Rebalancing the Enlarged Single Market

With different rounds of Eastern enlargement, the socio-economic heterogeneity within the European Union increased significantly. Related fears in the richer member states that low wage labour could undermine their higher social standards were answered with widely implemented transition periods for the free movement of labour. But posted workers, based on the freedom to provide services, nevertheless led to practices of social dumping. And in the UK, which had not opted for transition periods for the free movement of labour, the criticism of inner-EU migration was central for the decision to leave the EU. Imbalances from EU labour migration have thus become a very salient political issue for the EU. The move of French President Macron to push for a reform of the posted workers directive in order to combat social dumping and the European Commissions push for an EU social pillar attest to it. In this project we analyze this Rebalancing in the enlarged single market by analyzing different forms of atypical labour migration: marginal employment contracts, solo self-employment and posted work. Focusing on three old member states, Germany, France and Austria, and two new member states, Poland and Slovenia, the project analyzes which kind of new social compromise can be established and where its challenges lie. In doing so, the project distinguishes itself from much of European integration research by emphasizing the importance of case law, established by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in interpreting the EU Treaties. The Court has always played a crucial role for European integration, which has been integration through law. Yet, with the rising competences of the European Parliament, much research has neglected the importance of the Court. With a focus on the European and the member-state levels, we analyze the interactions of the three branches of government within and between levels. How easily can political compromises on social rebalancing be challenged judicially? Which different preferences do member states have with view to the protection of social standards? How well versed are different member-state administrations to control social dumping through atypical work, and how do different economic actors position themselves in between social protection and the EUs economic freedoms? By focusing on administrative and judicial responses next to EU legislation, the project analyzes where EU rules for atypical employment, solo self-employment and posted work undermine existing social compromises in member states, and how European or national rules can provide compensation for this. The comparison among different forms of atypical work and different member states promises to provide important guidelines for the successful rebalancing of the enlarged single market.

The overall goal of the project - being a collaboration between researchers of the Universities of Salzburg and Bremen - was to answer the question as to how economic freedoms and social protection are balanced in the EU's single market since its Eastern enlargement in 2004 (by focusing on Austria, Germany, Poland and Slovenia). It did so in a comprehensive and at the same time focused way: (i) comprehensive, as it did not only consider EU legislation (and member states' implementation into national law), but also the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and member states' administrative practice - and their interactions. The project was (ii) focused, as it concentrated on three particular kinds of labour mobility with a record of precarious working conditions: marginal employment, solo self-employment and posted work. To cover these forms, it focused in particular on the road transport sector, live-in care work and the meat industry. The overall result is that while both EU legislation and ECJ jurisprudence try to (re)balance social and economic aims on paper, economic aims still often take precedence over social aims in practice. The project identifies a structural disadvantage of transnational labor, compared to transnational capital. Member states still have room for maneuver to curb this disadvantage and close severe loopholes where capital used to exploit workers, as the recent German reform in the meat sector demonstrates - but the conditions for such reforms are very demanding. In particular, EU social and labor rules are highly complex and even more so is their (transnational) enforcement in cross-border contexts. Especially the isolated nature of migrants' work and related lack of capacities of enforcement actors (both trade unions and control authorities) lead to the fact that workers' rights are often not enforced. Moreover, the project found that workers do not only face difficulties related to precarious and exploitative work, but also related to, e.g., welfare benefits. When it comes to enforcement, the project further found that there is a lack of transnational diagonal administrative cooperation, hence cooperation between authorities with different tasks, e.g. between social security and control authorities. Moreover, it finds that cross-border cooperation is that complex that social rights are difficult to achieve and that the recently established ELA is subject to high expectations in this regard.