Introduction

On 28 November 2002, UNICE, UEAPME, CEEP and ETUC adopted a Work Programme 2003–2005 comprising nineteen actions as a ‘useful contribution to the European Lisbon Strategy and to preparation for enlargement’. But European social dialogue has long been involved in governance without knowing it. Since the adoption of the White Paper on governance, the most serious introspective exercise ever undertaken by the Commission, observers who have habitually tended to be sceptical have understood the path-breaking role that European social dialogue has played since the 1980s.

The European Council in Laeken on 14–15 December 2001 granted the European social partners three seats as observers to the ‘Convention composed of the main parties involved in the debate on the future of the Union’. This sounds very much like the supplementary, and logical, recognition by States of the altogether particular role played by UNICE, CEEP and ETUC. This co-operation led, in a satisfactory way, to a reinforcement of the authority invested in these actors in the ‘Draft treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe’. These actors appear to have passed all the stages of acquiring full legal legitimacy, which confers a major responsibility upon them.

Has social dialogue achieved autonomy? Will European social dialogue be successful in avoiding the pitfalls of constructivism? What is the governance needed for social dialogue in the EU process? What body of law is available to the actors? This chapter will attempt to answer all of these questions.