Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:50:43.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-ordinated Continental European Market Economies Under Pressure From Globalisation: Germany's “Rhineland capitalism”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Jürgen Hoffmann

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

[Editors’ Note: The 22 July 2004 acquittals of all six defendants in the criminal proceedings against former Mannesmann CEO, Klaus Esser; Deutsche Bank's CEO (Vorstandssprecher) and then Member of Mannesmann's supervisory board, Josef Ackermann, and other members of Mannesmann's Supervisory Board have, once more, highlighted to German, European and International observers the particular features of law and politics in “Germany Inc.”, “Rhenish Capitalism”, or “Rhineland Capitalism”. As begun in the aftermath of Josef Ackermann's inthronization at the head of Deutsche Bank and Ackermann's subsequent transformation of the Board's control structure, German Law Journal has published several contributions to the ongoing changes in German corporate governance and its embeddedness within the specific German economic and legal system. In his fine piece, Jürgen Hoffmann, Professor of Sociology in Hamburg, surveys the current interdisciplinary debate over the future fate of so-called Rhineland Capitalism and reconstructs Germany's recent history in an international context. In the next issue, to be published on 1 September 2004, Professor Christopher Allen of the University of Georgia will further deepen this inquiry and place the contemporary debate over the possible end of Rhineland capitalism in the historical context of Germany's development in the 20th Century. The Editors of German Law Journal are very pleased and honored to be able to provide for a further forum for this important debate, bringing together lawyers, economists, political scientists and sociologists, for a much needed exploration of the historical and political origins as well as of the legal framework of Germany's much critizised and, at the same time, ardently praised system of corporate governance and industrial relations. We invite our readers to contribute to this debate, which has so far found too little resonance in Germany itself. The Editors.]

Type
Legal Culture
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 5 , Issue 8 , 01 August 2004 , pp. 985 - 1002
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 This article was originally presented at the Chamber of Labour seminar on “The US American and the European model” in Vienna on 30 October 2003 and translated and published as a discussion and working paper at European Trade Union Institute (ETUIin Brussels 2004; it was also presented on the website of the CCGES – Toronto/Montreal. Translation from the German by Janet Altman.Google Scholar

2 Albert, M., Capitalisme Contre Capitalisme (Paris 1991).Google Scholar

3 Coates, D., Models of Capitalism – Growth and Stagnation in the Modern Era (Cambridge 2000).Google Scholar

4 Varieties of Capitalism – The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage (P. Hall & D. Soskice eds., 2001).Google Scholar

5 Id.Google Scholar

6 Höpner, M., Wer beherrscht die Unternehmen? Shareholder-Value, Managerherrschaft und Mitbestimmung in Deutschland (2003).Google Scholar

7 On the following points see P. Hall & D. Soskice, Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism, supra note 4, at 1; O. Fioretos, The Domestic Sources of Multilateral Preferences: Varieties of Capitalism in the European Community, in Varieties of Capitalism supra note 4, at 213; St. Wood, Business, Government, and Pattern of Labor Market Policy in Britain and the Federal Republic of Germany, in Varieties of Capitalism, supra note 4, at 247; S. Vitols, Varieties of Corporate Governance: Comparing Germany and the UK, in Varieties of Capitalism, supra note 4, at 337; D. Soskice, Globalisierung und institutionelle Divergenz: Die USA und Deutschland im Vergleich, in Geschichte und Gesellschaft Nr. 2, 201 (1999); but also A. Graham, The UK 1979-95: Myths and Realities of Conservative Capitalism, in C. Crouch & W. Streeck, Political Economy of Modern Capitalism 117 (1997)Google Scholar

8 See H. C. Katz & Darbishire Converging Divergences (2000).Google Scholar

9 See G. Bosch & M. Knuth, Das deutsche Beschäftigungssystem im 13. Jahr nach der Vereinigung, in WSI-Mitteilungen Nr. 5, 275 (2003).Google Scholar

10 Wood, , supra note 7, at 250.Google Scholar

11 It is however debatable whether or not the British economy can still be referred to as a “low-skill, low-wage” economy, as regularly happens in the rather idealised terminology of VoC analysis, given the large proportion of sectors in the UK requiring high-level skills (See European Commission (2001), Employment in Europe. Luxembourg). A theoretical approach based on a labour market segmentation or on a “dual labour market” – an approach developed in the USA against the background of its own “dual economy” – would probably be more telling. Nonetheless, the European Commission's current report on employment in Europe, to which we refer here, says nothing about the actual mix of skills in the above-mentioned sectors, referring only to an increase in employment in “high-education sectors” (European Commission 2001, pp. 32–34). Any comparison with sector-specific figures for Germany would have to take account of the fact that Germany's commercial service sector lags behind that of the UK, and of the distortion introduced by the situation on the east German labour market.Google Scholar

12 See Vitols, supra note 7.Google Scholar

13 On this point See Hall & Soskice, supra note 7; Fioretos, supra note 7; Wood, supra note 7; Vitols, supra note 7; and W. Streeck, German Capitalism: Does it exist? Can it survive?, in Crouch & Streeck, supra note 7, at 33.Google Scholar

14 Jacobi, O., Renewal of the Collective Bargaining System?, in, The Changing Contours of German Industrial Relations 26 (W. Müller-Jentsch & H.J. Weitbrecht eds., 2003).Google Scholar

15 Wood, , supra note 7, at 249.Google Scholar

16 See Bosch & Knuth, supra note 9.Google Scholar

17 This depiction of the German labour market as being dominated by skilled labour, with a strong focus on the capital goods sector of industry and clearly in this case also on large enterprises, is disturbing to readers – at least those who are familiar with Germany's labour market – and should not be allowed to obscure the fact that many branches of the consumer goods industry and the service sector do of course constitute a sizeable segment of the labour market, where Fordism and unskilled, low-wage labour prevail: some five million jobs fell into this category in 1990. The EU Commission's statistics for knowledge-based sectors of the European labour market in 2000 place Germany only in a middle-ranking position, calculated according to the percentage of people employed in them (See European Commission 2001, p. 31). Streeck's often-repeated thesis concerning Germany's “high-quality, high-qualification, high-wage” economy likewise suffered from a one-sided concentration on industrial skilled labour, even though there is some truth in this thesis as concerns the capital goods manufacturing industry, a key sector, and the export industry.Google Scholar

18 See also B. Boyer, French Statism at the Crossroads, in Crouch & Streeck, supra note 7, at 92.Google Scholar

19 Ganssmann, H., 30 Jahre Massenarbeitslosigkeit in der Bundesrepublik – ein deutscher Sonderweg, in LEVIATHAN Nr. 2, 164 (2004).Google Scholar

20 See Streeck, W., The Internationalisation of Industrial Relations in Europe: Prospects and Problems, MPIfG Discussion Paper 98/2 (Cologne: Max-Planck-Institute 1998).Google Scholar

21 E.g. Albert, supra note 2; Streeck, supra note 7.Google Scholar

22 See Varieties of Capitalism, supra note 4, at 56.Google Scholar

23 Katz, & Darbishire, , Converging Divergences (2000).Google Scholar

24 Höpner, , supra note 6; See also the book review from the author in: transfer – Eur. Rev. of Labour and Research Vol. 9, No. 4, 761.Google Scholar

25 Höpner, , supra note 6, at 53.Google Scholar

26 See Id.; but also, A. Nölke, Transnational Economic Relations and National Models of Capitalism: Institutional Investors and the “Disembedding” of German Corporate Finance, Paper to be presented at the workshop “National Models and Transnational Structures: Globalisation and Public Policy” (ECPR 27th Joint Session of Workshops, 26-31 March 1999, Mannheim); Lütz, S., Globalisierung und die politische Regulierung von Finanzmärkten, in PROKLA Nr. 118, 61; U. Jürgens & J. Rupp, The German System of Corporate Governance – Characteristics and Changes (2000).Google Scholar

27 Höpner supra note 6, at 85, 87.Google Scholar

28 Hübner, K., Der Globailisierungskomplex (1998).Google Scholar

29 As is emphasised in particular by Jürgens, supra note 26.Google Scholar

30 On this point see Höpner, supra note 6, at 104.Google Scholar

31 Id. at 123.Google Scholar

32 Id. at.131.Google Scholar

33 Id. at 130.Google Scholar

34 Dörre, K., Global players, local heroes. Internationalisierung und regionale Industriepolitik, in Soziale Welt Nr. 2, 198 (1999).Google Scholar

35 Statistisches Taschenbuch 2003, 2.4, our calculations.Google Scholar

36 Pongratz, H.J. & Voß, G., Arbeitskraftunternehmer, , (2003).Google Scholar

37 Kratzer, N., Arbeitskraft in Entgrenzung (2003).Google Scholar

38 Schmid, G., Wege in eine neue Vollbeschäftigung. Übergangsarbeitsmärkte und aktivierende Arbeitsmarktpolitik (2002).Google Scholar

39 On this point see M. Baethge, Der unendlich lange Abschied vom Industrialismus und die Zukunft der Dienstleistungsbeschäftigung, in WSI-Mitteilungen Nr. 3, 140 (2000).Google Scholar

40 Hancké, B., Revisiting the French Model: Coordination and Restructuring in French Industry, in Varieties of Capitalism, supra note 4, at 307.Google Scholar

41 See Jürgens, supra note 26.Google Scholar

42 See on this point The Changing Contours of German Industrial Relations 195, tables 4 and 5W. (Müller-Jentsch & H.J. Weitbrecht eds., 2003).Google Scholar

43 Id. at 193.Google Scholar

44 See J. Waddington & R. Hoffmann Trade Unions in Europe, Facing Challenges and Searching for Solutions 54 (2000).Google Scholar

45 Schroeder, W. & Silvia, St., Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgeberverbände, in Die Gewerkschaften in Politik und Gesellschaft der Bundesrepublik Deutschland – Ein Handbuch 261 (W. Schroeder & W. Wessels eds. 2003).Google Scholar

46 Höpner, supra note 6, at 210.Google Scholar

47 See, Die wirtschaftlichen Folgen der Mitbestimmung (B. Frick, et al. eds. 1999).Google Scholar

48 Höpner, , supra note 6, at 150.Google Scholar

49 See Jürgens, supra note 26, at 55; See now the much awaited judgment in the Criminal proceedings against former Mannesmann CEO, Klaus Esser, and various members of Mannesmann's former supervisory council, Landgericht (Regional Court) Düsseldorf, 23 July 2004. First reactions and commentary, e.g., Financial Times Deutschland, 23 July 2004, 1, 2, 25,27-29; Berliner Zeitung, 24 July 2004, 27; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 23 July 2004, 1, 3; Nürnberger Nachrichten, 23 July 2004, 1-3; See also the article by Peter Kolla on the Mannesmann trial, published in: 5 German L. J. No. 6 (1 July 2004), at http://www.germanlawjournal.com.Google Scholar

50 J. Esser, Gewerkschaften in der Krise (1982).Google Scholar

51 Schroeder, W., Das Modell Deutschland auf dem Prüfstand, Zur Entwicklung der industriellen Beziehungen in Ostdeutschland (2000).Google Scholar

52 Fr. Traxler, et al., National Labour Relations in Internationalized Markets (2001); See also, Europeanisation of Industrial Relations in a Global Perspective – Literature Review, (J. Hoffmann, et al., eds., 2002).Google Scholar

53 Jürgens, , supra note 26, at 54.Google Scholar

54 It is no accident that where a similar degree of security is not provided through institutional involvement, namely in LME forms of capitalism, multinational enterprises are taking the initiative themselves and adopting codes of conduct or corporate social responsibility (CSRstandards as uniform, certified methods of embedding economic activity into society. In this way they gain a certain amount of security in unstable consumer markets (threats of consumer boycotts and can guard against potential action by trade unions.Google Scholar

55 Christopherson, S., The Divergent Worlds of New Media – How Policy Work in the Creative Economy (2003); Manuskript: Conference Neue Medien – Neue Arbeit? Hamburg 12/13 June 2003.Google Scholar

56 See Schmid, supra note 38.Google Scholar

57 Arbeitskreis, Entwicklungstrends im Dienstleistungsbereich (M. Baethge, et al., eds., 2000); Zwischen tertiärer Wohlstandsgesellschaft und tertiärer Krise, in http://www.gwdg.de/sofi/frames/publik/mitt25/dl.htm Google Scholar