This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pérez, S. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Monetary Union and Wage Bargaining Institutions in the EU

Extrapolating from Some Member State Experiences

Boston University

This article considers the question of how monetary union in the EU is likely to impact the preferences of governments, employers, and unions regarding the organization of wage bargaining. European Monetary Union involves a decentralization of wage bargaining (centered at the national level) in relation to monetary policy (centralized at the European level). Drawing on recent literature and on the experience of two member states (Italy and Spain), which, prior to EMU, underwent periods of intense bargaining fragmentation, the author argues that the imposition of restrictive monetary policy in a fragmented wage bargaining context in which workers nonetheless have substantial bargaining rights tends to have perverse effects. These effects ultimately led governments and bargaining actors in Italy and Spain to seek a reorganization of bargaining that gave national actors greater control over wage setting. The article considers to what extent a similar dynamic might play out in the Euro zone.

Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 35, No. 10, 1198-1227 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/001041402237948


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				O. M. Romo Political Exchange and Bargaining Reform in Italy and Spain European Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1, 2005; 11(1): 7 - 26. [Abstract] [PDF]