Jesper Hamark () and John Lapidus ()
Additional contact information
Jesper Hamark: Department of Economic History, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University, Postal: Box 720, SE 40530 Göteborg, Sweden
John Lapidus: Department of Economic History, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University, Postal: Göteborg University, Box 720, SE 40530 Göteborg, Sweden
Abstract: How do unions who support universal welfare such as public employment insurance reason when they introduce private solutions such as obligatory complementary income insurance (OCII)? Unions are important actors in shaping the welfare model. Their actions and arguments tell a lot about how and why welfare state changes take place. In this paper, we seek answers to how the unions have acted and argued on OCII, how these actions and arguments have changed over time and whether there are differences across unions within the same confederation and across different confederations. The material includes congressional minutes and other internal documents for the period 2000–2020. Further, a number of newspapers and union magazines are studied. What we find and systematise is a myriad of arguments for and against OCII, some of them referring to the eroded public unemployment insurance and others pointing towards sharp competition between unions to keep or to recruit new members.
Keywords: Unions; public unemployment insurance; obligatory complementary income insurance; welfare models; Swedish welfare model
Language: English
41 pages, January 1, 2022
Full text files
70631 HTML file Full text
Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to Jens Anmark ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().
RePEc:hhs:gunhis:0029This page generated on 2024-09-13 22:14:36.