U.S. Department of Labor Blog
Many workers around the world celebrated Labor Day (or International Workers Day) on May 1, including those in most countries that make up continental Europe. In honor of that day of solidarity, we’re taking a look at how unions and labor-management cooperation in Europe compare with the labor landscape in the U.S.
Partly due to Europe’s economic base being essentially “reinvented” after World War II, European governments have been more deeply involved than the U.S. government in the intricacies of labor and employment policies, which are seen as an integral part of broader social and economic policies. Here are some other key differences:
An “industry-level” approach to collective bargaining: Instead of the firm-level experience of many trade unions in the U.S. that will negotiate with individual employers for a specialized segment of that employer’s workforce, European countries in general have fewer but larger unions negotiating with an association of employers across an entire industry. This approach can reduce the points of contention between employers and unions because these industry- or sector-level unions primarily focus on securing the best economic compensation possible for workers, leaving the particulars of firm-level job responsibilities to be determined by employers. Additionally, because all significant competitor employers in the same industry are subject to the same employment cost overhead, there are fewer fears that union representation might make an individual employer uncompetitive.
Active participation in social dialogue: European unions and employers engage in a practice called social dialogue, which means that industry-level unions and employer associations participate in discussions, consultations and negotiations with each other and with the government. Working together, they shape the national consensus and laws around labor, social safety net programs (health, retirement and unemployment security), tax and trade rules, and other economic policies.
Higher union density: Union density and collective bargaining agreement coverage for workers is generally higher in European Union countries than in the U.S., where 10.0% of workers are members of a union. The EU averages around 23% union density across all member states, with around 70% of workers holding union membership in the Nordic countries.
It’s also worth noting that Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland are consistently ranked as having the highest standards of living in the world. Recent research from the Labor Department’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs shows how unions and worker organizations make it possible for workers to advance their interests, improve wages and work conditions, and have a voice in policies that directly affect them – all of which have a significant impact on quality of life.
A more widespread “union effect”: Even where union density is lower, such as in France, nearly all workers enjoy the benefits of collective bargaining agreements whether or not they are members. That’s because employees in industry- or sector-level unions reap the rewards of negotiated industry-wide contracts that are consistent throughout the industry.
More apprenticeship opportunities: While the Biden-Harris administration has made major investments to ramp up apprenticeships in the U.S., many European countries have much more extensive union-management run apprenticeship programs that put workers on the path to good-paying jobs. Germany’s system is considered one of the best in the world, affording students as young as 16 the opportunity for full employment and training for three years.
Today in the U.S., support for unions is higher than almost any point in the last six decades. As more workers are coming together to collectively seek better terms and conditions of work, it’s worth examining labor-management relationships abroad to ask what’s working well and what lessons we can draw to help make work better for everyone.
Ethan Dazelle is a policy and law advisor with the Office of Labor-Management Standards. He is grateful to staff in the department’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs for their advice and editorial support.