In the first chapter,a harmonised linked employer-employee dataset is used to study the impact of firm-level agreements on the wage structure in the manufacturing sector in Belgium, Denmark and Spain. To our knowledge, this is one of the first cross-country studies that examines the impact of firm-level bargaining on the wage structure in European countries. We find that firm-level agreements have a positive effect both on wage levels and on wage dispersion in Belgium and Denmark. In Spain, firm also increase wage levels but reduce wage dispersion. Our interpretation is that in Belgium and Denmark, where firm-level bargaining greatly expanded since the 1980s on the initiative of the employers and the governments, firm-level bargaining is mainly used to adapt pay to the specific needs of the firm. In Spain, the structure of collective bargaining has not changed very much since the Franco period where firm agreements were used as a tool for worker mobilisation and for political struggle. Therefore, firm-level bargaining in Spain is still mainly used by trade unions in order to reduce the wage dispersion. In the second chapter, we analyse the impact of the bargaining level and of the degree of centralisation of wage bargaining on rent-sharing in Belgium. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that considers simultaneously both dimensions of collective bargaining. This is also one of the first papers that looks at the impact of wage bargaining institutions on rent-sharing in European countries. This question is important because if wage bargaining decentralisation increases the link between wages and firm specific profits, it may prevent an efficient allocation of labour across firms, increase wage inequality, lead to smaller employment adjustments, and affect the division of surplus between capital and labour (Bryson et al. 2006). Controlling for the endogeneity of profits, for heterogeneity among workers and firms and for differences in characteristics between bargaining regimes, we find that wages depend substantially more on firm specific profits in decentralised than in centralised industries , irrespective of the presence of a formal firm collective agreement. In addition, the impact of the presence of a formal firm collective agreement on the wage-profit elasticity depends on the degree of centralisation of the industry. In centralised industries, profits influence wages only when a firm collective agreement is present. This result is not surprising since industry agreements do not take into account firm-specific characteristics. Within decentralised industries, firms share their profits with their workers even if they are not covered by a formal firm collective agreement. This is probably because, in those industries, workers only covered by an industry agreement (i.e. not covered by a formal firm agreement) receive wage supplements that are paid unilaterally by their employer. The fact that those workers also benefit from rent-sharing implies that pay-setting does not need to be collective to generate rent-sharing, which is in line with the Anglo-American literature that shows that rent-sharing is not a particularity of the unionised sector. In the first two chapters, we have shown that, in Belgium, firm-level bargaining is used by firms to adapt pay to the specific characteristics of the firm, including firm’s profits. In the third and final chapter, it is shown that firm-level bargaining also allows wages to adapt to the local environment that the company may face. This aspect is of particular importance in the debate about a potential regionalisation of wage bargaining in Belgium. This debate is, however, not specific to Belgium. Indeed, the potential failure of national industry agreements to take into account the productivity levels of the least productive regions has been considered as one of the causes of regional unemployment in European countries (Davies and Hallet, 2001; OECD, 2006). Two kinds of solutions are generally proposed to solve this problem. The first, encouraged by the European Commission and the OECD, consists in decentralising wage bargaining toward the firm level (Davies and Hallet, 2001; OECD, 2006). The second solution, the regionalisation of wage bargaining, is frequently mentioned in Belgium or in Italy where regional unemployment differentials are high. In this chapter we show that, in Belgium, regional wage differentials and regional productivity differentials within joint committees are positively correlated. Moreover, this relation is stronger (i) for joint committees where firm-level bargaining is relatively frequent and (ii) for joint committees already sub-divided along a local line. We conclude that the present Belgian wage bargaining system which combines interprofessional, industry and firm bargaining, already includes the mechanisms that allow regional productivity to be taken into account in wage formation. It is therefore not necessary to further regionalise wage bargaining in Belgium.

La représentation collective des salariés se caractérise par une pluralité de sources : internationales, européennes, étatiques et professionnelles. Leur identification permet d’établir une cartographie. Certaines ont pour objet de garantir les droits fondamentaux des salariés d’essence collective. D’autres participent plus directement à structurer le système de représentation collective des salariés. Cette cartographie renseigne ensuite sur leur importance respective à régir ce dernier domaine. Le développement du droit de l’Union européenne d’un côté et l’essor de la négociation collective de l’autre tendent ainsi à relativiser l’importance traditionnelle de la loi. De même, la promotion des normes négociées conduit corrélativement à un déclin des normes issues du pouvoir patronal. Leur articulation permet de comprendre les différents rapports qu’elles nouent entre elles. Elle met en évidence ce vers quoi est orientée l’articulation des sources de la représentation collective des salariés. Classiquement, cette articulation vise à garantir le droit des salariés à être représentés. De manière renouvelée, elle s’inscrit dans un processus de contractualisation et de décentralisation de la production normative. Le domaine de la représentation collective de salariés n’offre pas seulement une illustration particulière et vivante des mutations des sources du droit. Caractérisé par l’importance des normes de structure, il est un parfait observatoire pour appréhender le dynamisme de l’agencement des sources du droit et pour comprendre les mécanismes qui rendent possibles les déplacements d’une source à l’autre. / Workers’ collective representation is guaranteed by several sources of Law: international, European, statutes and collective bargaining. Pinpointing all of them enables a “map-making”. Some sources are to ensure workers’ collective fundamental rights. Some others aim to design workers representation. This « law-mapping » indicates each law’s respective importance. The increasing importance of the European Union law and of the collective bargaining in this matter alleviates statutes’ traditional role. In the same time the increasing role of collective bargaining diminishes management role in this respect. Studying the coordination of the different laws helps to understand their functions regarding one another. It makes possible to identify their purpose. Traditionally, such a coordination aims only to ensures workers’ representation. Now on, this coordination falls within the scope of a « contractualized » and decentralized normative production. Workers’ collective representation is not only a topic illustration of sources of laws mutation, it is also a field to observe the dynamic current of their coordination and interaction.

Phénomène émergent, l’usage des réseaux sociaux en ligne et des outils informatiques mobiles croît de façon exponentielle et tend à se généraliser. Leur développement envahit peu à peu tous les espaces de vie, marquant plus particulièrement celui des entreprises, le monde du travail. La question du rapport entre les nouvelles technologies et le droit du travail n'est pas nouvelle, elle date de l'introduction de l'informatique dans la sphère sociale, notamment dans les relations collectives. Pour autant, l'examen de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence récentes témoigne largement de nouvelles problématiques juridiques quant à l'utilisation de moyens de communication sans limite de temps et d'espace. L’usage d’internet, et plus spécifiquement des réseaux sociaux dans l’entreprise déséquilibre les relations de travail en confrontant le pouvoir de l’employeur aux droits et libertés émergents et intimement liés aux nouvelles pratiques salariales. Ces nouveaux rapports invitent à remodeler la législation sociale pour une garantie des droits et libertés qui se veut effective. Les réseaux sociaux d’entreprises interrogent enfin sur le renouvellement du dialogue social dans l’entreprise dans une société démocratique de l’information. Brouillant les anciens cadres de référence, les nouvelles technologies de la communication invitent à une réflexion sur le devenir du droit du travail. / An emerging phenomenon, online social network and mobile apps usage has increased exponentially and is becoming widespread. Their exponential adoption offers a multitude of possibilities which is gradually invading living spaces, and in particular the professional world. The link between new technologies and employment law is not really new and dates from the arrival of IT (Information Technology) into the professional world, especially in collective relationships. However, recent doctrine and jurisprudence examinations surface new legal issues in regards to the use of new communication means that don’t have any time and space limits. Internet usage, and more precisely social network usage within companies, destabilises employment laws and leads to a confrontation between employer rights and the employees’ emerging rights and freedoms according to new practices. Companies’ relationship to social networks resurface questions about the renewal of industrial relationships inside a company that belongs to a democratic information-based society. Reshaping old frameworks, and new communication technologies encourages a wider reconsideration of future employment laws.

L’action collective des travailleurs - qu’on désigne ordinairement en France par le terme de grève - fait l’objet d’un traitement juridique diversifié, aussi bien au niveau national que supranational. A la suite des arrêts Viking et Laval, rendus en 2007 par la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne, les régimes nationaux et supranationaux de l’action collective sont amenés à évoluer du fait de leur rencontre avec les libertés économiques, au premier rang desquelles figurent la liberté d’établissement et la libre prestation de services. L’étude de ces évolutions requiert la combinaison de deux perspectives. Dans une perspective historique et descriptive, il s’agit d’examiner ces régimes pour en saisir la construction. A cette fin, l’outil choisi est celui de la comparaison juridique, comparaison qui s’effectue à un double niveau : national (droit français et droit anglais) et supranational (droit de l’OIT et droit du Conseil de l’Europe). C’est dans une perspective plus dynamique que l’étude porte ensuite sur les interactions de ces régimes avec les libertés économiques. / Collective action of workers - ordinarily designated by the term of “strike” or “grève” in France - is subject to a diverse legal understanding at national and supranational level. Following the Viking and Laval judgments, made in 2007 by the Court of Justice of the European Union, national and supranational regimes of collective action are likely to evolve as a result of their encounter with the economic freedoms, the first among which are freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services. The study of these changes requires a combination of two perspectives. In a historical and descriptive perspective, the aim is first to understand the structure of these regimes. To this end, the chosen tool is that of legal comparison, made at a double level, national (French law and English law) and supranational (ILO Law and Law of the Council of Europe). It is in a more dynamic perspective that the study then focuses on the interactions of these regimes with economic freedoms.

L’établissement distinct est devenu un concept incontournable dans la vie des entreprises et une notion récurrente dans les textes légaux et la jurisprudence. Dans l’hypothèse la plus simple, l’entreprise n’est dotée que d’une seule unité de travail, constituée d’activités et de personnels réunis en un même lieu. L’entreprise et l’établissement unique se confondent alors. Mais dès lors qu’elle développe un effectif important et que sa structure complexe impose la mise en place d’une organisation adaptée, elle se démembre et se divise en établissements. L’établissement distinct devient alors un centre d’activité de l’entreprise géographiquement ou matériellement isolé. Le droit du travail tente de saisir l’établissement distinct dans de multiples dimensions et n’adopte pas la même approche selon l’utilité que sa reconnaissance peut apporter dans l’entreprise. L’objet de cette recherche est de saisir la multiplicité des réalités que recouvre l’établissement distinct et d’éclaircir la manière dont le législateur et les tribunaux tendent à l’optimiser en fonction du rôle qui lui est assigné. Concomitamment, il est question de vérifier l’opportunité d’opérer un recentrage des rapports du droit du travail au niveau de l’établissement plutôt qu’au niveau de l’entreprise et les conséquences qui en résultent. / The separate establishment has become an unavoidable concept in the life of the companies and a recurring notion in the legal texts and the jurisprudence. In the simplest case, the company has only one work unit, consisting of activities and personnel in one place. The enterprise and the single establishment are then merged. But since it develops a large workforce and its complex structure requires the establishment of a suitable organization, it is dismembered and divided into establishments. The separate establishment then becomes a center of activity of the company geographically or materially isolated. Labor law attempts to seize the distinct establishment in multiple dimensions and does not adopt the same approach depending on the utility that its recognition can bring to the company. The purpose of this research is to grasp the multiplicity of realities encompassed by the distinct institution and to clarify how the legislature and the courts tend to optimize it according to the role assigned to it. Concomitantly, it is a question of verifying the desirability of refocusing the relations of labor law at the level of the establishment rather than at the level of the enterprise and the resulting consequences.

Les entreprises sont aujourd’hui au coeur des échanges économiques mondiaux. Ces échanges se traduisent par la mise en place de relations commerciales desquelles peuvent émerger des structures souvent complexes et difficilement saisissables par le droit : les entreprises transnationales. Aucune réponse juridique satisfaisante n’a encore été trouvée pour les encadrer, alors que paradoxalement, la RSE donne naissance à des normes, des outils et des instruments pour les responsabiliser. L’étude de la responsabilité sociétale des entreprises transnationales à travers le prisme du droit révèle en réalité l’émergence d’un cadre de régulation hybride : les normes de RSE s’immiscent dans le droit, conduisant celui-ci à s’emparer de ces normes à son tour. Cet échange permet d’aborder l’entreprise transnationale à travers une approche nouvelle, tirée des normes de RSE, c’est-à-dire à travers son organisation et ses fonctions. Les relations de l’entreprise avec ses partenaires commerciaux deviennent alors une assise potentielle pour le droit, davantage que son statut ou que sa structure juridique, à partir desquelles peuvent être imputées des obligations, aujourd’hui inexistantes. Une fois l’entreprise transnationale saisie, c’est un cadre juridique adapté à son organisation complexe qui peut être mis à jour. L’étude des normes de RSE dévoile un enrichissement des règles applicables à l’entreprise transnationale et un renforcement potentiel de sa responsabilité juridique, fondée sur une approche préventive mais également solidaire du droit de la responsabilité. Passant outre les problèmes posés par l’absence de statut juridique, la RSE permet de saisir les entreprises transnationales par le biais de leurs relations commerciales, et d’envisager la conception d’un nouveau standard juridique de conduite sociétale, générateur d’une responsabilité individuelle et collective fondée sur une obligation de vigilance. / Companies are now at the heart of global trade. These economic exchanges result in the establishment of commercial relationships, from which may emerge structures that are often complex and difficult to grapple with under the law: transnational corporations. While no satisfactory legal framework has yet been established to frame their work, paradoxically CSR gives rise to standards, tools and instruments to ensure their accountability. The study of the social responsibility of transnational corporations through the prism of the law actually reveals the emergence of a hybrid framework of regulation: CSR standards influence the law, forcing the law in turn to take note of these standards. This exchange allows us to handle a transnational business through a new approach derived from CSR standards, essentially through its organisation and functions. The relationship between a company and its business partners then becomes a potential basis for the law, rather than its status or its legal structure, from which can be derived responsibilities. Once a transnational corporation is seized, a legal framework adapted to its complex structure can come to light. The study of CSR standards reveals an enrichment of the rules applicable to transnational corporations and a potential strengthening of their legal liability, based on a preventive and joint and several approach of the law of responsibility. Ignoring the problems posed by the lack of legal status, CSR allows for the regulation of transnational enterprises through their commercial relations and provides a basis for the development of a new legal standard of social conduct, giving rise to individual and collective liability based on a duty of care.

In the first chapter,a harmonised linked employer-employee dataset is used to study the impact of firm-level agreements on the wage structure in the manufacturing sector in Belgium, Denmark and Spain. To our knowledge, this is one of the first cross-country studies that examines the impact of firm-level bargaining on the wage structure in European countries. We find that firm-level agreements have a positive effect both on wage levels and on wage dispersion in Belgium and Denmark. In Spain, firm also increase wage levels but reduce wage dispersion. Our interpretation is that in Belgium and Denmark, where firm-level bargaining greatly expanded since the 1980s on the initiative of the employers and the governments, firm-level bargaining is mainly used to adapt pay to the specific needs of the firm. In Spain, the structure of collective bargaining has not changed very much since the Franco period where firm agreements were used as a tool for worker mobilisation and for political struggle. Therefore, firm-level bargaining in Spain is still mainly used by trade unions in order to reduce the wage dispersion. <p>In the second chapter, we analyse the impact of the bargaining level and of the degree of centralisation of wage bargaining on rent-sharing in Belgium. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that considers simultaneously both dimensions of collective bargaining. This is also one of the first papers that looks at the impact of wage bargaining institutions on rent-sharing in European countries. This question is important because if wage bargaining decentralisation increases the link between wages and firm specific profits, it may prevent an efficient allocation of labour across firms, increase wage inequality, lead to smaller employment adjustments, and affect the division of surplus between capital and labour (Bryson et al. 2006). Controlling for the endogeneity of profits, for heterogeneity among workers and firms and for differences in characteristics between bargaining regimes, we find that wages depend substantially more on firm specific profits in decentralised than in centralised industries ,irrespective of the presence of a formal firm collective agreement. In addition, the impact of the presence of a formal firm collective agreement on the wage-profit elasticity depends on the degree of centralisation of the industry. In centralised industries, profits influence wages only when a firm collective agreement is present. This result is not surprising since industry agreements do not take into account firm-specific characteristics. Within decentralised industries, firms share their profits with their workers even if they are not covered by a formal firm collective agreement. This is probably because, in those industries, workers only covered by an industry agreement (i.e. not covered by a formal firm agreement) receive wage supplements that are paid unilaterally by their employer. The fact that those workers also benefit from rent-sharing implies that pay-setting does not need to be collective to generate rent-sharing, which is in line with the Anglo-American literature that shows that rent-sharing is not a particularity of the unionised sector. <p>In the first two chapters, we have shown that, in Belgium, firm-level bargaining is used by firms to adapt pay to the specific characteristics of the firm, including firm’s profits. In the third and final chapter, it is shown that firm-level bargaining also allows wages to adapt to the local environment that the company may face. This aspect is of particular importance in the debate about a potential regionalisation of wage bargaining in Belgium. This debate is, however, not specific to Belgium. Indeed, the potential failure of national industry agreements to take into account the productivity levels of the least productive regions has been considered as one of the causes of regional unemployment in European countries (Davies and Hallet, 2001; OECD, 2006). Two kinds of solutions are generally proposed to solve this problem. The first, encouraged by the European Commission and the OECD, consists in decentralising wage bargaining toward the firm level (Davies and Hallet, 2001; OECD, 2006). The second solution, the regionalisation of wage bargaining, is frequently mentioned in Belgium or in Italy where regional unemployment differentials are high. In this chapter we show that, in Belgium, regional wage differentials and regional productivity differentials within joint committees are positively correlated. Moreover, this relation is stronger (i) for joint committees where firm-level bargaining is relatively frequent and (ii) for joint committees already sub-divided along a local line. We conclude that the present Belgian wage bargaining system which combines interprofessional, industry and firm bargaining, already includes the mechanisms that allow regional productivity to be taken into account in wage formation. It is therefore not necessary to further regionalise wage bargaining in Belgium. <p> / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished