The future of employment relations goodbye ‘flexicurity’ - welcome back transitional labour markets?

Starting points are two contrasting perspectives: temp-agency work or civil service work as possible ideal types of future ‘flexicurity’ employment relations. This thought experiment clearly demonstrates, however, that neither the state nor temp agencies as employers can serve as a role model for future employment relations. The paper, therefore, contributes to the empirical and theoretical backdrop to an alternative. It begins by comparing the extent and dynamics of part-time, temporary and own account work in Europe. These forms of non-standard employment relations are spreading, however to varying degrees and depending on the national employment systems. Although empirical evidence confirms to some extent the thesis of erosion, the same evidence can also be taken as an indication of a still stable foundation of the standard employment contract, especially as the increasing variety of employment relations is concentrated on new jobs and among new labour market participants (women, the young, and other vulnerable people). As both empirical evidence and theory provide plausible arguments for the raison d’être of the open-ended employment contract as well as the need for its adjustment, the logical next step is to ask what new elements should be included in the legal or institutional design of employment relations in order to ensure the right balance between flexibility and security, which is the ultimate aim of all ‘flexicurity’ rhetoric. The paper responds to this problem by suggesting a set of new institutional arrangements based on the theory of transitional labour markets, in particular the institutionalization of ‘active securities’ understood as legally guaranteed social rights to participate in decision making about work and employment and to share equally their fruits as well as their risks. The final section exemplifies the potential role of these new securities on the basis of two regulatory ideas: rights and obligations related to capacity building, and coordinated flexibility as functional equivalents to external numerical flexibility, in particular the model of short-time work. A brief summary concludes and reminds us that ‘flexicurity’, despite its resilience, requires more conceptual rigour.