INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“
#223 GddZ
Conflict actor works council – Part 3.
Conflicts between the works council committee and management
In conversation with lawyer Antje Burmester
Lawyer, specialist lawyer for labour law, mediator (Viadrina Frankfurt); expert in collective labour law conflicts.
Small series:
Contents
Chapter:
Chapters
0:14 – Welcome to the podcast Gut durch die Zeit
2:10 – Conflicts in the works council
8:42 – Challenges for works councils
9:40 – Conflicts with the management
11:50 – The triangle of interests
15:40 – The role of mediators
17:40 – Influences outside the negotiating table
22:16 – Negotiating committees and their dynamics
23:58 – Mediation in difficult situations
28:33 – The change in works council work
33:37 – New beginnings through mediation
36:08 – International challenges in labour law
41:51 – Conclusion and outlook for the future
Summary of content
In this episode, we conclude our short series on the works council as a conflict actor, led by lawyer Antje Burmester. Together we look at the challenges faced by works councils, particularly with regard to the lines of conflict with employers and their representative managers. We will reflect on the main points of conflict that arise both within the works councils themselves and in their interaction with management.
To begin with, we look at the internal conflicts within works council committees, which are characterised by different age groups, genders and professions. This diversity brings with it both opportunities and difficulties as the aim is to promote constructive cooperation. Antje sheds light on how these internal conflicts often reflect major workplace challenges and we discuss the need for works councils to present a unified voice to the outside world in order to strengthen their political rights.
A central point of our discussion is the complexity of the relationship between the works council and management. We shed light on how works councils are often perceived as „obstructionists“, especially when it comes to issues such as Working time regulations or Occupational safety goes. In the process, we realise that works councils, as representatives of the interests of the entire workforce, are suddenly torn between the needs of the employees and the demands of the company.
Antje shares her experience of how works councils in their role often not only serve the interests of the workforce, but are also confronted with a variety of expectations and pressures from employees. This highlights the challenge of acting as both a protective and mediating works council between the different perspectives and needs. The question of how works councils can position themselves in this area of tension is at the heart of our dialogue.
We also discuss the role of external mediators and their influence on conflicts between the works council and management. Antje emphasises that it is important not only to work with the visible parties at the table, but also to take into account the voices of those who want to exert influence but do not participate in the negotiations. The complexity of these dynamics requires us as mediators to have a deep understanding of the internal structures and processes in the company.
At the end of the episode, we reflect on the key findings of this series and realise that in its function, the works council is often more than a mere representative of employee interests. Rather, they operate in a constantly dynamic political environment and must skilfully navigate the different perspectives, objectives and interests that affect them. The interview emphasises the challenges involved in managing these roles and the associated responsibilities.
We would like to thank Antje for her valuable contribution and her deep insights into the complex world of works council work and its areas of conflict.
Complete transcription
[0:00]You also have that on both sides. You also have those on the employer's side who are not sitting at the table, but are clearly looking over your shoulder and want to exert influence, with whom you can then talk depending on where you are now as a consultant,
[0:14]
Welcome to the podcast Gut durch die Zeit
[0:12]must of course also deal with. Welcome to the podcast Gut durch die Zeit. The podcast about mediation, conflict coaching and organisational consulting. A podcast from INKOVEMA. I'm Sascha Weigel and I'd like to welcome you to a new episode. And today we're going to finish the short series that we started some time ago. The short series that we labelled with the works council as a conflict actor and we have already recorded two episodes. And we, that means in this case Mrs Antje Burmeester, lawyer, and myself. Welcome, Antje. This is the third time we have had the opportunity to talk about the conflict actions and reactions of works councils. We have already done this twice and in the first one we focussed on the conflicts within the works council committees and worked out typical situations that were very socially relevant. So different age groups, different professions, different genders are suddenly sitting at the same table because they have been elected and have to work together somehow, like in a small parliament.
[1:29]In order to make works council policy a practical experience. And that, of course, was and still is a challenge for works councils.
[1:37]In the second, we then looked at different committee levels, because several committees can exist in a company.
[1:48]We have been working with site works councils, general works councils, group works councils and have looked at the lines of conflict that emerge there. And I have already realised that, for me, this was the core, that the big company policy is spilling over into the committees because it is no longer just a site logic,
[2:10]
Conflicts in the works council
[2:07]but a corporate logic often emerges. What did you take from this area, so to speak, Antje? What was the core of these episodes for you, so that we can swear our listeners in again?
[2:25]I think we have agreed that it is difficult for the external person, which we can be if we come across such a constellation as a mediator or moderator, to get involved. Getting into the conflict, getting into the committees or getting close to the people, because of course such internal conflicts are very reluctant to be shared and a certain level of trust has to be established before you can open up accordingly. Externally, we would very much like to present a unified works council. There are also relevant political reasons for this. Only a unified works council is a strong works council. The internal-external relationship is also an important issue if works councils want to get along with each other. Speaking with one voice, even though you may know or want to show that you don't want to support certain things. It's a big challenge for inexperienced people to take on this role and not simply express their opinion at the whim of their own personality.
[3:42]This aspect will certainly play a role today, because we want to look at it in the last episode, basically the classic, the classic idea, because this is ultimately what the works council was founded for as a company body, the line of conflict to the management, often represented by the HR department. In other words, conflicts for which the works council was founded because the workforce, the employees, were allowed to create a representative body in order to make their voices heard and thus basically institutionalise the potential for conflict. And it is no longer the individual employee who should or needs to stand up for themselves, because they are ineffective in a large unit with several hundred or dozens of people. How do you generally recognise that such a body is involved? And that is, I can say, a very German speciality in this form, in principle independent of the trade unions.
[4:49]Without a trade union, we have resolved to create an employee representative body, a small parliament in practice, and also to establish such a body for the management and owners if the workforce so wishes. In general, I look at it with great respect, because the employee representatives fulfil this works council office as an honorary position. This means that they do this in addition to their normal workload. They take on responsibility for their colleagues and, as a result, have to deal with one or two difficulties. They have to deal with their own professional development. Will this continue unhindered? They have to deal with the expectations of their colleagues. They have to deal with criticism from their colleagues. In other words, it's all something that these people take on.
[5:50]To volunteer for their statutory duties. And that commands my great respect every time I meet a new works council. It's a perspective that you bring in and also from a position and from a perspective that is detached from the individual committee, but from the abstract regulation that realises a basic idea. The basic idea that this is an honorary position and that someone is making themselves available for the interests of others.
[6:22]You also take risks, the keyword is career setback, so the specialist career is often at least slowed down in practice, so to speak. How do you experience the power of this perspective in committees? So does it have a practical impact? Or is it… Because I experience it that way too, but how is it weighted, how is it experienced by those involved? Even by those who are not on the committee. Are works councils viewed in this way? With the appropriate respect? Big question.
[7:00]It is not for nothing that many works councils, as we have already briefly discussed elsewhere, have problems recruiting new members for their committees, even if only as candidates for election. This is an issue that we will face again in 2026, when the regular works council meetings are expected again, which is every four years. We will certainly encounter this, because it's not that easy to motivate people to do this, or if you can motivate them, you have to look a bit at why they are doing it. What is their motivation? Is it more the motivation for the community, for the task of working together in a spirit of trust, for this potential for conflict, which you rightly mentioned? Or is it also a concern for themselves? Because we also know that, conversely, the legislator has provided the works council and its members with good protection, and for good reason. And the protection has also been extended again. So that's where other logics are applied again, so to speak. The classic case, and this is less about employees' careers and more about team cohesion, is that they often report that their colleagues sometimes don't just see them as good that you are doing this for me, please go there and look after our interests, but that you are now gone again and I have to work here alone.
[8:24]And that is of course a different perspective. You could say that a lack of respect or something like that is one thing, because that wouldn't justify any claims that you might have for the person, but it would be more like saying, you need this, we don't need that,
[8:42]
Challenges for works councils
[8:41]So don't go, what was that all about? So the turnout is also more in favour of a very clear orientation or perspective of, this is politics, this is company policy and are treated like politicians. Yes, and just like politicians, there is also personal criticism, even personal criticism, you have to be able to deal with that and sometimes it is.
[9:09]Portrayed as obstructionists according to the motto, what are you doing? We now want mobile working, we now want to use our private devices for our work tasks, we want this and that and what problems do you have? In other words, that such a pushy approach is being taken at a point where the works council has rightly been given the task of looking at, yes, yes, how does that affect the collective?
[9:40]
Conflicts with the management
[9:38]Do I perhaps have to protect employees from themselves? That's also an aspect that is definitely a potential source of conflict in the transformation we are currently undergoing. This interplay of conflict lines leads us straight to our core topic today. Conflicts with management, site management or HR representatives. A very common topic is protection from oneself, i.e. works councils advocating health and safety regulations.
[10:07]Keyword working time regulations and encountering situations where the employees directly involved and their superiors are actually in agreement. Yes, you do an extra hour on top of that, which is generally referred to as overtime. Or you do another night shift and you do the things where you want the extra pay. And of course they want that too. And if the works council takes its rights and the interests of all employees into consideration and stands up for them, then it is a third force and is not only the protective shield of the individual, but is also seen as a preventer.
[10:43]To earn money, to earn extra money. Nevertheless, he doesn't just go to the management in this line of conflict and say you can't demand this work from them.
[10:55]Because that violates working hours, health and safety, etc. But at the same time it must also conflict with the individual employees who say, Paul, Peter, what are you doing? You can't prevent that here now. I like working on Sundays. I have a mortgage, I have a family, I have this and that. Let me do this. So, that's where we get right into the line of conflict, so to speak. What's it like for you when you work with works councils? Do you have this classic area where the works council acts as a protective shield for the employees with its rights in confrontation with the management, site management, etc.? Or is it more in this triangle of saying that we have everyone against us and yet we are doing this because we need to strengthen a perspective that is not centred on the individual employee, but on everyone.
[11:50]
The triangle of interests
[11:50]I encounter both and the reality is not lost on any of us, even in our co-operation within the company, and that of course applies first and foremost, and even more so for works councils, who of course also see the tension between where the company needs to develop. Yes, in other words, do we need more flexibility in working hours? Do we need more flexibility in working conditions on the one hand? On the other hand, how much protection do employees need against this? In other words, is this classic protective shield issue towards the collective, the employees, expanding in the direction of the triangle you mentioned? How can we all best get through this? Through the demands that are placed on us from the outside. And the outside can be anything.
[12:39]The overall economic situation, the political situation, but also the demands of time, i.e. reconciling work and family life, for example, is a classic requirement that is now being brought in much more strongly from outside, where works councils are of course also called upon to be more flexible and to consider what daily working time corridor do I want to open up? Does it really end at four o'clock or do I perhaps open it up into the evening hours to give people more opportunity during the day to not be tied down at work, but perhaps to be able to do private things, pick up children, look after children, whatever. In other words, from my point of view, we are very much involved in this triangular relationship, which of course doesn't make it easy or any easier. Perhaps that really is a point, so at least it's only now that this argument or this, how should we put it, this assessment of the preventer, the works council as a preventer, breaks down many issues, not just technological issues.
[13:42]It only has such power, perhaps now formulated as a thesis, because it is not only the prevention from the perspective of the management that says, well, we are in competition here with other locations, with other countries, with other countries. It's also because employees also experience this as an obstacle, even if it's only individuals, but perhaps the loudest ones who say, yes, we don't want it that way. And that this is a requirement that doesn't become so clear if we take this perspective, if we take a look at the conflicts between the works council and management, which are structurally laid out in the Works Constitution Act. Instead, I believe we can only understand the conflicts if we continue to focus on the employees. So it is only meant to be one workforce, but there are also many factions and different interests. And they are not experienced political works councils. Many of them come.
[14:46]Well, perhaps it really is like in parliament, we get there for two or three periods and then others are almost professional works councillors, have been there for a very long time. But this political dynamic of uniting different interests, to what extent are works councils aware of this in their conflict situations when they look at their rights and want to assert them?
[15:09]I think they are very aware of it and to the point that it is tugging at them. That they are put in situations or placed in situations where they are conducting negotiations and they may come back to their own location and something has already leaked out. And then colleagues say to them, tell me, have you still got it all, why did you agree to it like that? And then they say, no, wait a minute, we have to protect the weekend. We can't keep releasing Saturday shifts because the production planning is too tight.
[15:40]
The role of mediators
[15:36]once again didn't get it together, to put it bluntly. These are issues that can really tug at the heartstrings. Or let's take technology affinity, which is very different in the workforce. Some people don't care what, where, how, for them or by them, what data is floating around. For others, it is a highly sensitive asset. In other words, there are also very different ideas that are brought to the works councils and where they then have to somehow determine their path, their direction, how do they deal with it? So we have a lot of these issues that are more of a drag than a unifier. Perhaps this is a point where we can now also strengthen the perspective of us third parties. So not only the neutral, all-party mediators or also in the conciliation committee, who are the decisive people, so to speak, but also the party representatives, so to speak, who are also present in negotiations and mediations like a party lawyer.
[16:38]What conflicts they are confronted with. The fact that two groups of representatives are directed against each other and can really make it clear that we are in conflict. There is a relatively strong demarcation between the committee and then management, site management, HR, sometimes also in this group at a Group site. And yet, and this is my point, so to speak, there are still many others who are not at this table, but whose presence is important.
[17:11]conflicting interests are now being fought over. And the classic mediator's idea of bringing all interests to the table is ridiculously under-complex. It simply doesn't work, it just doesn't work. That's why the people were elected. How do you experience the negotiations there? So what influence do those who aren't sitting at the table but want to keep looking over your shoulder have? It's very different, of course
[17:40]
Influences outside the negotiating table
[17:36]and very dependent on the constellation. You also have that on both sides. You also have those on the employer's side who are not sitting at the table but are clearly looking over your shoulder and want to exert influence.
[17:48]Depending on where you are now as a consultant, you naturally have to deal with them. To be honest and off the top of my head, I would categorise these expectations, these unwritten expectations that are not brought to the table, much more strongly on the employer side than on the works council side. On the works council side, they at least try to formulate this internally and discuss it internally, and here we are again with a democratically organised body. Ultimately, we then have majority decisions that are made in the works council body, in the sense that certain negotiating positions that are taken are not only discussed in advance, but also voted on in case of doubt. Yes, and then it's democratic at that point and, in my experience, the points that are brought in from outside are also brought to the table, along the lines of, in smaller contexts, this one and that one approached me or this one and that one had the idea, but in larger contexts, there are perhaps more co-operating groups, for example the research and development department, which tries to get more in touch with the company in order to promote an advanced technology that is needed and where the works council has to be involved somehow for various reasons.
[19:10]In case of doubt, in the end, at least according to the law, I have to make this restriction according to democratic principles.
[19:19]Even if they are adhered to, formally it is a highly complex interplay. So I experience both, let's not go back to the classic old days, where the works council chairman sits and negotiates and says, I can convince my committee. That's clear. So he has given himself a mandate that he can fulfil in practice because he can convince the committee. More frequently, and in this sense also truly democratised, the committees give the chairpersons or negotiating groups a very narrow mandate. They actually only come back with a proposal for a result and then it is negotiated again, which is highly problematic for the negotiation itself and really hardly allows for any negotiation other than, yes, let's do it this way and ask your committee now. And of course that also gives you the negotiating power to keep referring people to the committee. Even if you follow the letter of the law, it is simply a very difficult practice to negotiate, i.e. to carry out negotiations. Yes, and quite honestly, as an outsider, you either don't know the other people at all or you know some of them.
[20:34]And what I have experienced really painfully is that these commissions are formed, small and large negotiating commissions, and the composition of the small negotiating commissions then turns out to be quite unfavourable in retrospect because the actual spokespeople are in the large negotiating commission. This is of course incredibly aggravating for the negotiation dynamics, because the other party must then get the impression that they are actually negotiating with the wrong people. And that is also super, super difficult for the person advising, because basically in this situation you then have to moderate between these two partitions, so to speak, of the negotiating groups at company bar times. That really is one of the things that has changed more frequently in this so-called agent-principal problem. In the past, the headmaster was always there as the chairman and said, yes, I'll get it done, so I'll get it done. At the same time, he was practically the agent who could say what would and wouldn't be done. And today the negotiating groups and leaders actually have to inform the strong people in the committee first. They know, so to speak, that I'm not even going into the negotiations, I'm only going to raise my voice within the committee and use it to control or at least influence things.
[21:59]Influence. I experience that here too. You could also say throwing sand in the works. So if you were to look at it negatively, you would say throwing sand in the works. So that's very judgemental, but in the negotiation process, where you actually want to achieve something on the works council side,
[22:15]you have to call it that at some point. You actually want to achieve a goal within the context in which you find yourself. You just used the word conciliation board for short. When I negotiate, I often negotiate in front of the conciliation committee, because I know that the conciliation committee might not be able to achieve the result I want, because I don't just have goal A, but B, C and D are just as important to me. But I can forget about that in the conciliation committee. Yes, before the conciliation committee. Yes, before the conciliation committee, but the employer can also play around with saying yes, guys.
[22:52]Think about it, in case of doubt we also have the conciliation committee here in purely legal terms and that is a body that represents a special feature under works constitution law and where you really, quite clearly have to say that you don't know beforehand what will come out afterwards. So this conciliation committee procedure is an ironclad principle. And I often experience it as a negotiating argument or as a bargaining chip, it's a procedure that the employer has to pay for in any case. And this cost element is often used. That's where the negotiation starts. Company owners say we'll just go to the conciliation committee, knowing full well that it's unpleasant in terms of costs.
[23:36]And the employer says, if we have to go to the arbitration board because of you, then tell your voters that you're wasting money here when it's already so tight on the belt. And then this issue will be negotiated, before the conciliation committee, with the threat of it. I have a constellation, to put it in concrete terms, of what we are now doing.
[23:58]
Mediation in difficult situations
[23:57]have already discussed. Perhaps we can clarify a few things again about what it means to have conflicts between the works council and management. I was called in as a mediator because there were serious conflicts between the HR management at a company site and the works council chairman. This had repercussions that the people around me could really hear and see in meetings. It quickly became clear that the two needed to talk to each other.
[24:29]And that's where the idea came from at a mediation meeting. The idea was announced there, I hadn't had anything to do with it for a long time, and then a small group was formed, not just the two people, but also deputies and the right-hand man and HR development, so that you really have a small team, because it was also about structural issues that played a role. And then the question arose, who would do that? And then my name probably came into play. And the HR manager, who I didn't know at the time, agreed to it. And I often experience that the mediators' proposals are then agreed to in order to take the first step towards the works council.
[25:11]At the negotiating table, at the mediation table, it starts like this, everyone tells it like this and everyone makes their things clear and a slight atmosphere of war reporting arises. So what's so bad, how bad, how impossible was the other person and what did you have to put up with. And now I just skip over a few situations and then suddenly the people were sitting there and agreed that the conflicts that led to this were older. The HR management wasn't even there yet. And it concerned issues, we had already dealt with them before us, working hours and health and safety, areas at this site where everyone was in agreement. We work overtime, in other words extra work. There are bonuses. We earn money, so to speak. And it's not just the company that earns money with the products, but also the employees who were employed there were able to earn more money than the usual wage. And not really a problem. So who had a problem? The works council said that this is a practice that we can't leave as it is. And it had been in place for a long time and had been at odds with the former HR manager and site manager for years. And now the new HR manager came in and inherited these conflicts. And it became clear relatively quickly that the people sitting around the table were…
[26:40]By no means those who caused the whole problem or the whole thing. There are practically people sitting at the table who have hurt each other badly on a personal level and have to realise that they are largely - of course there are subtleties - but largely dealing with a conflict that is not directly theirs, but which they have inherited, which they have to carry out with their roles. And the idea of directly agreeing with those involved doesn't work, so you can't get everyone round the table. Hey, you who are listening to this podcast, if you like it, why don't you press five stars and leave feedback so that others who haven't yet listened to or found the podcast can do so. And now we continue with the episode in the podcast. Well done for the time.
[27:38]Not all of them, because the ones from the past are of course no longer tangible. Exactly, it becomes very clear with them. And at the same time, the excuse can be taken, so to speak. We are actually innocent, they are actually the ones who are no longer tangible. And now we are all victims of this person. Of course there's that again. And of course that's not true either. Of course, there is also a relief function involved. Is that a situation where you would say, yes, that's how it is in the organisation. That's not the unusual case. No, that's really not the unusual case. From my point of view…
[28:18]Of course, the increasing speed of the economic situation also has to do with the fact that people often work as HR managers in this type of sub-location,
[28:33]
The change in works council work
[28:29]HR business partner, whatever, as a career station. They stay for two or three years and then move on.
[28:37]But that's a more recent development. We used to have the same HR manager, usually male, in one position for 30 years and we also used to have the same works council in one position for ten or more years. And conflicts naturally built up on a personal level. You can still remember who didn't open the door for you ten years ago, figuratively speaking. I can understand that very well. But I think that it will probably become a little less in the future because we simply have more turnover, at least on the employer side, especially in these positions.
[29:11]That's my experience. Less so on the works council side. We already have a high level of continuity, especially in the works council chairmanship, because the experience advantage is simply there. But of course it's a classic constellation, but not an easy constellation for mediation, because I can only deal with the injuries to a very limited extent, I'd say, due to a lack of presence. All I can do is basically try to agree on rules for the future and use them to gain trust. I find it interesting that this is, so to speak, a constellation or a provoked situation from a changed understanding on the part of the management, i.e. that the management level is only there for two or three years and that even the site managers or the HR managers at the site are ultimately only transitory personnel. I can now categorise this differently, because sometimes the site manager or staff with many years of service were other management functions that were passed through and works councils.
[30:21]That's what my colleague told me as a formulation, that's the conscience at the site. They still know the history here. And even there, I have been experiencing this generational change over the last few years, at least the last ten years. We've already looked at the fact that the princes and princesses are stepping down or being stepped down and then the young people often step into the functional roles with the claim of democratisation on the board. Yes, and that also explains why there was potential for offence or issues of offence, such as being angry that the other person had left. You can't sort it out with them anymore, even though things went badly over the years when you tried to sort things out. So sometimes a nostalgia arises where you can't say, well, that would resolve itself if he was at the table, but it usually wouldn't resolve itself that way, is my theory.
[31:24]I see it the same way and sometimes it's just the pure pleasure of friction. So you have to name that too. It's not very useful for the cause when two people get so entangled with each other. I believe that this is a very, very important task for mediators who are introduced to such a conflict in a larger context, who have the opportunity to do this outside of the conciliation committee, to really understand relatively quickly what kind of parties are involved, what kind of conflict history do I have here, in order to be able to work out exactly this point. Is it about the matter? Is it about the history? Is it about personal threads? This is something that basically needs to be separated out as quickly as possible and dealt with again separately, because otherwise we have no chance of resolving the actual factual conflict that has brought us to this point. to resolve it. So whether you actually resolve it in mediation is a different question, but you can't leave it unresolved, you have to address it. Yes, I sometimes suspect that this clinging to conflict perspectives that are so directly personal.
[32:41]That this also has a positive function or a constructive function to make things manageable.
[32:50]So that's Karl-Heinz, who was the site manager here for many years. And I had such a row with him back then in this situation that he put me down in front of the whole team or something. And then it has such a personal impact that he can make it clear to everyone that it remains presentable. Because I can make it clear to everyone that being put down in front of the whole team is a no-go. And I can somehow make that clear to everyone. Even if they claim to be impartial and neutral. He has to be on my side. And now there's another perspective that I experienced a few months later in this area or in this company. It was a good mediation, also for those involved, this first situation, because this new interaction, new personnel management and works council, has a
[33:37]
New beginnings through mediation
[33:37]good start. Despite their injuries, because of the injuries, but also because it was new and this new start had to succeed, everyone was highly motivated. And it worked out well. That's also another thesis. Once they sit around the mediation table, half the work is actually already done. There's so much motivation there that you can only make mistakes as a mediator. You don't really have to do anything except allow time. But later there was another extended round of talks for a different reason and something came up again that I had only ever experienced in such large organisations.
[34:16]It has been noticed. The situation that I described earlier, that working time offences were being committed with consent, has now been presented very one-sidedly in the sense that some people were doing something that was not right and that was the cause. It was only later that I realised that this was not just a group, but a foreign group. So the head office was not a German company at all and the management there may have acted as German management with the Works Constitution Act under their arm, but nobody there was interested. And the fact that they were able to make production possible here in a way that was not entirely correct, so to speak, and also through the motivation of their employees, simply saved the location or simply allowed it to play a part in this international area. And that was not clear to many company speeches, which tend to say, what do I care about the requirements from other countries? If this company wants to produce here in Germany, it has to comply with German laws. And that's why the managing directors here and the site managers have to make it clear to them that this is not how things work in Germany.
[35:38]Heerer claim, but they didn't have to represent that at the head office either. How do you experience the problem that the labour protection laws and, above all, the Works Constitution Act are perceived differently abroad with these works councils, so to speak? And even more so by companies that produce in Germany but, let's just say, don't have these legal principles instilled in them from home?
[36:08]
International challenges in labour law
[36:05]This is traditionally a great potential for conflict. As you said so well, the Works Constitution Act is under your arm, but not in your head.
[36:14]German managers have certain points of contact, so to speak, and a certain awareness of this. I wouldn't say they are highly sensitised. Yes, but you are then in the situation of having to explain this to your American partners, which I think is incredibly difficult for you, because in the US, if I focus on the US, it doesn't exist in this form at all. So it's a real Herculean task for you, where I often experience in practice that there is also a high potential for frustration. So for the German contacts, then the works councils, who say that we have addressed it, we have asked.
[36:53]We don't get any figures, for example, yes, we don't get any more detailed information. It is also of little interest that German case law has also developed further in this respect and has said that, in case of doubt, figures must also be obtained. In the meantime, there are now also entry-level cases. But this has not progressed so far that it has changed anything. So that's one perspective. They are clearly under pressure. But I also have another perspective, which is that employees in companies that are not exactly production companies, but service providers, software developers, whatever, are now organised in teams that are no longer purely German, but may work around the globe. And here too, of course, the perception of what you have in Germany, what's the point, is incredibly difficult, so that the works councils, as I have also experienced, are sometimes fighting on two fronts. On the one hand, they have to make their demands clear to the HR management, the management in Germany, but on the other hand, they also have to campaign for it in their own teams, according to the motto, it just doesn't work like that here in Germany.
[38:01]And I've often seen works councils lower their standards for the proper implementation of processes because there's simply no other way. Yes, I've experienced that too. And that's often a reaction because colleagues disconnect themselves from the works council and say that they can't help me, that they're not a suitable point of contact when it comes to these issues. I just go along with it as if I'm just an employee like the others and I can't seriously invoke German laws because then working together wouldn't work. I thought it was nice that you emphasised the image with the law under your arm and in your head. I can well imagine that.
[38:50]I don't have so much case experience that I could say that this is common, but I have heard of individual cases, including in my work with managers, where it is actually a comfortable situation from an argumentative point of view to invoke the laws of the German legislator. You don't have to link it to the quality of the work or the ability of the German employees etc., so to speak. Sorry, that's just the law here. And then it doesn't mean that the superiors in the other countries say, well, then we'll comply, but they say, stick to it and do your job. So I'm not going back on the demands, but you have to do it in accordance with the law, of course. And then there's the dilemma. But what I'm getting at is that they bring this up, they address the fact that they are subject to legal requirements and would also advertise that this is of course the standard.
[39:52]They come back, but of course with the proviso that they fulfil the figures as required and are then accused by the works councils of not doing enough. You don't make this sufficiently clear to them, otherwise they would react differently. I experience the dilemma that they are really caught between a rock and a hard place and say, well, what else can I do? And it's also a dilemma that's almost impossible to resolve, because you can't just say, well, works council, why don't you go to. New York, Pretoria.
[40:29]China, where also always towards and makes those the times clear. Yes, I believe already, that it a personal Dilemma gives on the Position. I believe but also, that it a Gateway is and the mine I even not negative, but for very qualified labour law and specific Works constitution law Counselling of the employer. Because straight there in the international Context is a large Order volume there, the even checked becomes, what must here in Germany on Standards complied with become or in Europe on Standards, we have Yes again one whole Pile on european Standards and the then even also targeted Counselling in this respect takes place, certain Lines, so red Lines to draw, but also softer Lines to draw and there receive already the Manager to mine Experience then also qualified Support for through External. The is a more effective Consultancy business, what You but from the personal Dilemma, the Lawyer, the Advises sits namely then not in the Jouofix with the Works Council, not freed. So the is already then in the Constellation the Realisation and the Discussion before Location to like before a more difficult Posts and one difficult Task.
[41:51]
Conclusion and outlook for the future
[41:43]The rooms I immediately in. Antje, so that are we on End and with the Series also ready.
[41:51]It is for me again clear become today, one can although these Line of conflict Management, Works Council very clear in the Law recognise, the so to speak says, well, the is but quite clearly, there are stop different Interests and the must stop negotiated become. In favour gives it the Committee and Representative rules. So, Point. It gives even then also the Arbitration board as Procedure.
[42:17]But the Cases, the we us viewed have, have me clear made, it gives essential more Interests, the also not so simple on the Table to get are. And itself when them on Table would be, would them therefore still long not simple mediated and negotiated become can. But the is a very complex Interaction, the with one classic Mediation Relative little to do has. It gives many Actors and the World is very Colourful on the Position. Exactly, very clear pronounced.
[42:50]Good, yes, now have we the Series completed. We have the Works Council as Conflict actor and as Field of conflict from many Pages considered. Would you say, we have essential Points or new or other Perspectives even not taken up so far? I think, we have it whole good outlined, probably knowing, that due to the Variety the Actors also one Plurality from Lines of conflict there are, the we here in the Individuals not unravel and also with View on her Potential, what Mediation concerning, not view can. But I think, in the Large and Whole have we the edited.
[43:36]Yes, this Point, the we today called, again like this, that a Works Council practical more a Politicians is, because as a Employees, the would be again one own Perspective worth, like many different Perspectives and Interests he in this Electoral office to note has. And even not times only, so that other recognise, oh Human.
[43:56]You have it but also heavy, but also Works councils really also clear to make, the is recognised from outside, that the a Minefield is, with the one frequently good Mine to the problematic Game make must. It is one Challenge, on each Case. I thank you me, Anja, that you these three Episodes with me here discussed have and yours Experience with Works councils and with Conflict situations, with those Works councils involved are, shared have. Very with pleasure. Likewise. I wish you one good Time and possibly until soon, because the Topic becomes furthermore here in the View keep become. I would me look forward to. Many love Thanks to. Beautiful, that you with thereby were. When you it please has, leave behind but a Like and one Comment, so that also other this Podcast here to the Themes Conflict management and Coaching, Mediation also Find can. Me would it look forward to, us would it help. I thank you me with you and remain with best Wishes. Yours Sascha from INKOVEMA, the Institute for Conflict and Negotiation management, and Partner for professional Mediation and Coaching training.
Leave A Comment