically derived from structural factors The role ofstructural factors and of subsequent interaction is mentioned in a chapterconceptualizing solidarity among works representatives Writing about possiblecommon identities in the European Works Councils, Kotthoff (2007: 179f.)refers to the feeling of interdependence among the different plants, which isequivalent to the Durkheimian division of labour He sees in competition apossibility to evoke an awareness of interdependence and‘sense of being affected’(ibid: 180) I will analyze the process of developing solidarity based on moreempirical material and in different transnational situations, taking both theperception of structural factors and the relations between the trade unions intoaccount Furthermore, I will highlight the change over time that will deepenour understanding of the link between structural factors and solidarity.The arguments developed in the literature, namely that diverging interests,institutional differences and vertical divide preclude solidarity, will be exam-ined in this inductive study I argue that we should re-consider the argumentsagainst transnational solidarity that dominate in the literature My findingswill shed light on the interests and whether differences hinder cooperation Byshowing the dynamism of solidarity and change in the relations between thetrade unions, my study will question the assumptions of other scholars whobase their predictions on identified differences The vertical divide will beexamined Seeing that other studies identified facts such as organizations atthe transnational level or interaction to foster cooperation, I will provide amore detailed picture of this for my specific case To pursue this endeavour,the unit of analysis– transnational solidarity – needs to be specified

Concept of European solidarity and its operationalization

In the following subchapter I will present and discuss the way the concept oftransnational solidarity and cooperation should be operationalized This is

hardly discussed in many contributions dealing with the topic, whereas itseems to me to be of fundamental importance Although many authors frametheir contribution as an investigation of transnational solidarity and coop-eration, their conceptualization reflects bias from the national level in the waythe solidarity is measured or assessed A typical contribution in this debatewould recognize the need to cooperate and then point to diversity of theEuropean trade union movement and the obstacles to transnational action inthefield of legislation and collective bargaining at the EU level Although theauthors would frame their interest in a‘transnational action set’ defined as an

‘alliance of interacting organizations for the sake of a common purpose’(Visser and Ebbinghaus 1994: 208), then only formal institutional settingswould be analyzed Studies on international solidarity and action are rare andnot popular (Waterman and Timms 2004: 198) The huge amount of com-parative studies on industrial relations did a good job in recognizing thediversity However, it does little to advance the debate on the future of labourintegration The differences must be acknowledged and their identificationhelps to understand the behaviour of the trade unions Nevertheless, oneshould not overvalue their significance for the prediction on the ability tocooperate and act together Therefore, I would like to shift the researchinterest from the structural obstacles to the actual action Focusing attention

on the actual acts of cooperation and their future potential has been lated by Turner (1993: 9) in the very beginnings of the debate Similarly, afocus on attitudes instead of action harbours the similar disadvantage of fal-sely assessing the cooperation potential In the following, I will argue why theanalysis of transnational solidarity should not be limited to the institutionalmeasures (first subsection) and that attitudes should not be a base for theassessment of transnational solidarity (second subsection)

postu-Solidarity instead of institutions and legal measures in the focus

Limiting research and the base for conclusions on European solidarity to theinstitutional differences and obstacles overlooks the fundamental feature oftrade union relations, namely solidarity Solidarity, or lack of it, is sometimesassumed from the way the trade unions see the possibility or necessity ofshifting their autonomy or competencies to the European level (Busemeyer et

al 2007; Dølvik 1997; Martin and Ross 2001ab) This assessment is limited

by patterns known from the national level Those pointing to the institutionaldifferences that prevent harmonization of industrial relations systems acrosscountries are right in pointing to its impossibility However, should this be abasis for concluding a lack of solidarity? Cooperation can have differentforms that are adjusted to the opportunities and constraints in which theactors operate Therefore, first the question whether there is a transnationalsolidarity should be posed, rather than emphasizing the differences

The basic definition of transnational solidarity can be derived from theapproaches conceptualizing solidarity among workers Fantasia (1988) defines

solidarity as the opposite of capitalist values such as individualism and petition (ibid: 237).10 This conception contrasts with Streeck’s (1999) view,maintaining that solidarity has changed its meaning and expression byadjusting to the market relations instead of countering them His notion ofcompetitive solidarity resembles the rules of capitalism, competition andindividualism In the transnational context it means location competition andlack of cooperation Tuckman and Whittal (2002: 69), based on Burawoy’s(1979) conceptualizations, describe the situation as a game where the workersare put into competition with each other By playing the game they re-definethe class-based conflict into location-based competition Consequently, I

com-define transnational or European solidarity in an opposite way It would beexpressed by looking for solutions to overcome competitive pressure and coop-erating This is also implied by Hyman’s definition of solidarity as ‘a project

to reconcile differences of situations and of interests, to offer support andassistance to the claims of groups and individuals irrespective of immediateadvantage in respect of one’s own circumstances’ (Hyman 1999: 99)

Transnational solidarity should be assessed within the context of theopportunities and constraints of the trade unions There are two possiblestrategies that can be pursued by the trade unions: exclusionist or inclusionist.The former aims at defending the local labour market; the latter is based onthe ideal of class unity and human rights They can pursue these strategies indifferent venues The trade unions can press for changes in jurisdiction,administration and legislation They can also engage in negotiations withemployers A third possibility of action is at the trade union level in the form

of relations between members, members and non-members, and betweentrade unions (Kahmann 2006: 186).11 The exchange of information andcoordination are identified as available means for countering the competitivepressure among workers (Galgóczi et al 2005) Whereas the decision on reg-ulation and bargaining depends on other actors, the area of inter-union rela-tions is one depending on the trade unions themselves and therefore should beseen as the major venue of solidarity expression

The focus on transnational solidarity has implications for case selectionand analysis The method of contextualized comparisons points to a commonproblem of comparative studies which is the assumption in the study that aspecific issue has the same meaning for the actors across countries The samecould be applied for different sectors that are exposed to different kinds ofthreats Instead, one should look for ‘analytically parallel [emphasis in origi-nal] phenomena for comparison’ (Locke and Thelen 1995: 344) A compar-ison of inter-union strategy in different sectors – automobile, shipping andclothing– reveals that the form of transnational inter-union cooperation andsolidarity depends on the type of imposed competitive pressure and theopportunity structure for the institutionalization of inter-union ties (Anner et

al 2006; and for the European level: Eberwein et al 2002: 62–70) Similarly,

a study on the strategies of trade unions with regard to migrant workers andpreventing their exploitation shows that the choice of strategy reflects the

nationally specific organizational structures that have been built up (Lillie andGreer 2007) Therefore, one should concentrate on the notion of transnationalsolidarity that implies a certain range of behaviour types in situations ofcompetition A context-sensitive comparison would select issues where oppo-site ways of defining interests are at stake: either following competition andshort-term interests or cooperating against and despite competition Thelatter option could be pursued with the available means.

The attempts to prevent exploitation in the construction sector illustrate theinappropriateness of analysis of institutional solutions as an indicator forsolidarity The construction sector is especially influenced by the principle offreedom of labour movement and services The conditions of work and thegrowing cost-competition make the workers employed in this sector vulner-able (Cramers and Donders 2004: 8f.) The main problem for the constructionsector is the liability chain caused by multi-fold subcontracting The maincontractors outsource responsibility for wages and safety conditions to othersubcontractors In effect, the subcontracted workers at the bottom of thechain are very low paid and work under bad conditions The European-levelregulation can only limitedly be a remedy for the challenges caused by themobility of labour Sector social dialogue is absent in many of the sectors In

2003 it covered 40 per cent of the EU-15 workforce The trade unions inagriculture, construction and the transport sector provided their EuropeanIndustrial Federations with mandates to represent their interests in the sectorsocial dialogue Similarly to the cross-sectoral social dialogue, it is character-ized by weak outcomes It results in recommendations to the national level,codes of conduct, best practices guidelines and framework agreements thatare non-binding12 Mostly, the ‘soft’ issues are dealt with and ‘hard’ pay andworking-time standards are not on the agenda of European sector social dia-logue (Marginson 2005).13 Since the activities at the EU level have not beensuccessful in regulating the practice of subcontracting, the national tradeunions started lobbying at the national level The main obstacle in the newmember states is also the fact that social dialogue is absent at the sectorallevel or that the collective agreements are not applied in practice Poland is anexample of the latter (Cramers and Donders 2004: 55) Legal measures are oflimited effectiveness in preventing the exploitation of workers and socialdumping The Laval case, which is one of my case studies, confirms that therelations between the trade unions and their daily cooperation are a crucialmeans of pursuing this aim

An evaluation of solidarity taking for granted that certain institutionalarrangements are either possible or desirable for the trade unions acrosscountries and sectors can provide a distorted picture Conclusions based on acomparison of attitudes and choices connected to profound institutionalchanges in different national contexts shows rather that for some trade unionscertain changes are easier to adapt to than others However, concluding thatEuropean solidarity is based on that might be misleading and does not tellthe whole story about transnational cooperation

Action instead of attitudes

Both in the literature on European integration and the integration of opean labour, much stress is put on identity and attitudes research Studies onsocial movements revealed that the static character of interests or identities isempirically problematic For instance, comparison of the beliefs before andafter a strike revealed that they depend on the situational–temporal context(Langford 1994: 126f., cited in Fantasia 1995: 272) Surveys that are based onthe assumptions of a static identity or attitudes are criticized (Fantasia 1995:

Eur-270ff.) The survey method and focusing on attitudes has been criticized forits false assumptions about class consciousness and the artificiality of the researchmoment in contrast to the moment of class conflict when consciousness plays

a role Marx has been often misinterpreted in his notion of‘class for itself’ bylimiting this concept to the attitudinal or ideational level The processes ofmobilization and acting for oneself are ‘conscious human activity’ in which

‘objectivity’ and ‘subjectivity’ come together (ibid: 273f.) My research egy resembles work by Fantasia (1988) Fantasia investigates case studies ofcollective action at the local level to draw conclusions on the‘class capacities

strat-at a more generalized level’ (ibid: 18)

A collective identity is assumed to be among the participants of action.They continuously need to position themselves in relation to the goals, meansand environment of the action Commitment is a result of achieving an inte-gration of these elements (Melucci 1995: 44) The attitudes or identitiesshould not be taken as an indicator for measuring integration of the move-ment, but the action itself Sustainability of action, which implies that themovement can deal with differences, should be the main focus of the analysis(Gajewska 2008b) Studies based on surveys or structured interviews mightlead to different conclusions than the action-centred study that I undertakebelow

My case studies illustrate that diversity does not necessary preclude anaction and that attitudes are not stable Therefore, a concentration on atti-tudes would lead to a false assessment of collective action potential As myexamples made vivid, conflicts and contradicting interests may well exist, butthe actors often have a capacity to overcome them or deal with them in a waythat does not disturb the relationship Other problems that are indicated asobstacles to cooperation are contradicting interests Here the same criticism isapplicable, namely that they also can neither be treated as given nor as non-negotiable This conceptualization of identity and of the link between actionand identity should be followed by a re-orientation in the study of Europea-nization and European integration Rather than focusing on identities andattitudes we should look at the practice of problem solving, negotiation ofdivergences and the sustainability of collective action: ‘attention should bepaid to the terrain that must be traversed into collective action, and notsimply to the will, the ideas, and the attitudes of participants in the abstract’(Fantasia 1988: 227) Instead of overstating the structural, institutional and

cultural legacies or path-dependencies, we should look at the dynamic aspect

of it and trace the transformative processes.14

Whereas the research on identities conceptualizes them as stable or difficult

to change, the institutional–functionalist approach assumes an automaticchange in attitudes, interests or orientations due to a change of institutionalstructures I am going to analyze whether the institutional structures estab-lished as part of European integration are a venue where commitment tocollective action and cooperation is generated Analytically, though, it isinteresting to trace how it occurs One should consider the structures asvenues where relations and ties can develop They shape the identities andinterests Furthermore, one should not only analyze a possible change ofattitudes and interests, but the way actors deal with and manage to cooperatedespite the differences This is an alternative take on cooperation than onestressing arguing and persuasion such as the institutionalist approach on EUintegration

However, to avoid a trap of the uniqueness and idiosyncrasy of themoment, one should also see solidarity as a dynamic and self-reinforcingprocess Fantasia coins the term ‘cultures of solidarity’ that is ‘the activeexpression of worker solidarity … cultural formations that arise in conflict,creating and sustaining solidarity in opposition to the dominant structure’(Fantasia 1988: 19) Kay (2005) uses the term transnational relationship, that

in my view could be replaced by solidarity or Fantasia’s culture of solidarity.According to her, it is ‘transnational union culture based on cooperativecomplementary identities, defined as a shared recognition of mutual interestcoupled with a commitment to joint action’ (ibid: 725) She also sees it as aprocess and conceptualizes its stages: beginning from contact, through inter-action and converging interests, growth of trust, action andfinally identifica-tion My research strategy is to look at the instances of solidaristic behaviourand examine what were the underlying processes and motives; how it wasframed This will be the basis for a broader conceptualization on the process

of developing of solidarity or, using Fantasia’s term, culture of solidarity

I established a definition of transnational solidarity in this subchapter Oneshould start with very basic criteria of solidarity, namely a behaviour aimed atthe avoidance of competition among workers The institutional measures,such as for instance willingness to harmonize policies affecting trade unions

at the European level, cannot be a basis for assessments or predictions Such

an approach does not take into account the context of decision making Thearea of inter-union relations and cooperation seems to be a more appropriatemeasure for solidarity Another problem of the concept of transnational Eur-opean solidarity is the fact that it is often defined as an attitude and measuredaccordingly This might also be misleading, as attitudes do not necessarilyhave to be followed by certain action They might also change due to struc-tural change or interaction among actors This definition of solidarity asaction and as situational will determine my case selection and researchdesign

Case study method and selection of critical cases

In this subchapter I will describe the case study method and case selection,which follow on from the theoretical arguments that I am going to confrontand the conceptualization of solidarity I have presented above Having estab-lished that the action should be in the focus of analysis and not institutions orattitudes, the case study method seems to be the most appropriate one I willpresent rationales for the case study method and inference from case studies.The case selection criteria will be described in the second subsection I willbriefly describe how the four cases fit the theoretical claims about Europeantransnational solidarity made by other scholars

Case study method and logic of case selection

Choice of the case study as a method is motivated both by the research questionand feasibility The case study method is distinctive from static correlationand is useful in situations where statistical analysis might not be possible.Investigating the behaviour of trade unions in unusual situations, when inter-ests might possibly clash, informs us about trade union relations in general.Instead of sampling a population of cases that would give a statistical prob-ability of certain choices by the trade unions, I ask about processes that lead

to certain behaviour The former research strategy would be first, hardly sible, and second, in case it would not include development over time, of limitedgeneralizability in terms of predictions about general tendencies and devel-opment An in-depth analysis of a small number of cases has the advantage ofexploring causal paths and linking the decision making to the organizationalstructures and structural change as well as other mechanisms

fea-Furthermore, the limited availability of cases that could be used in a parison controlling for different factors can be overcome by a research designbased on within-case analysis It is advised to bring together a small number

com-of within-case analyses under a theoretical framework A congruence method,which would be the effect of such a comparison, is recommended in a situa-tion where the variation in cases is not available It also has the advantage ofextending or refining the existing theory and subsequently inspiring furthertheory testing (George and Bennett 2005: 179ff.) Furthermore, the analyticalcausal explanation type of process tracing can enrich black-box theoreticalexplanations such as rational choice (ibid: 200–211) In-depth study of seeminglyextraordinary cases might enrich our understanding of trade union decisionmaking

Deviant or unexpected casesfit well to the heuristic case study method, theaim of which is to inductively identify new variables and causal mechanisms(George and Bennett 2005: 75) The case selection follows the method ofcrucial or least likely crucial case (Goldthorpe et al 1968; Gerring 2007) Ihave chosen situations that, in terms of the ongoing debate on the possibility

of solidarity across borders, reflect the conditions that make solidarity difficult:

the structural and institutional differences; the different cultures of the actorsinvolved; the situation where competition could be at stake The conditionsmentioned by other scholars are present; however, the trade unions behave in

a way that is not predicted by theory seeing obstacles for solidarity

The logic of inference follows two ways: that of most likely and of leastlikely case On the one hand, the cases are disconfirmatory This goes in linewith the method of most-likely case:

A most-likely case is one that, on all dimensions except the dimension oftheoretical interest, is predicted to achieve a certain outcome and yet doesnot It is disconfirmatory

(Gerring 2007: 232)The cases are disconfirmatory in the sense that in conditions predicted byother scholars to preclude solidarity, there is solidarity The outcome goesagainst the expectation In this way I disconfirm the theory that the differenceshinder the solidarity between workers across borders with examples showingthat solidarity is possible despite differences The competition pressure, which

is also indicated as being an obstacle to solidarity, has intensified in recenttimes and on the other hand the trade unions intensify their cooperation overtime

The goal of studying the cases is to generate a theory The research designcan be seen as a least-likely crucial case to a limited extent, though The least-likely case method can identify the crucial factors that are decisive for theresult:

A least-likely case is one that, on all dimensions except the dimension oftheoretical interest, is predicted not to achieve a certain outcome and yetdoes so It is confirmatory

(Gerring 2007: 232)Despite the conditions supposed to hinder solidarity, one can classify thesecases as examples of solidarity This outcome is unexpected However, there isanother condition that is a constitutive part of my theoretical framework,namely interaction I show that interaction has a potential of overcoming theproblems of differences and that solidarity is based on social ties The logic ofinference in the crucial least-likely case can be called a‘Sinatra inference’: ‘[if]

it can make it here, it can make it anywhere’ (Levy 2002, cited in Gerring2007: 237) However, the case selection should not be considered as a rigorouscomparative research design It would need to include cases where interactiondid not take place to assess the value added of interaction Since such a case

is not available, we can derive the importance of interaction from within-caseanalysis

The contribution of an inductive study of solidarity in a transnationaldimension and in the situation of market pressure should be also highlighted