GEMExpert – Social Dialogue: The Social and Economic Committee, a Mixed Initial Assessment

Interview with Heather Connolly, Associate Professor at Grenoble Ecole de Management (GEM)

Was the introduction of the Social and Economic Committee (SEC) in 2017 a major development for social dialogue in companies?

It’s a turning point as significant as the adoption of the Auroux Laws in 1982, which already aimed to transform labor relations. Let’s recall that these laws notably created the Committee for Health, Safety, and Working Conditions (CHSWC) and established employees’ right to express themselves about their working conditions.

With the SEC, lawmakers merged the CHSWC, the Works Council, and employee representatives into a single body, which impacts the quality and effectiveness of social dialogue. We wanted to assess this impact through a research project conducted by six entities, including Grenoble Ecole de Management, and funded by France Stratégie. In practice, we conducted 160 interviews in seven major French groups.

Download the report: “Effect of the implementation of the SEC on social dialogue” -  in French

The reform aimed to simplify and strengthen social dialogue. Has it achieved its goal?

Dialogue has become more centralized, but also more cumbersome. SEC meetings are preceded by preparatory work in committees, which is very time-consuming. Moreover, these meetings are held monthly, which is not always enough to address all the necessary topics.

Additionally, the disappearance of employee representatives has made it harder to deal with individual issues. The SEC tends to focus more on collective topics (employee health, restructuring, etc.), even though this is not formally required. It has also become difficult to address short-term operational problems, whether individual or collective. These are redirected to "local representatives" on the union side and to middle managers, who are expected to engage in social dialogue.

What are the consequences of these changes?

Issues that could have been resolved through dialogue now persist—or even become entrenched—which is not good for the workplace climate. As for the unions, they have to fight to regain resources they previously had, such as negotiating to establish local representatives and ensuring they have time to perform their roles. The result: the connection with employees seems to be weakening and becoming more fragile.

What is the perspective of HR managers and executives?

They were expecting a simpler, more fluid, and more “efficient” dialogue—overlooking the fact that dialogue can often be conflictual. Among the companies studied, some report improvements, while others feel the situation has worsened. Overall, the assessment is mixed.

From the union perspective, our contacts mostly gave negative feedback. They feel that this reform has stripped them of many resources, power, and influence. Part of the social dialogue they previously conducted in the CHSWC or the Works Council has now become informal and shifted to the field.

Publications
Academic articles associated with the project:
Connolly, H., Béthoux, É., Bourguignon, R., Mias, A., Tainturier, P., & de Becdelièvre, P. (2024). Neoliberalism by stealth? Labour reforms and institutional discontinuity in worker representation in France. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 0143831X241268171.

Mias, A., Tainturier, P., de Becdelièvre, P., Béthoux, E., Bourguignon, R., Connolly, H. (2024). Le CSE et ses commissions : reconfigurer les instances représentatives pour rationaliser le dialogue social ? Chronique du Travail, 13: 43–74.

Bio Snapshot
Heather Connolly is an Associate Professor and member of the “Re-Imagining Work” research team at Grenoble Ecole de Management. Her research focuses on labor relations, human resource management, and research methodology.

 

Associated GEM Programs

▶ Master in Management (Grande Ecole Program)

▶ International BBA

▶ MSc International Human Resource Management