IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/115.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

German employers and the origins of unemployment insurance. Skills interest or strategic accommodation?

Author

Listed:
  • Paster, Thomas

Abstract

This paper analyzes the attitudes of industrial employers during the German Empire and the Weimar Republic towards the adoption of public unemployment insurance. While employers initially opposed unemployment insurance, they eventually endorsed it. What explains this shift in attitude? The paper tests two alternative theses: the conventional power resource thesis and the newer skills interest thesis. While the power resource thesis explains social protection as the result of distributive conflicts between employers and labor, the skills interest thesis sees it as an outcome of joint interests in skills investment by capital and labor. The study concludes that the power resource thesis has the greater explanatory power. Employers' support of unemployment insurance was an attempt to defeat other policy options on the agenda rather than an effort to promote skills investment. An unfavorable policy legacy and a sustained change in political majorities are the main factors that explain the change in positions. Fear of rising labor costs and the erosion of work incentives shaped employers' preferences rather than an interest in protecting skills investments. On a more general level, the results show the significant impact of political constraints on the positions actors take and the importance of short-term considerations in processes of preference formation.

Suggested Citation

  • Paster, Thomas, 2011. "German employers and the origins of unemployment insurance. Skills interest or strategic accommodation?," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:115
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/45618/1/657608513.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mettler, Suzanne, 2002. "Bringing the State Back In to Civic Engagement: Policy Feedback Effects of the G.I. Bill for World War II Veterans," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(2), pages 351-365, June.
    2. Iversen, Torben & Soskice, David, 2001. "An Asset Theory of Social Policy Preferences," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(4), pages 875-893, December.
    3. Emmenegger, Patrick & Marx, Paul, 2010. "Employer Preferences and Social Policy: Business and the Development of Job Security Regulations in Germany since World War I," IZA Discussion Papers 5043, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Paster, 2016. "Adaptation and Influence: The Schumpeterian Perspective on Business-Politics Relations," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 444, Collegio Carlo Alberto.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bruno Amable, 2009. "The Differentiation of Social Demands in Europe. The Social Basis of the European Models of Capitalism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 391-426, May.
    2. Ronconi, Lucas & Zarazaga S.J., Rodrigo, 2015. "Labor Exclusion and the Erosion of Citizenship Responsibilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 453-461.
    3. CRISTE, Adina, 2013. "A General Assessment Of The Monetary Integration Process In Europe After Euro Adoption," Studii Financiare (Financial Studies), Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 17(4), pages 35-47.
    4. JaeYoul Shin, 2018. "Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 35-56, November.
    5. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    6. Yeandle, Alex & Green, Jane & Le Corre, Tiphaine, 2024. "Economic hardship and support for redistribution: synthesising five themes in the literature," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125294, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Michał Litwiński & Rafał Iwański & Łukasz Tomczak, 2023. "Acceptance for Income Inequality in Poland," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 381-412, April.
    8. Baptiste Françon, 2013. "Who turned their back on the SPD? Electoral disaffection with the German Social Democratic Party and the Hartz reforms," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14019, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. Rui Esteves & Kris James Mitchener & Peter Nencka & Melissa A. Thomasson, 2022. "Do Pandemics Change Healthcare? Evidence from the Great Influenza," NBER Working Papers 30643, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Reale, Filippo, 2019. "Governing innovation systems: A Parsonian social systems perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    12. repec:zbw:bofitp:2018_007 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Brendan Moore & Andrew Jordan, 2020. "Disaggregating the dependent variable in policy feedback research: an analysis of the EU Emissions Trading System," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 291-307, June.
    14. repec:osf:socarx:d3ybr_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00586260 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Jacqueline Chattopadhyay, 2017. "Is the ACA's Dependent Coverage Provision Generating Positive Feedback Effects Among Young Adults?," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 42-70, March.
    17. Greg Fuller & Alison Johnston & Aidan Regan, 2018. "Bringing the Household Back in. Comparative Capitalism and the Politics of Housing Markets," Working Papers 201807, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    18. Apaydin, Fulya, 2012. "Partisan Preferences and Skill Formation Policies: New Evidence from Turkey and Argentina," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1522-1533.
    19. Bishara, Dina & Jurkovich, Michelle & Berman, Chantal, 2023. "Citizens’ understanding of the social contract: Lessons from Tunisia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Luis Vila-Henninger & Claire Dupuy & Virginie Van Ingelgom & Mauro Caprioli & Ferdinand Teuber & Damien Pennetreau & Margherita Bussi & Cal Le Gall, 2024. "Abductive Coding: Theory Building and Qualitative (Re)Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 53(2), pages 968-1001, May.
    21. Vincent Mahler, 2006. "Electoral Turnout and Income Redistribution by the State: A Cross-National Analysis of the Developed Democracies," LIS Working papers 455, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    22. Maria Grazia Pittau & Riccardo Massari & Roberto Zelli, 2013. "Hierarchical Modelling of Disparities in Preferences for Redistribution," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 75(4), pages 556-584, August.
    23. Thewissen, Stefan & Rueda, David, 2016. "Automation and the Welfare State: Technological Change as a Determinant of Redistribution Preferences," INET Oxford Working Papers 2016-02, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.