INICIO ÚLTIMO NÚMERO LAST ISSUE
Revista Nº 36 Junio 2020
Monográfico: La inclusión socio-laboral de colectivos vulnerables en las empresas de economía social
Aitor Bengoetxea Alkorta y Gemma Fajardo García (Coordinadores)
Descargar el número completo de la revista 36Descargar
Presentación del monográfico: La inclusión socio-laboral de colectivos vulnerables en las empresas de economía social
Aitor Bengoetxa Alkorta y Gemma Fajardo GarcíaDescargar
Aitor Bengoetxea Alkorta y Gemma Fajardo García (Coordinadores)
La inclusión socio-laboral de los grupos vulnerables. Colectivos y formas de inclusión a través del trabajo.
Aitor Bengoetxea AlkortaDescargar Ver resumen
La noción de los grupos vulnerables se encuentra cada vez más extendida en la literatura sociológica, y también en la jurídica. Pero no hay un concepto jurídico-positivo sobre los mismos, ni una lista que los enumere con carácter exhaustivo. Se propone analizar el origen y contornos de esa noción, esbozando un concepto jurídico. En materia de acceso al empleo, la ley de empleo los denomina colectivos prioritarios. Estudiaremos cuáles son, por qué se les considera colectivo prioritario, en función de las peculiaridades de cada uno de ellos, y qué medidas de acción positiva se les aplican, partiendo de su desventaja, para procurar ayudarles en su esfuerzo hacia la consecución de un empleo.
THE SOCIO-LABOR INCLUSION OF VULNERABLE GROUPS. GROUPS AND FORMS OF INCLUSION THROUGH WORK
The present study deals with the subject of access to employment for vulnerable groups. The first challenge is to seek a correct approach to the concept of vulnerable groups. The question is complex, because there is no legal concept on these groups of people. In positive law, and in language in general, the expression vulnerable group is used with increasing profusion. In a legal analysis, the absence of a legal concept of vulnerability leads us to tackle the difficult task of seeking its delimitation, an issue that we will address in this article.
Nor does the law provide us with an exhaustive list that clearly indicates which are the vulnerable groups. If we compare different norms that deal with the issue, we can verify that these groups (women, people with disabilities, young people, elderly people, people in a situation of social exclusion, etc.) largely coincide. But there is no rule that defines us specifically, providing legal certainty, which are the vulnerable groups.
As a method to approach this concept, we will study the sociological notion of vulnerable groups, and the groups that compose them, and then approach their legislative treatment. Afterwards, always with humility, we will try an outline of the long-awaited legal concept of these groups.
When trying to promote the social inclusion of vulnerable groups, employment is the key tool for that inclusion, because it provides economic and psychosocial tools to the vulnerable person, giving them autonomy, which leads to social inclusion. There are some exceptions where employment is not the solution (such as people with autism spectrum disorder).
At this point, if we approach social inclusion from the specific aspect of employment, the employment law contains a list of what it calls priority groups, which contains eight (youth, women, long-term unemployed, people over 45 years, people with family responsibilities, people with disabilities, people in situations of social exclusion, and immigrants). We can affirm that the priority groups, from the prism of access to employment, are the labor law version of vulnerable groups.
Starting from the positive law enumeration that provides us with a sure handle, we will observe which are these eight groups, individually. We will see why each of these eight groups is disadvantaged in the race for access to employment. We will study what, in each case, are the specific difficulties they experience to get a job. As far as possible, we will try to provide data from labor market statistics, to empirically corroborate its disadvantage.
After identifying those eight groups that the employment law classifies as priorities, there are various regulations on employment that seek to balance this situation of disadvantage. The instrument to try to apply justice and solidarity, as a response to this disadvantageous situation, are positive action measures. This restorative legislative policy sinks its positive law foundation in the Constitution, when, in its art. 9.2, indicates that it is up to the public powers to promote the conditions so that the freedom and equality of the individual and of the groups in which it is integrated are real and effective; remove the obstacles that impede or hinder its fullness and facilitate the participation of all citizens in political, economic, cultural and social life. In what interests us, the matter is seeking equality for vulnerable groups, or priority groups, in access to employment.
Therefore, we will present the main positive action measures that the employment regulations establish for each of the eight priority groups. To do this, we will use a broad notion of employment, which we believe to be correct, encompassing all types of employment. In addition to the hegemonic employees in the private sector, we will study the positive action measures that exist to promote the employment of vulnerable groups in public employment; in self-employment (individual self-employment); and also in collective self-employment (worker cooperatives and labor companies).
To achieve the objectives of the study, a first objective would be to try to shed some light, from the labor law focus, on that elusive notion of vulnerable groups. Starting from the non-existence of a legal concept of vulnerable groups, we will try to delimit it from the normative and meta-legal instruments within our reach.
Subsequently, we will try to delve into the particular characteristics of each of the eight priority groups for access to employment, specific characteristics that, in short, justify their consideration as such priority groups or vulnerable groups.
Later, with a descriptive nature, we will present the positive action measures that we have found, aimed at promoting access to employment for each of these eight groups, leaving their evaluation for the conclusions.
As a methodological point, we want to indicate that we will study the particular discriminatory factors that affect each of the groups, without studying the phenomena of multiple discrimination. Of course, we are aware of the importance of analyzing multiple discrimination, and we also know that such intersectoral discrimination occurs frequently. The reason that we do not study them is twofold. On the one hand, we want to focus our effort on the peculiarities of each group, because when they are mentioned in positive law, it is not usually indicated why they are a discriminated group. The second reason is space. Addressing multiple discrimination would require a broader study, which would go beyond the contours of this that we present here.
Regarding the territorial scope, the generic study of vulnerable groups will analyze international and state regulations. In the matter of access to employment for priority groups, we will limit ourselves to state regulations, for reasons of space, without studying autonomous regulations, being aware of their importance, particularly with regard to positive action measures, where the variety in autonomous comparative law, and even in local law, is remarkable.
In terms of structure, the study begins with the concept of vulnerable groups. Next, the relationship between social inclusion and labor inclusion policies is analyzed. The following section is devoted to access to employment for vulnerable groups, dedicating a section to each of the eight priority groups. We will finish with the conclusions obtained.
Los Centros Especiales de Empleo: configuración legal e incidencia y valoración de las últimas actuaciones normativas
Luis Ángel Sánchez PachónDescargar Ver resumen
El reconocimiento legal de los Centros Especiales de Empleo (CEE) se produjo en la Ley 13/1982, de 7 de abril. La Ley 5/2011, de Economía Social, incluyó a los CEE dentro de las entidades de economía social. El Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2013 dio una nueva definición de los CEE. La Ley 9/2017, de 8 de noviembre, de contratos del sector público, produjo un cambio significativo en la tipificación de los CEE, repercutiendo en las reservas de contrataciones del sector público. En el trabajo repasamos esta evolución normativa, nos centramos en la caracterización actual de los CEE y en el cambio significativo producido en la Ley de 2017. El cambio no deja de ser polémico. En los pocos años de vigencia de la reforma surgen conflictos en su aplicación, discrepancias interpretativas, desajustes o colisiones con otras instituciones de nuestro sistema jurídico y no faltan, tampoco, voces críticas que cuestionan sus objetivos.
SPECIAL EMPLOYMENT CENTERS: LEGAL CONFIGURATION AND INCIDENCE AND VALUATION OF THE LAST REGULATORY ACTIONS
The legal recognition of the Special Employment Centers (CEE) occurred in Law 13/1982, of April 7, on the social integration of the disabled (LISMI), under the protection of art. 49 of the Spanish Constitution. The regulatory development took place through Royal Decree 2273/1985, of December 4, which approves the Regulation of the Special Employment Centers defined in article 42 of Law 13/1982, of April 7, on Integration Social of the Handicapped (sic) (BOE 12/09/1985).
In the following years we were able to attend some modification in the characterization of the CEE as well as some administrative measures to promote the employment of people with disabilities, such as the creation of labor enclaves, through Royal Decree 290/2004, of February 20, or the regulation of the support units for professional activity, in Royal Decree 469/2006, framed within the adjustment services of the CEE.
The Act 5/2011, on the Social Economy, included the EWCs within social economy entities and Royal Legislative Decree 1/2013, which recasts and repeals, among others, Law 13/1982 (LISMI), gave a new definition of the CEE. However, it was in 2017 when the most significant change occurred. Change, apparently, that was being claimed by an important sector of Social Economy entities. However, in the two long years that we have been in force since its inception, conflicts arise in its application, interpretative discrepancies, imbalances or collisions with other institutions of our legal system, and there is no lack, either, of critical voices that question a certain sectarianism – some speak, even, of illegality- of the reform operated in 2017 that allows coverage of certain questionable actions, particularly in public procurement procedures.
The Act 9/2017 created the “Special Employment Centers of social initiative”. These are those promoted and participated in more than 50% by one or several entities, public or private, that are not for profit or that have recognized their social character in their statutes. Such can be associations, foundations, public law corporations, cooperatives of social initiative or other social economy entities; but so will the centers of mercantile societies in which the majority of its capital stock is owned by any of those entities indicated, or by entities controlled by them. With this legal configuration, there are many doubts and also the risks of collusions for the creation of a social initiative EEC with the aim, for example, of having competitive advantages in public procurement. The reservations to the CEE of social initiative in some public contracts have already given rise to conflicts with other CEE. The European Directive 2014/24 / EU is also invoked and the right to free competition is claimed.
In this situation, in which different interests converge, after reviewing the regulatory evolution in the characterization of the CEE, we seek to open the debate and reflection in the Social Economy sector and, in particular, in the CEE, to propose the corresponding regulatory adaptations and corrective measures that facilitate compliance with the institutional purposes entrusted to the CEE. All this will be done within a legal security framework that the system must always offer. In this discussion is interesting the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee “Towards an appropriate European legal framework for social economy enterprises” (own-initiative opinion), of June 19, 2019. It proposes to introduce into the EU legislation a legal framework adapted to a better recognition of the EES, in which a new concept of “limited benefits”, would allow reconsidering the actions of companies that can obtain benefits, but not with in order to distribute them among their owners, but with a purpose of solidarity or general interest.
In our conclusions we highlight that the policies of social security, treatment, rehabilitation and integration of people with disabilities and specialized care, to guarantee their right to work, have a constitutional justification and recognition in the International Convention on the rights of people with disabilities (New York of December 13, 2006) ratified by Spain through an instrument of ratification published on April 21, 2008, and to which the European Union is linked, by means of a Council Decision of November 26, 2009.
The CEEs have been recognized in our legal system, for almost 40 years, they have been an instrument to avoid the job separation suffered by people with disabilities. The CEE are an opportunity for professional development and, therefore, for autonomy. In the current configuration of the CEEs, our legal system does not establish any limitation regarding the public or private nature of the entity, nor its legal form, nor its purpose (lucrative or not), or ownership, if applicable, of its share capital.
The main objective of the CEEs is to carry out a productive activity of goods or services and their purpose is to ensure gainful employment for people with disabilities, but, at the same time, they are a means of including the greatest number of these people in the ordinary employment regime. It is convenient to recover the CEE as a bridge or transit to employment in an ordinary company.
National and European regulations make it possible to justify the priority and reservations for EWCs (and insertion companies) in public sector contracting due to their different behavior compared to ordinary companies. What does not seem so justified is that this priority and reservations be limited to certain CEE, to CEE of social initiative, and even less that, for this, the Public Sector Contracts Law is used to modify the Law that configures CEEs, introducing an ad hoc category, which will not stop generating conflicts.
The CEE category of social initiative, added by the Public Sector Contracts Act of 2017, is still controversial and deserves to be revised. The Social Economy Law does not distinguish categories of special employment centers and calls for the promotion of all of them, so a specific type of CEE, which will have an advantageous treatment in public procurement, does not fit well into the system of Social Economy Law.
The Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, ‘Towards an appropriate European legal framework for social economy enterprises”, in the observations on Competition Law, it is said that this concept of limited benefits should apply to Competition Law and that, even when only the exercise of an economic activity in a market is used as a criterion to determine the scope of competition rules, it could be introduced adjustments in the application phase of the regulations, in order to take into account certain specificities of the Social Economy Entities.
Regarding public contraction, the Opinion states that the European Community considers that the access of Social Economy Entities to public contracts is a matter that requires attention and has highlighted the difficulty of some to participate in tenders and that these companies are excluded, a priori, from reserved contracts. However, there is a general exception for economic operators whose main objective is the social and professional integration of people with disabilities or disadvantaged. Furthermore, Directive 2014/24/EU also gives Member States the possibility of reserving health, social and cultural services contracts for companies with limited benefits that meet certain operating criteria.
This proposed new concept of “limited benefit” entities may perhaps be a way to better recognize Social Economy Entities and better care, and more respectful of competition law, in the sector’s contract reserves public. This new concept, incorporated by public administrations in the contracting specifications, would facilitate, without distortion, we understand, the participation of social economy entities in tenders.
Cooperativa-centro especial de empleo como forma jurídica de empresa para la inserción laboral. (Análisis a partir de un caso)
Amalia Rodríguez GonzálezDescargar Ver resumen
En el presente trabajo se analiza desde un punto de vista jurídico, el fenómeno del cooperativismo de iniciativa social como herramienta al servicio de la inserción laboral de colectivos en riesgos de exclusión social o colectivos con especiales dificultades para el acceso al empleo, así como el papel que desempeñan los centros especiales de empleo de iniciativa social como coadyuvantes de las cooperativas de iniciativa social (de trabajo asociado o de consumidores) en la consecución de aquel fin. Desde distintas instituciones y organizaciones en esta materia y desde hace ya algún tiempo, se apuesta por potenciar el empleo ordinario como mejor instrumento de integración social para lo cual son necesarios mecanismos eficaces para facilitar el tránsito desde el empleo protegido al ordinario.
COOPERATIVE-SPECIAL EMPLOYMENT CENTER AS JURIDIC FORM FOR LABORAL INSERTION (Analysis from a Case)
The phenomenon of social exclusion is complex, due to the various circumstances involved in breaking social ties: unemployment, lack of housing, health, etc. These groups include the long-term unemployed, the disabled, drug addicts, immigrants, the homeless, ex-prisoners, elderly people living alone, and finally we understand that women are also included, whose unemployment rate is still higher than that of men.
The European Union estimates that around one in six Europeans suffer from a disability (80 million), with a poverty rate 70% higher than the average, also as a result of not being able to get a job.
This is therefore one of the problems that most concerns the European Union. The European Strategy 2010-2020. A renewed commitment to a barrier-free Europe, shows that the employment rate of people with disabilities is around 50% and that more people with disabilities need to be in paid employment to achieve growth targets.
The Spanish Constitution of 1978 combines in its articles the promotion of social economy enterprises and the development of policies, by the public authorities, for the social integration of people with disabilities so that they can enjoy the rights that the First Title grants to all of them. These rights include labour rights (Article 35.1)
Disability policies have evolved in recent times, from being focused on welfare benefits to the search for quality employment in decent conditions, as a tool for social integration (protected employment or ordinary employment).
Social economy enterprises specialise in the care sector and coexist with other types of companies (public limited companies and limited companies).
Social economy enterprises encounter difficulties in economic management because of the model that these enterprises have chosen and which may jeopardise their viability and survival in the market. It is not easy for social economy enterprises (sometimes of a small size) to compete with other enterprises of a capitalist nature and often of a larger size, in this difficult sector of social care.
Social economy enterprises also face difficulties because they internalise costs and are willing to carry out their activity without seeking extreme profits.
When they are small enterprises (especially worker cooperative societies) they often have problems related to financing, for which it would be necessary and desirable to seek suitable financing formulas adapted to these cooperatives. However, it is difficult at present. Although this issue is not the subject of our study at the moment, we feel that it needs to be addressed at a later stage. Without adequate financing, these companies will not have the possibility of competing in the market on equal terms with the large business groups dedicated to caring for people.
On the other hand, it is necessary in these cooperatives, to promote the formulas of associationism, both the horizontal one with an economic character and the vertical one of an associative type, in both cases to make them stronger in the market and to achieve their survival. On this point it is fundamental to apply the cooperative principle of education, training and information of the cooperatives that links this training with the promotion of the cooperative associationism that allows the strengthening of the cooperatives.
It should be pointed out that excessive dependence on public administration also makes them more vulnerable in times of economic crisis, although numerous studies have highlighted that, because of their flexibility, they are more resilient in these times and therefore destroy fewer jobs in difficult times.
Social initiative cooperatives also make a decisive contribution to reducing the undesirable effects of social exclusion caused by the lack of access to decent, quality employment, and promote sustainable economic growth that has clear positive repercussions on social progress and the achievement of social justice.
For all these reasons, clear and decisive support is needed from public administration for these social economy enterprises, through different formulas and measures. These are companies that, in many cases, are of public utility and defend the social interest.
They are special companies that apply principles and values that are also closely linked to the objectives of sustainable development, and that are committed to decent, quality employment, respect for the environment and equal opportunities for men and women. It should not be forgotten, however, that they are companies.
Las empresas de inserción en España en 2019.
Miguel Ángel García CalaviaDescargar Ver resumen
En el presente artículo, se ofrecen los resultados de una radiografía que se ha llevado a cabo de las empresas sociales de integración laboral en España, cinco años después de dada por finalizada la gran recesión de este siglo (2009-2014). Se trata de iniciativas ya consolidadas que han evidenciado su capacidad de innovación en la búsqueda de soluciones adecuadas tanto en lo que se refiere al entorno territorial como a los distintos grupos destinatarios.
Además, en la investigación empírica se quiere profundizar en una de las funciones sociales básicas de este tipo de empresas: la de intermediarias de transición de grupos sociales desfavorecidos en el mercado de trabajo.
Las fuentes de información para la radiografía provienen de documentación de FAEDEI y de entrevistas en profundidad a informantes cualificados, mediadores laborales de las WISE. Los resultados han permitido profundizar en el conocimiento de los procesos de inserción de las personas con serias dificultades para encontrar empleo y en riesgo de exclusión social.
WORK INTEGRATION SOCIAL ENTERPRISES (WISE) IN SPAIN IN 2019
In this paper we present the first results of a service which is being carried out of Work Integration Social Enterprise (WISEs) specializing in Spain five years after the date which has been taken as the end of this century’s economic crisis (2009-2014). It covers already consolidated initiatives which have been shown to be innovative in looking for adequate solutions for particular areas and target groups. In this description, attention is paid to a series of variables in order to assess the economic dynamics of this type of company. In addition, in the empirical research we have wanted to explore in more depth one of the social functions of these organizations: that of acting as intermediaries to facilitate the transition into the labour market of disadvantaged social groups.
The objectives are therefore descriptive. However, the examination allows evaluating the effectiveness of the Work Integration Social Enterprise as social companies. Also, investigate the exercise of one of its functions, that of labor mediation, carried out by someone from the insertion company. This is a very important responsibility, on the one hand, in the search for jobs outside WISE; on the other, in the training and orientation of insertion workers (WIs); finally, in its subsequent follow-up. However, the performance of this function is poorly understood. His examination is one of the contributions of this article.
In some case studies, the importance of training of a different nature provided in the WISEs with respect to the insertion of WIs in the ordinary market has been examined. It has been shown that personal and social skills are more important than professional skills, often very routine, in insertion. In this regard, it was urged to investigate the labor mediation process and its protagonists.
The sources of information for the survey are the documentation of Federación de Asociaciones Empresariales de Empresas de Inserción (FAEDEI) and a survey which is being carried out. The variables selected for the description are legal (legal formulas of the insertion companies), economic (activity sectors, templates and composition, income and origin thereof) and social (insertion results). In the narrations of the interviewees, attempts have been made have allowed us to delve into the attitudes of the protagonists of the insertion, WIs and ordinary companies, as well as those of the interviewed mediators themselves; in the contents of the insertion practices.
The description has shown that insertion companies respect and meet the economic criteria to be considered social companies: they carry out productive activities over time; they constitute autonomous projects of the public administrations; its activities are market oriented; they involve business risk; and require a minimum of salaried workers. In 2018, WISE have been promoted mainly by non-profit entities created under different legal formulas; above all, under the Foundation or Association. The activities carried out by the WISEs are located mainly in the service sector: almost 80%. They are labor intensive activities and little capital investment. Most WISE do more than one activity, often two, which are usually complementary. The income of the WISEs came mainly from the sale of products and services: almost 80% of the income; a percentage that has been maintained since 2010. In this respect, the WISEs transmit the will to be solvent, although they are not yet solvent. In addition, the number of WISE workers has increased considerably in recent years, especially that of WIs: between 2015 and 2018, 27.8%. Regarding its distribution by sex, the number of female workers is quite similar to that of male workers.
Likewise, they satisfy one of the main social criteria: provide a service to the community, social integration through the work of people with difficult employability, contributing to social cohesion. In 2018, almost 70% of the people who had completed their learning pathways in WISEs, entered the ordinary labor market. This percentage represented a considerable increase with respect to the insertion registered in 2015 and 2012. Insertion companies are, therefore, social companies.
On the other hand, the examination of the information contained in the in-depth interviews has allowed to deepen the knowledge of the insertion processes of people with serious difficulties in finding employment and at risk of social exclusion. The existence of people with job mediation functions in WISEs has been verified, as well as the availability of networks typical of ordinary companies to turn to when WIs are about to complete their learning itineraries and end their employment contracts. Regarding the insertion processes, it has been observed the importance of the attitude of the WIs in the conclusion of the learning itinerary and in the job search, the development of occupational training programs of the WIs in the search for employment and the existence of an informal mediation channel alongside the formal one. With regard to the immediately subsequent phase related to employment in ordinary companies, a significant degree of satisfaction from the contracted WIs, as well as from the contracting ordinary companies themselves.
Thus, the importance of mediators and their action in the transition from WIs to the ordinary labor market has been demonstrated, both in terms of prospecting for WIs and in their employment orientation. Also, the importance of the predisposition of the WIs in regards to completing the itineraries, as well as facing the insertion. They are the main contributions of this article.
Finally, some problems that affect the activity of the WISEs have been shown: the lack of visibility of their function, which hinders their political and social recognition; poor long-term coordination with public administrations to guarantee WISE activity; the absence of a unique regulation of conciliation for WIs who start their working life in ordinary employment so that they can better combine it with their personal and family life; the predominance of highly feminized productive activities in WISE, limiting the professional training of WIs.
Centros especiales de empleo de Euskadi. El modelo vasco de inclusión sociolaboral
Ane Echebarria RubioDescargar Ver resumen
El empleo se ha convertido en uno de los principales instrumentos de inclusión social de las personas con discapacidad. La inclusión laboral supone el derecho a trabajar en igualdad de condiciones con las demás personas, en un entorno abierto, accesible e inclusivo, y mediante un trabajo libremente elegido. Los Centros Especiales de Empleo de Euskadi, que conforman el llamado Modelo Vasco de Inclusión Sociolaboral, llevan años trabajando con el objetivo de crear empleo de calidad para las personas con más necesidades de apoyo y facilitar el tránsito al mercado de empleo ordinario para el colectivo. En el presente estudio, se han analizado las cualidades de los centros especiales de empleo para el desarrollo profesional y personal de las personas con discapacidad, poniendo una especial atención en el funcionamiento y características de las entidades pertenecientes al llamado Modelo Vasco de Inclusión Sociolaboral.
SHELTERED EMPLOYMENT ORGANIZATIONS FROM EUSKADI. THE BASQUE MODEL OF SOCIAL AND LABOUR INCLUSION
Employment can be considered as one of the most efficient tools for the social inclusion for people with disabilities. The labour inclusion involves, the right of people with disabilities to work on an equal basis with others, through freely chosen work and in one inclusive, open and accessible environment. Sheltered Employment Organizations (SEO) from the Basque Country, that constitute the Basque Model of Social and Labour Inclusion, have years of experience in this sector, and they have a common fundamental aim, which is to generate quality employment for people with more need for support and to promote insertion into the open labour market. The aim of this study is to analyse the employment of people with disabilities, to then focus on the characteristics of the Basque Model of Social and Labour Inclusion, highlighting the positive elements as well as the future challenges.
The concept of disability is defined by the General Law on the Rights of People with Disabilities and their Inclusion (Ley General de Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad- LGDPCD in its Spanish initials). Article 2.a) establishes that disability is the interaction between a person with a deficiency and the barriers that prevent their full and effective participation in society. This concept is based on the definition of person with disability defined at the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Therefore, focus is placed on social barriers, and the society’s impossibility to develop means of support to bypass them.
Article 4 of the LGDPCD says that “People with disabilities are those who show physical, mental, intellectual or sensory deficiencies, which are presumably permanent and which, when interacting with different barriers, may prevent their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”.
Full and effective inclusion into society of people with disabilities involves, among other things, the right of these people to work on an equal basis with others. Regarding national regulations, public authorities must carry out a prevision, treatment, rehabilitation and integration policy for people with disabilities, providing them with the specific care that they require and protecting them so that they may enjoy the rights afforded to all citizens in the Constitution.
Two types of employment can be differentiated through which the collective can exercise their right to work: regular employment, which includes working for others (both in the private and public sectors), self-employment and collective self-employment; and employment in Sheltered Employment Organizations. Lastly, the LGDPCD offer occupational therapy services in order to achieve maximum personal development and, when possible, facilitate training and preparation for access to employment.
Sheltered Employment Organizations are the main facilitating instrument for access to employment for people with disabilities. They are companies that carry out productive activity in goods and services, and who regularly compete in the market. For this reason, they will be subjected to the same rules and requirements as other companies in the sector to which they belong. Article 43 of the LGDPCD establishes the two mandatory requirements that these organizations must fulfil: 1) they must have a minimum of 70% of the staff comprising working people with a recognized degree of disability equal to or greater than 33% and, 2) they must provide personal and social adjustment services required by the working people through support units created for such a purpose.
Sheltered Employment Organizations from the Basque Country, constitute the Basque Model of Social and Labour Inclusion (all of them are social initiative SEO and it concentrates 95% of all employment initiatives in the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country). With years of experience on this sector, they have a common fundamental aim, which is to generate quality employment for people with disabilities, prioritizing those with more need for support, and to promote insertion into the open labour market. In addition, all of them share each of the guiding principles of the Social Economy.
The Basque Model is a model focused on people´s abilities and their development, generating employment opportunities in professional and competitive environments. The entire professional itinerary is carried out with an inclusive approach. They manage different employment programmes and have full labour insertion itineraries, that are adapted to the needs and wishes of each person. It is considered a flexible and innovative model, and they work each day for excellence in the management of different types of business activities, demonstrating the ability of people with disabilities to carry out different jobs. This social initiative SEO works towards inclusive, open and accessible employment in equal conditions. The ultimate goal is that people with disabilities are able to earn a living through a freely chosen job.
At this point, it is very important to analyse the Basque Model of Social and Labour Inclusion in light of the International Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, that was conceived as a human rights instrument with the explicit dimension of social development and an inclusive society. It reaffirmed the fact that all people, regardless of their disability, must be able to enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms. Article 27 of the Convention establishes that people with disabilities have the right to work and to earn a living on an equal basis with others, through a freely chosen job. The analyses of this article shows that the Basque Model is a clear example of the working environment defended by the International Convention. They have managed to build an accessible, open and inclusive environment for people with disabilities, where they can freely carry out the job they have chosen.
In the Basque Country, employment has been a fundamental tool in the inclusion of people with disabilities. The daily work and effort of the organizations of the Basque Model of Social and Labour Inclusion contribute directly to the inclusion of the group, and they work to create a decent and quality employment. Additionally, there are several challenges facing the future of the SEO, since there is a long way to go to achieving more and better employment for people with disabilities, especially for people with the greatest need for support.
La empresa social italiana después de la reforma del tercer sector
Antonio FiciDescargar Ver resumen
En Italia, en julio de 2017, se aprobó el Código del Tercer Sector (Decreto Legislativo 117/2017), una ley orgánica y sistemática sobre las entidades del tercer sector, incluida la empresa social. Se trata de una reforma legislativa “histórica” por varias razones que serán destacadas en este artículo, junto a una visión general de la nueva regulación de la empresa social.
THE ITALIAN SOCIAL ENTERPRISE AFTER THE REFORM OF THE THIRD SECTOR
In July 2017, a Code of the Third Sector (Legislative Decree no. 117/2017) was approved in Italy. It is an organic and systematic law on third sector entities, including social enterprises. This new law may be seen as a “historical” legislative reform for several reasons that will be highlighted in this article, along with an overview of the new regulation of the social enterprise.
By creating the general category of the “third sector entities”, the Code has implemented the Italian Constitution, and in particular its principles of horizontal subsidiarity, formulated in article 118, para. 4, of solidarity in article 2, and of substantial equality in article 3, para. 2. The third sector entities are, indeed, the most natural organizational legal form for citizens interested in pursuing the “common good” through activities of general interest.
From a scientific and cultural point of view, this new legislation is one that does not aim to prevent and repress the “bad man” and to satisfy the interests of the homo oeconomicus, but rather to sustain and promote good solidarity practices put in place by “good men”.
The Code provides a comprehensive and clear definition of “third sector entities”, for the benefit not only of the third sector itself, which now has a well-defined identity, but also of all its stakeholders, such as public administrations, donors and volunteers.
The existence of a clear definition also facilitates a legislator that wishes to promote the third sector through various tax or subsidy policies.
From this definition, read in connection with other provisions of the Code, it is clear that the essential requirements of a “third sector entity” are:
1) the legal form of association, recognized or not recognized as a juridical person, or foundation;
2) the independence from specific entities, such as public administrations, political formations and associations, trade unions, professional associations and associations that represent economic categories, employers’ associations, which are, in their turn, the same entities that could never acquire the status of third sector entities;
3) the exclusive, or at least principal, carrying-out of one or more activities of general interest: the legislator has not identified them through a general clause, but has provided a very long list of activities of general interest, which includes social assistance, health, environmental protection, etc. (art. 5). These activities do not necessarily have to be carried out free of charge, so that a third sector organization may have an entrepreneurial nature and is not necessarily bound to the prevalent use of volunteers. Activities that are “different” from those of general interest are permitted, but within specific limits (they shall be secondary and instrumental);
4) the prohibition of distributing profits in any form, neither directly, for example through dividends, nor indirectly, for example through an unjustified and unreasonable remuneration to workers, directors, etc.; with regard to workers, for example, there is a prohibition on remunerating them in excess of 40%; the assets, including any profits or operating surpluses, must in fact be used exclusively for carrying out the statutory activity of general interest;
5) the pursuit of civic, solidarity and social utility purposes;
6) the registration in the single national register of the third sector (RUNTS) held by the Ministry of Labour and social policies through the Regions.
The Code provides for different sub-types of third sector entities. The social enterprise is one of these sub-types (certainly the most peculiar in its traits), more precisely that designed for the performance of entrepreneurial activities. These sub-types of third sector entities are:
– the voluntary organization (ODV),
– the association of social promotion (APS),
– the philanthropic entity,
– the social enterprise (including the social cooperative),
– the mutual aid society,
– the associative network (including the national associative network).
Each particular sub-type is subject to specific rules in the Code (and is registered in a separate section of the RUNTS), which specialize and distinguishes it from the other sub-types. However, except for the social enterprise, these sub-types are not so different between each other. Some of them (the ODVs) are characterized by a prevalently gratuitous activity and the prevalent use of volunteers. Some other (associative networks) for the function performed, which is the representation, assistance and protection of the associated third sector entities.
Even though each particular sub-type is alternative to the others, so that an entity may register in only one section of the RUNTS, it is possible to change the status within the third sector, i.e. to convert a particular type of entity of the third sector into a different type (for example, from ODV to a social enterprise), without negative consequences of any type for the entity that decides to change its status.
In Italy the social enterprise has been a legal subject matter since 2006, but it has never taken off due to some deficiencies and gaps in the legislative act that had first established it, namely, legislative decree no. 155/2006, now repealed.
In fact, the only legal form for social entrepreneurship remained the social cooperative established by law 381/1991: A very widespread type of social enterprise (today there are around 16,000 of them and they constitute a very large part of the overall cooperative movement) and a model legislation for many European and non-European legislators.
The social enterprise is today contemplated and regulated in the broader framework of the new law of the third sector, as emerging from the “epochal” reform of 2017. More precisely, the social enterprise is now provided for and regulated by Legislative Decree n° 112/2017. There are solid grounds for appreciating this new legislation for its potentials in promoting social enterprises.
This new law has enlarged the fields of general interest activities that a social enterprise may conduct; it has allowed social enterprises (established in the form of companies) to remunerate (though only up to a certain extent) the share capital provided by shareholders; it has provided a specific tax regime consistent with the legal nature of a social enterprise.
However, since the law is essential but alone not sufficient for the success of an organizational form, from this new regulation one can expect a “take-off” of the social enterprise only if two conditions will be met: on the one hand, if certain “souls” of the third sector will abandon the ideological prejudice that everything that is enterprise is “bad” in itself; on the other hand, if the social enterprise becomes known, even beyond the current boundaries of the third sector, for its ability to satisfy different needs, not only those of a social nature, but also those of people and institutions interested in working or investing in a business environment completely different from the conventional one.
The work integration social enterprises in Greece
Ifigeneia DouvitsaDescargar Ver resumen
LAS EMPRESAS SOCIALES DE INTEGRACIÓN LABORAL EN GRECIA
El presente documento se centra en las formas jurídicas disponibles con integración laboral como objetivo explícito en el legislador griego y describe sus principales rasgos sobre la base de la EMES (Red Europea de Investigación) nueve criterios de las empresas sociales. También se examina su aplicación hasta ahora, incluidos los desafíos y deficiencias a los que se han enfrentado las EMPRESAS, en el contexto griego.
En general, las empresas sociales de integración laboral (“WISEs”) se definen como entidades económicas autónomas que se orientan principalmente a la integración profesional de las personas que se enfrentan a graves dificultades en el mercado laboral. En Grecia, el surgimiento y desarrollo de las EMPRESAS públicas pueden dividirse en tres períodos de tiempo: a) el primer período (1984-1998), durante el cual las políticas y los fondos públicos europeos incitaron a la formación de iniciativas de cooperación en fase inicial, allanando el camino para el reconocimiento jurídico de las EMPRESAS Públicas, b) el segundo período (1999-2010), que destaca por la institucionalización de las EMPRESAS EN EL QUE se encuentran en el sector de la salud mental y c) el tercer período (2011-2019), durante el cual las EMPRESAS se convirtieron en un vehículo para la integración de otros grupos de la población, cuya inclusión socioeconómica y laboral se vio obstaculizada por diversos factores.
En el contexto actual, el legislador introduce una serie de formas jurídicas específicas bajo una estructura cooperativa que persiguen explícitamente la integración laboral de las personas desfavorecidas. Estas formas jurídicas específicas son las cooperativas sociales de responsabilidad limitada (ar. 12 L. 2716/1999), las cooperativas agrícolas de mujeres (L. 4384/2016), las empresas de cooperación social de integración de grupos vulnerables y de grupos especiales (L. 4430/2016) y las cooperativas sociales de integración (ar. 143 L. 4600/2019).
Bajo este prisma, el documento se centra en las formas jurídicas anteriores con la integración del trabajo como objetivo explícito y describe sus principales rasgos sobre la base de la EMES (Red Europea de Investigación) nueve criterios de las empresas sociales, que son una actividad continua de producción de bienes y/o servicios de venta, un nivel significativo de riesgo económico y una cantidad mínima de trabajo remunerado, un objetivo explícito para beneficiar a la comunidad, una iniciativa lanzada por un grupo de ciudadanos u organizaciones de la sociedad civil y una distribución limitada de beneficios, un alto grado de autonomía, un poder de decisión no basado en la propiedad de capital y un carácter participativo.
Más concretamente, se observó que la mayoría de los indicadores EMES que definen una empresa social se reflejan en las disposiciones sobre las formas jurídicas en estudio y que esas disposiciones no difieren significativamente entre sí. Sin embargo, este no fue el caso de los indicadores de la limitación de la distribución de beneficios y del carácter participativo, en los que las formas jurídicas en estudio presentaban divergencias, a partir de una distribución de beneficios sin limitaciones a una limitación sin fines de lucro y de una estructura obligatoria de una sola parte interesada a una estructura de múltiples partes interesadas de los miembros y miembros del consejo de administración.
En cuanto a la aplicación y los desafíos a los que se enfrentan las EMPRESAS WIS, se observan los siguientes. En el caso SCLL, aunque el objetivo inicial de establecer 58 SCLL (uno en cada sector de salud mental) no se realizó en tal medida (Adán 2014, 12), el número del SCLL registrado hasta ahora en el registro de la economía social -que no es obligatorio para adquirir una personalidad jurídica- ha aumentado a 27 (Registro de Economía Social y Solidaria). Sobre la base de investigaciones anteriores, su capacidad para alcanzar su objetivo prioritario, mediante la creación de empleos bien remunerados a tiempo completo para el grupo objetivo ha estado en cuestión (Adam 2014, 19-25). En algunos casos, se han observado discrepancias entre el grupo objetivo y los profesionales con respecto a las condiciones de trabajo asociadas con el pago, el contrato de trabajo formal y las horas de trabajo (Adam 2014, 19-25). Por otro lado, varios SCLL han podido firmar contratos públicos con las autoridades públicas para la prestación de servicios en ámbitos como la restauración, los servicios de limpieza o la jardinería. Además, doce años después de la promulgación del ar. 12 L. 2716/199 en el SCLL, la Federación Panhelénica de Uniones DE LA SCLL fue fundada por 14 SCLL. La federación ha estado activa desde entonces en: a) promover los intereses del SCLL, b) representarlos al Estado griego, a los organismos nacionales e internacionales y a, a, c) arrojar luz sobre cuestiones relacionadas con el SCLL y proporcionar información a sus miembros-SCLL, d) cooperar con el Estado griego y la UE y esforzarse por abordar los problemas a los que se enfrenta el SCLL.
En lo que respecta a la SCE, sólo se han formado unos pocos SCE de integración, que se trata principalmente de ECE de integración de grupos vulnerables, lo que indica que no se ha aplicado la forma jurídica anterior para la integración de los solicitantes de empleo capaces que se enfrentan a graves problemas para integrarse (re)integrados en el mercado de trabajo. Una observación general para la mayoría de las SCE es que tienden a tener una actividad económica limitada, dependiendo en gran medida del trabajo voluntario y con una pequeña contribución a la creación de vacantes bien pagadas a tiempo completo (Douvitsa 2016, 13-14; Secretario Especial de Economía Social y Solidaria 2018, 102-110). La falta de inversión social y de sistemas financieros adecuados adaptados a sus necesidades se suele mencionar como algunos de los desafíos a los que se enfrentan. Además, el L. 4430/2016 se inclina por la sobrerregulación de los actores de la SSE, en la que se incluyen las RSE de integración y disuadiendo así a las partes interesadas de elegirla como forma jurídica para su iniciativa (Adam 2018, 239).
En cuanto a las cooperativas agrícolas de mujeres, se observó que durante los años de crisis 1/3 de ellas quedaron inactivas. Este último llevó al Ministerio de Agricultura a emprender una investigación sobre los desafíos y deficiencias a los que se enfrentaban. Sobre la base de los resultados del informe del Ministerio, estas cooperativas son empresas muy pequeñas basadas en mano de obra manual. Producen principalmente en cantidades bajas, que se venden localmente. Como resultado, algunos de los problemas más importantes a los que se enfrentan son: los altos costos de producción, su incapacidad para aumentar las cantidades de productos, la dificultad para acceder a los mercados nacionales e internacionales y en invertir en infraestructura y nuevas tecnologías. Además, también se observó la falta de un perfil competitivo de sus productos en los mercados y la ausencia de una certificación de producto (por ejemplo, ISO). Otra cuestión que también se puso de relieve fue la ausencia de asociaciones formadoras y de un órgano de coordinación que representara sus intereses (Tsiomidou 2016, 2-13).
Por último, el SCI es una forma jurídica recientemente prescrita por la ley y, por lo tanto, se basa en los datos del Departamento de Tratamiento de las Adicciones del Ministerio de Salud, no se ha establecido ningún registro de que se haya establecido el LIC, hasta ahora.
Además, la contratación pública, la excepción fiscal y la utilización de bienes públicos inmuebles o muebles se encuentran entre las medidas fundamentales de apoyo prescritas por la ley para las formas jurídicas anteriores para las empresas de servicios wi-fis. A pesar de estas medidas, las ESS en estudio representan aproximadamente 188 de los 1.638 actores de la EES (10,6%) y se enfrentan a una serie de desafíos asociados con su capacidad para crear empleos a tiempo completo y bien remunerados para el grupo objetivo, la dificultad para acceder a los mercados nacionales e internacionales y en la inversión en infraestructura y nuevas tecnologías, entre otros.
Para concluir, se observa un dominio de la forma cooperativa para las EMPRESAS WISEs en el contexto griego. El legislador impone un porcentaje de miembros procedentes del grupo objetivo, percibiendo de esa manera la mutualidad y la solidaridad como más bien entrelazados, ya que el objetivo explícito de las WISEs de integración laboral de las personas desfavorecidas se logra principalmente uniéndose a la cooperativa. Aunque, el legislador prescribe medidas de apoyo para las EMPRESAS, las políticas públicas hasta ahora no han logrado seguir promoviendo ese modelo de empresa, que posee un porcentaje marginal del sector de la economía social y solidaria.
The present paper focuses on the available legal forms with work integration as their explicit purpose in the Greek legislature and outlines their main traits on the basis of the EMES (European Research Network) nine criteria of social enterprises. Their thus far implementation is also discussed, including the challenges and shortcomings that WISEs have faced in the Greek context.
The main findings of the study indicate a dominance of the cooperative form for the WISEs under the Greek context. More specifically, the legislator imposes a percentage of members coming from the target group, perceiving in that way mutuality and solidarity as rather intertwined, since the WISEs’ explicit aim of work integration of the disadvantaged people is mainly achieved by joining the cooperative. Despite the supportive measures for the WISEs, the implementation of the thus far public policies has not been effective in further promoting such a model of enterprise.
O fim mutualístico desinteressado ou altruísta das cooperativas de solidariedade social
Deolinda MeiraDescargar Ver resumen
Las cooperativas de solidaridad social persiguen, principal o exclusivamente, un fin mutualista desinteresado o altruista, que el legislador denomina «fines de solidaridad social». El objetivo de estas cooperativas es lograr una clara misión de asistencia en situaciones de vulnerabilidad social y económica, dando expresión a los valores de altruismo y solidaridad. Esto justifica que su régimen jurídico tenga ciertas peculiaridades, tanto en lo que se refiere a las categorías de miembros, la estructura organizativa y el régimen económico. Estas cooperativas se caracterizan por la heterogeneidad de sus miembros, lo que exige la definición de normas que permitan una gestión verdaderamente participativa y democrática, y en este sentido se requieren cambios en el régimen jurídico vigente. El régimen económico es plenamente apropiado para este fin mutualista desinteresado, lo que justifica la prohibición de lo retorno de los excedentes y hace más intenso el principio de la devolución desinteresada.
THE DISINTERESTED OR ALTRUISTIC MUTUAL PURPOSE OF SOCIAL SOLIDARITY COOPERATIVES
Social solidarity cooperatives are entities that use work as an instrument to support social inclusion, promoting sheltered employment or therapeutic and occupational activities, to allow active participation of people in the labour market.
This pandemic outbreak of COVID 19 and the resulting economic and social crisis demands from this cooperative branch a significant intervention in providing social services both to its members and to the community where it operates.
This article aims to analyze, at a strictly legal level, the challenges the branch of social solidarity cooperatives face, taking into account the specificities of their object and purpose.
The Portuguese social solidarity cooperatives are integrated into a movement to reinvent the cooperative model started in Italy in 1990 with social cooperatives. This movement led to the emergence of cooperatives with an objective focused mainly or exclusively on the pursuit of objectives of general interest.
One of the main reasons pointed out for the emergence of these particular cooperatives, with an objective focused mainly or exclusively on pursuing the general interest, was the inadequacy of conventional cooperatives to accommodate innovative business phenomena characterized by an objective of collective interest, the absence of a profit aim and a model of organization based on democratic and participatory principles.
This movement has brought with it significant changes in the scope configuration of cooperatives. It does not have to be “exclusively mutualist,” it can be “ mainly mutualist.” It does not have only to pursue directly, but may, exceptionally and providing certain conditions, pursue indirectly. It does not have to respond mainly to the cooperators’ interests and may respond mainly to the interests of the community.
Therefore, the mutual purpose of cooperatives is not only to satisfy the needs of their members (interested or egoistic mutual purpose) but also to respond to the interests of the community where the cooperative operates (disinterested or altruistic mutual purpose).
The legal regime of social solidarity cooperatives sets out in Decree-Law No. 7/98, of 15 January 1998.
From the legal notion, it results that these cooperatives pursue, mainly or exclusively, a disinterested or altruistic mutual purpose, which the legislator calls “social solidarity purposes,” which fulfils a clear mission of attending to situations of social and economic vulnerability, based on a paradigm of social intervention, giving expression to the values of altruism and solidarity, contributing to the implementation of social rights.
Since they base all their activity on the values of solidarity and altruism, the legal regime of social solidarity cooperatives has specific characteristics, both concerning the categories of members, the corporate structure, and the economic regime.
These cooperatives are characterized by a heterogeneous membership, which the legislator has grouped into two categories: full members and honorary members.
In light of the current regime, the full members present themselves as the cooperative’s reference members. The notion of social solidarity cooperative, contained in Decree-Law 7/98, reports to them. In the light of this notion, the social solidarity cooperative establishes the fulfillment of the social needs of its cooperator members or their families in health, education, professional integration, or a way to develop a professional activity.
The honorary member’s category includes all those who contribute with goods or services, particularly social volunteering, to the pursuit of the cooperative’s purpose”.
Considering that the Cooperative Code has applied subsidiarity to social solidarity cooperatives, we may find another category of members in them: the category of investor members.
It is necessary to revisit the concepts of full and honorary membership to adapt them to the current context of social solidarity cooperatives, emphasizing the increasingly important role that social volunteering assumes in these entities. There is no reason why a social solidarity cooperative should not be a volunteer promoting organization, in which volunteers will be the reference members of the cooperative and include the category of full members. The honorary member concept should cover both investor members (since 2015 Cooperative Code reform) and social investors, who are increasingly crucial promoting and sustaining social solidarity cooperatives.
A legal amendment is also needed to remove the restrictions on the full participation of honorary members in general meetings of social solidarity cooperatives. Due to their increasing importance in these cooperatives, honorary members should have the right to vote and be elected to the cooperative’s governing bodies, being the only way to fulfill the cooperative principle of democratic member control.
In order to combine the interests of these different categories of members, it is necessary to allow a plural vote in social solidarity cooperatives, removing the restrictions provided in the Cooperative Code. Indeed, a plural vote is not allowed in the current state of Portuguese cooperative legislation in social solidarity cooperatives.
As far as the economic regime is concerned, in social solidarity cooperatives, the patronage refund is forbidden, which means that all surpluses must revert to reserves. This impossibility of distributing surpluses results from the fact that these cooperatives carry out their activity mainly in the community’s interest, i.e., pursuing a disinterested or altruistic mutual purpose.
The legal regime of surpluses and their return to cooperators bases on the assumption of a cooperative that pursues, mainly or exclusively, an interested or egoistic mutual purpose. The surpluses are the positive results that arise from the cooperative’s pursuit of the mutual scope, corresponding to the excess of revenues over costs of the cooperative transactions. This amount is provisionally overpaid by cooperators to cooperatives or underpaid by cooperatives to cooperators, in exchange for their cooperative transactions participation.
We should note that this forbidden of patronage refund implies that the voluntary reserves created with the remaining net annual surpluses will, in no case, be divisible among members. Therefore, when the cooperator leaves the social solidarity cooperative, he will not be entitled to the share of the voluntary divisible reserves.
This disinterested or altruistic mutual purpose implies that the principle of disinterested distribution is more intense in social solidarity cooperatives. In effect, in the event of liquidation of a social solidarity cooperative, which is not succeeded by another cooperative entity of the same branch, the balance of all reserves (mandatory or voluntary) reverts to another social solidarity cooperative, preferably from the same municipality, to be determined by the federation or confederation representing the main activity of the cooperative.
A inserção social e laboral de grupos vulneráveis nos empreendimentos sociais no Brasil por meio das cooperativas
Emanuelle Urbano Maffioletti y Camila SatoDescargar Ver resumen
El presente estudio aborda sociedades cooperativas cuyo objetivo es la inserción social y laboral de los grupos clasificados como vulnerables en la legislación brasileña. Con ese reto, el estudio contextualiza las políticas públicas existentes en el país con respecto a los grupos vulnerables y las formas de inserción social y laboral, centrándose en medidas normativas e institucionales que fomentan la participación de estos grupos en las empresas sociales. Teniendo en cuenta la dificultad de datos y de investigación cuantitativa sobre las empresas dedicadas al tema, este trabajo trae ejemplos concretos de acciones y agentes, entre ellos cooperativas, que han estado trabajando en la inserción de grupos vulnerables, centrándose en drogadictos y personas con discapacidad. Para ilustrar el escenario problemático observado en Brasil, también se mencionaron ejemplos de cooperativas que actualmente están inactivas, principalmente debido al desafío de la autosostenibilidad de su estructura organizativa.
THE SOCIAL AND BY WORK INSERTION OF VULNERABLE GROUPS IN SOCIAL ENTERPRISES IN BRAZIL THROUGH COOPERATIVES
this paper was originally presented at the III Encuentro Internacional de Investigadores Sobre Economia Social, Autogestión y Empleo, that took place in Valencia, September 26 and 27 of 2019. Within the scope of the conference, the researchers had the task of uncovering the real national conditions of solidary enterprises in their respective countries. Despite the need of specific public policies and programs directed to insert vulnerable groups socially and professionally, primarily by solidary enterprises, we verified that the subject is not sufficiently studied and addressed in Brazil.
Considering this context, this paper addresses the cooperative societies that aim to the social and professional insertion of groups classified as vulnerable by the Brazilian legislation. Cooperative societies were the focus of this study, as one of many forms of solidary enterprises, and positively one of the better structured. The first methodologic step consisted in identifying the vulnerable groups, determining who qualified as such and the ambient surrounding them. For this selection and definition of vulnerable groups, the criteria provided by the Brazilian legislation were the initial stepping stones. Then, the research work was on identifying the main stakeholders within the solidary enterprise ecosystem, their initiatives regarding the subject, and possible relationships with public authorities. For this purpose, the study contextualizes the public policies of Brazil concerning vulnerable groups and the forms of social and professional insertion, with emphasis on the legislative and institutional measures that stimulate these groups’ participation in solidary enterprises. Combining the identification based on the Brazilian law, as well as the focus on cooperative societies as representative of a solidary enterprise, the Brazilian law n. 9.867/1999, which addresses social cooperative societies was chosen as the framework for the identification of vulnerable groups. Thus, drug addicts and the disabled were identified as vulnerable groups based on the legal criteria mentioned. Concerning what could be considered as social and professional inclusion, insertion into the society and community, the values of labor and autonomy were constant and promoted by the great majority of initiatives found as core elements of importance to the people in vulnerable situation.
When identifying other stakeholders and initiatives regarding the social and professional insertion of vulnerable groups, governmental measures and universities were identified as the primary foundations of their official ecosystem and support actors to the solidary enterprises’ network, in addition to the individuals most closely linked to the vulnerable groups. However, there was not enough information accessible on public and official channels to provide a complete picture of the solidary enterprises’ context in Brazil. Therefore, there was no intention of covering the entirety of the subject, which would require a whole set of governmental effort and investment into compiling all the information regarding solidary enterprises. Considering the lack of formal quantitative data researches regarding the social enterprises who dedicated to this cause, this paper illustrates some concrete examples of entities that operate within the solidary enterprise range, initiatives and players, amongst them being the cooperative society, that have been promoting the insertion of vulnerable groups, with especial attention to drug addicts and the disabled. Despite associations and non-governmental organizations being also mentioned to provide a more complete vision of the study subject, the research spotlight was on cooperatives which main activity is promoting the social and labor insertion of sensitive groups. Because of that, we decided to reunite the information regarding social cooperatives that we located in our study to provide a brief image of the work they develop in Brazil, as well as the difficulties they face. Together with the cooperative societies and some governmental actors, all these organizations compose the constellation of players that provide support for the vulnerable groups identified, promoting their social and professional inclusion.
As indicated by the information gathered, sometimes, labor by itself can represent a form of social inclusion. A great number of people classified as vulnerable does not receive the same opportunities of work, as there is a distinguishable prejudice against their vices and/or disabilities. This hinders them from getting a suitable job position that’s, at the same time, able to provide for their livelihood and adequate to their particularities. Therefore, solidary enterprises are a viable alternative, as their initiatives are directly aimed to the particularities of a certain group, providing suitable occupation, unity and support. However, there are not clear or abundant information regarding the participation of public authorities on those initiatives. For some of them, there are data over specific programs that offer funding and training for vulnerable people that fit certain criteria, but even in these cases is not possible to find a complete record of those who were effectively benefited. The data regarding each player, their operation, their stakeholders and their initiatives was found only in third parties’ channels, and most of them were poorly informative. Some of the information was also outdated, and there were no recent updates, so that it’s not possible to know for sure how or if the initiatives are still unfolding nowadays.
To illustrate the problematic scenario verified on Brazil, examples of inactive cooperative are also mentioned, especially due to the self-sustainability challenge that hangs over their organizational structure. Despite their relevant function on the social and professional insertion of vulnerable groups, we found that the entities of solidary enterprises lack proper institutional support from the specialized government sectors. And as most of them are constituted by people united by chance and necessity, they not always have the required management skills to maintain a stable organization. In other cases, the absence of sufficient financial support prevents cooperatives societies from building a sustainable organization, crippling their existence. However, these are not the only obstacles: especially considering the cooperatives, it is necessary to have a proper comprehension of their values, principles and structure, as it is a peculiar type of enterprise. Misunderstandings regarding the important role of the cooperative members, for example, make it harder for the cooperative to survive, as its structure depends of its members’ work. Those were the main aspects, initiatives, entities, stakeholders, players, and problems identified on this study. However, the subject is greatly bigger, and studying its entirety would not be possible within the scope of this paper. Therefore, we expect to provide a brief view of the Brazilian scenario of initiatives aimed to help vulnerable groups, its failures, obstacles and problems. Further studies would be necessary to deeper explore the subject and provide better alternatives.
Acceso al empleo de las personas con discapacidad: situación en el empleo en las personas con enfermedad mental
Manuel Francisco Salinas Tomás y Fernando Marhuenda FluixáDescargar Ver resumen
Las personas con enfermedad mental encuentran mayores dificultades en el acceso al empleo que otras personas que también forman parte del colectivo de personas con discapacidad.
Los datos estadísticos que hablan del empleo de personas con discapacidad suelen aglutinar bajo el término discapacidad psíquica tanto a personas con enfermedad mental como a personas con discapacidad intelectual. Dicha agrupación da lugar a equívocos, puesto que se trata de discapacidades bien diferenciadas y cuyo tratamiento requiere un abordaje específico tanto en apoyos como en medidas específicas de inserción.
Un estudio de los datos estadísticos de las diferentes modalidades de inclusión laboral reguladas en la legislación nos lleva a la conclusión de que es necesario un cambio en el sistema de recogida de datos y su tratamiento para poder diferenciar la enfermedad mental del resto y así poder elaborar medidas de inclusión diferenciadas y por tanto de mayor eficacia.
ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES: PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS BEFORE EMPLOYMENT
Preparation and access to the labour market of people with disabilities has improved along the past four decades as a result of the demand of civil society, families and people with disabilities themselves. However, little is known about the particular difficulties that people with mental illness face when trying to access an employment and try to keep it, their employability being often disregarded to the point that they sometimes hide their disability to their employers and colleagues in order to be able to enter employment.
This paper attempts to cover the specific obstacles that people with mental illness have to address and to discuss whether or not they find the support of specific measures that take into account their particular needs. In order to accomplish our aim, we structure the paper in three sections: in the first one, we review the sources of information available in Spain and we assess the possibilities we find in them for our purpose, on the one hand; and the limitations that these sources entail and that will affect our work on the other hand.
The second section focuses upon the different legislative measures that have been conceived, planned and developed along the years. In doing so, we follow the same order of the measures that were initially stablished by the LISMI, the Law passed in 1982 that was a landmark in the understanding of disability and handicap in the country and that has been the framework valid to structure any new development along the past four decades in terms of educational, social and economic inclusion of people with disabilities. This section is divided in two subsections, one on ordinary employment and a second one on protected employment.
Each subsection covers the different measures that have a legal reference, namely: the reserve quote of 2% for companies that employ more than 50 workers; access to public employment for people with disabilities; self-employment of people with disabilities; supported employment programs, labour or work-enclaves, and special employment centers. The structure of the different subsections is similar: a normative definition of the measure, an analysis of the available data and finally, a subsection on what is the situation of the measure regarding its impact upon people with mental illness and what could be done to improve its effectiveness.
The third and final section discusses the implications of our findings, while also draws attention to the need of more precise, stable and sustainable sets of data that allow researchers but also policy-makers and employers and unions to plan proper measures to facilitate the integration of people with mental illness in the labour market.
In section one we portray the two main sources of information, consisting of the Olivenza Report (the 2019 version is the latest one) and the National Institute of Statistics reports (we have used data from 2019) as well as the Observatory of Employment and Disability (also data from 2019). These being the main sources of data in the country, the problem we have found is the difficulty to identify mental illness as a particular kind of disability, often mixed, mingled or dissolved in other disability types, which leads to confusion and lack of precision, as mental illness is considered as intellectual disability, which it is clearly not. Therefore, in 2019 we have found very similar problems to those already pointed to by the Olivenza report on the situation of disability in Spain in 2019, indicating three obstacles we have also faced: lack of sources; methodological differences used to measure disability as well as the variability in frequency and sequence to obtain the data, something that is not amended whenever the date are claimed and updated.
The second section of the article starts with a general overview on the main laws ruling the object of our paper, the LISMI in 1982 and the General Law on Disability approved in 2013; consisting of an update of the previous with the relevant change of focus from the difficulties and limitations into the capacities and possibilities, therefore with a much more modern approach and one according to current scientific developments and social demands as well.
A review of the different legislative measure follows that introduction, starting with the reserve quote of the 2% in companies hiring more than 50 workers, this being one of the most inclusive measures insofar it consists of employing someone in the ordinary labour market. The legislation covering this quote is explained, and we specify what are the rules behind the calculation of the quote and what percentage of disability is needed to apply for the reserve quote. The paper also presents how can this reserve quote be avoided, an exception in the legislation that yields way to several of the other measures, most of which are not as inclusive as the reserve quote should be. The second measure reviewed in the paper is access to public employment, which consists of a particular application of the reserve quote in the case of the public administrations (national, regional and local) and that has proved useful yet with two necessary considerations: the impact of the 2008 financial crisis upon public employment due to the austerity measures applied by the European Union has been a considerable reduction of jobs available in the public sector, the second amendment related to the level of qualification that the public administration reserves for people with disability, which often leads to low qualified positions and therefore has an impact upon differential access to public employment. Like in the previous case, the lack of proper data invites us to suggest hypothesis on how the measure benefits or not people with mental illness specifically. The third measure we consider is that of self-employment which, to our surprise, despite added difficulties one may consider for people with disabilities has reached a larger percentage than that of the public administration. However, these data must be read with caution, as the coverage of self-employment is strongly related to the type of disability and this implies that people with mental illness are often out of this equation. Fourth we address supported employment, ruled in Spain in 2007 and which consists of an adaptation of a position in the ordinary labour market through staff trained to develop the necessary adaptation. This section shows the difficulties that people with mental illness face in entering the ordinary labour market without proper support, whilst this is often provided as if they were people with intellectual disabilities. We move then onto supported employment. The first subsection covers the ‘jewel of the crown’ among all measures, special employment centers, those employing by large most of the people with disabilities (and people with mental illness among them) even if they have become in fact a segregated labour market and therefore the least inclusive among the different measures. Then we move into labour enclaves, which are a measure so complex in bureaucratic terms that few companies opt for it. We finish the paper claiming for better and more precise data in order to make visible mental illness, to address it differently to intellectual disability, in order to be precise in policy planning and in providing appropriate support measures.
La empleabilidad a debate: ¿qué sabemos sobre la empleabilidad como estrategia de cambio social?
Lucía Llinares Insa, Ana Isabel Córdoba Iñesta y Pilar González-NavarroDescargar Ver resumen
Los cambios en mundo laboral derivados de la globalización y el neoliberalismo han puesto a la empleabilidad en el centro de atención del desarrollo económico y social. Sin embargo, la falta de consenso en las teorías y las dimensiones que la definen reclaman un análisis de la investigación que permita su uso como estrategia de cambio social. El objetivo de este trabajo es realizar una revisión sistemática de los marcos teóricos sobre empleabilidad. Se ha realizado un análisis de 239 artículos científicos atendiendo a dos áreas temáticas: la historia del concepto y las perspectivas teóricas. Los resultados de esta revisión han permitido sistematizar y comprender las orientaciones teóricas desde las que se ha analizado la empleabilidad, las premisas que toman las diferentes teorías como punto de partida y los indicadores propuestos. A partir de todo ello, se han abierto algunas cuestiones para la reflexión de los agentes sociales vinculados a la educación, la acción social y al empleo.
DEBATE ON EMPLOYABILITY: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EMPLOYABILITY AS STRATEGY OF SOCIAL CHANGE?
Many studies have analyzed the concept of employability. However, its importance and systematization is relatively recent. Firstly, late changes in the economic and labor areas made employability an important subject of study (Gracier, 2001; McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005; Rentería & Malvezzi., 2008; Tijssen, Van der Heijden & Roco, 2008). Secondly, many authors analyze the dimensions and indicators of employability to evaluate and categorize people (for example, Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforh, 2004; Tijssen, Van der Heijden, and Roco, 2008). Third, the term changes from the focus on the unemployed to the focus on the general population. Fourth, employability has been linked to the acquisition of formal titles from the Government. Fifth, employability became popular in few years.
We don’t know any studies that analyze its meaning in the social discourse, focused on the individual responsibility over his employability instead of social agents (Salognon, 2007). To clarify this, an explanatory model of employability emerged to consider employability as a socially constructed historical category and, thus, conditioned by socio-historical and institutional factors: the Bioecological Model of Employability proposed by Llinares-Insa, Córdoba, and Zacarés (2016). This model emphasizes the importance of the socio-structural elements in the genesis of the process. But it goes one step further and focuses on individual-society interaction.
The objective of this study is to define the concept of employability as a social construction from a broad perspective that includes all its repercussions. Thus, we carried out a bibliographic analysis on the scientific approach to the term and the theoretical frameworks, the evolution of the meaning of employability, the context in which it is framed and the contributions of the different approaches. Finally, we present an attempt to the concept, emphasizing its relationship with socio-labor inclusion/exclusion and the labor and social differences of different individuals and/or groups.
We performed a bibliographic search based on the recommendations of the systematic reviews and meta-analyzes of the PRISMA statement (Urrútia and Bonfill, 2010), from 2011 to the present. We reviewed SCOPUS, Proquest Central, DIALNET, PsycARTICLES and Web of Science with the terms ‘employabiliy’, ‘concept’ and ‘framework’ in the title and summary. We included only articles from scientific journals. We excluded papers referred to the measure of employability, questionnaires of employability, or those that analyze employability in a specific context or from an international organization or intervention program. We analyzed the content and extracted the most relevant data and made comparative tables according to the similarities and differences.
We organized this review through three big sections focused on well-differentiated characteristics to explain employability:
1. Historical evolution of the concept
The concept of employability has recently been integrated into the language, although it emerged decades ago (Serrano, 2000). According to Formichella and London (2005) or Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden (2006) the first publications are from the 1950s and referred to concerns about the position of homeless people in the labor market, such as disabled people. They presented employability as the potential a person has and that allows him to access a job and remain in it.
In the 1960s, Gazier (1998, 2001) distinguished three types of employability: a) Sociomedical referred to the distance between the real skills for the employment of people with social, physical or mental disadvantages and the requirements of employment. From this moment, people with some type of deficiency begin to be considered employable. b) The employability of labor policy, developed as an attempt to extend the socio-medical perspective to other disadvantaged groups. c) Fluid employability focused on demand and accessibility to employment in local and national economies; it defined employability as the high probability to find a job (Gazier, 2001).
In the last decades of the 20th century, the employment-based system changed to the worker-centered system (Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden, 2006). In the 1970s, employability focused on the measurement of both professional qualification and mobility deficiencies, measuring the distance between individual characteristics and requirements in the labor market, which promoted employment-oriented intervention programs (Renteria and Malvezzi, 2008).
In the 1980s and 1990s the concept of employability focused on the social inclusion of disadvantaged groups and was a reaction to the consequences of high levels of long-term unemployed and a trend towards new types of relationships between employers and employees (McQuaid and Lindsay, 2005).
In the late 1980s, the concept of initiative of employability reflected an acceptance that developing a successful career required the development of transferable skills and the flexibility to perform different roles on the job. It focused on the individual and his responsibility to develop those skills and be employable.
Towards the end of the 20th century, there was a leap to the new psychological contract and employability is considered a crucial component to get and maintain employment (Forrier and Sels, 2003). Moreover, international organizations also highlight the importance of employability for reducing social exclusion.
2. Epistemological perspectives on employability
We can distinguish two major theoretical perspectives in the analysis of the concept of employability:
A) The individualistic perspective focuses on the individual as responsible for developing their career (Kovalenko et al., 2016). Therefore, its role is to get qualities to be more employable (Fugate and Knicki, 2008). In return, they have the right to demand training and learning opportunities from the company (Montañana, 2005). This one-dimensional perspective labels the worker as employable or non-employable based on her ability to get a job (Finn, 2000). It focuses on the need for employees to adapt to new labor market situations and new types of organization (Formichella and London, 2005; Fugate et al., 2004).
B) The socio-critical perspective presents a critical discourse towards the apparent rationality of the market (Brunet and Pastor, 2003). It claims that employability is a social construction (Castillo, 1996) that begins with and maintains class differences (Brunet and Pastor, 2003; Reid, 2015). According to this perspective, occupational policies are considered ineffective. Public action deregulates the labor market and this maintains and generates new inequalities because the success or failure of their work career is attributed to the individual without taking into account the skills they have and the skills the jobs demand.
C) The bioecological model of employability: an integrative proposal from psychology. Finally, we present a proposal about employability as a process that connects the responsibility of society, companies and the context, the bioecological model on employability as an integrative proposal (Llinares-Insa, Córdoba and Zacarés, 2016). It considers employability as a social construction resulting from the reciprocal interaction between an active and developing biopsychological human organism and the people, objects and symbols of its external environment related to the acquisition and maintenance of employment.
Employability must be understood as a process linked to the person with his/her individual and social history. The model focus on (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998): a) Individual dispositions; b) The resources and positive and negative biopsychological elements that affect the subject’s ability to effectively engage in proximal processes; and c) The characteristics of the person that affect the way in which others react to it.
This model emphasizes the importance of the environment; therefore, in disadvantaged and disorganized environments, the impact of proximal processes will be greater on those results that reflect an evolutionary dysfunction (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998). Thus, the development of the person in advantageous and stable environments that transmit contents in accordance with the requirements and parameters imposed by the economic, political, socio-cultural and technological structure are more likely to increase the functional competence of the person and, therefore, employability.
Therefore, the bioecological model achieves the complexity of all types of groups and situations where the term is used, from a young university student to an adult in a work integration social enterprise.
The belief is that there is a standard working person and that everyone can reach it, but this is not real (Clark and Patrickson, 2008). The individual who feels unable to control the situation and who has internalized the institutional discourse may attribute their difficulties of labor integration to their own personal characteristics. This leads to the belief that unemployment is due to their way of being and proceeding, which generates a low level of self-concept, self-esteem and aspirations. As a result, the person can belief the impossibility of playing a valuable role, and this may promote a series of deficiencies in the cognitive, attitudinal and motivational personal areas. For all these reasons, we can affirm that the meaning of the concept of employability is not neutral in any context and that its use requires prior analysis of the symbolic element it evokes.
Indicadores de empleabilidad: de la inclusión al desarrollo de las carreras laborales
Lucía Llinares Insa, Ana Isabel Córdoba Iñesta, Juan José Zacarés González y Pilar González-NavarroDescargar Ver resumen
De la misma forma que la educación tiene la responsabilidad de fomentar la inserción laboral, la empleabilidad está reconocida como una competencia para el logro y mantenimiento del empleo, es por ello que, la empleabilidad es un eje central en la educación. En la Declaración de Incheon y el Objetivo 4 de Educación 2030 de Desarrollo Sostenible se destaca la importancia de las competencias básicas para hacer frente a la vulnerabilidad social y con el fin de conseguir el pleno empleo. Sin embargo, en la literatura científica sobre empleabilidad no hay acuerdo sobre los indicadores que la integran. Nuestro objetivo es delimitar qué indicadores resultan relevantes para el desarrollo de la empleabilidad. Para ello, analizamos los indicadores de empleabilidad que utilizan 30 empresas de inserción (EI) españolas para la realización de los itinerarios formativos de los trabajadores de inserción (PTI). Los resultados muestran una gran heterogeneidad de indicadores. La mayoría de ellos son características individuales, en menor medida hemos encontrado circunstancias personales y prácticamente inexistentes aparecen factores contextuales. Este artículo finaliza resaltando el vínculo formación-trabajo y la formación integral de la persona.
EMPLOYABILITY INDICATORS: FROM INCLUSION TO CAREER DEVELOPMENT
The Incheon Declaration and the Objective 4 of Education 2030 of Sustainable Development (UNESCO, 2015) highlight the relevance of basic competences to face social vulnerability promoting full employment. Nevertheless, in the scientific literature on employability there is not agreement about the employability’ indicators.
However, at present two of the challenges facing most countries are the fight against social exclusion and the creation of inclusive education. The Lisbon European Council emphasizes the need for education and training in Europe to generate a knowledge society and adapt to the needs of the world of work (RLCEur 2005 \ 1178, of May 24, 2005; Declaration of the Sorbonne, 1998). The challenge has been translated into a new community educational approach: skills for employment (García and Ibáñez, 2006).
Nevertheless, the notion of employability is used in many contexts and it has multiple and diverse meanings (McQuaid and Lindsay, 2005) and the lack of systematization makes it a diffuse concept (De Grip, Van Loo, and Sanders, 2004). Thus, we need to specify the employability indicators that allow identifying the skills to be trained, the learning contents, and the elements to be evaluated, especially in vulnerable groups.
Employability has been approached from two clearly differentiated perspectives (Llinares, Zacarés, and Córdoba, 2016). According to the individualistic perspective employability is an individual characteristic that must be promoted for the achievement and maintenance of the job (Finn, 2000; Formichella, and London, 2005; McQuaid and Lyndsay, 2005). However, there is no agreement on the most relevant individual characteristics to promote (Llinares et al., 2016).
Second, the critical perspective affirms that the people’ qualification constitutes a social construction that is based on class hierarchies and contributes to the production and legitimation of differentiation and social exclusion. From this perspective, the idea of employability is promoted as a broader concept where individual factors, personal circumstances, and contextual factors must be considered (McQuaid and Lindsay, 2005; Llinares et al., 2016).
However, there is not clarity about employability indicators, especially in vulnerable groups. An example is provided by the Worker Insertion Social Enterprises (WISE) (FAEDEI-AERES, 2014), companies that prepare vulnerable people to access to ordinary employment in Spain (L44 / 2007, of December 13, RCL 2007 \ 2249).
The WISEs use evaluation tools to collect information from the insertion worker to improve its employability. We analyzed The Instrument for the Analysis of Employability Indicators (IPAIE) (Llinares, Córdoba, and Zacarés, 2011) to analyze these tools. Nevertheless, in different previous investigations (e.g. Córdoba, Llinares, and Zacarés, 2013; Llinares, Córdoba, and Zacarés, 2012) it is observed that, although it includes a large number of indicators, it is a limited instrument to collect the wide variety of relevant employability indicators.
Our goal is to delimitate which dimensions are relevant to the employability’ development. Therefore, we analyze the employability’ indicators used by Spanish Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISE) to design the training itineraries of the insertion workers.
In order to define the indicators to measure employability, we analyzed the assessment instruments used by WISE. We collected all instruments used by 30 WISE, with a total of 220 instruments. We used the IPAIE that compiles the indicators into three broad categories (McQuaid and Lindsay, 2005): 1) Individual factors, referred to the worker. 2) Personal circumstances, referred to family responsibilities, access to resources. 3) External factors: determining factors of the socioeconomic environment related to the labor market (Córdoba et al., 2013).
In order to identify the employability indicators for vulnerable people, and specifically in WISE, we classified the elements that evaluated employability according the IPAIE. Seven specialists linked to the area of social exclusion carried out the categorization and three of them analyzed the agreement index. Subsequently, we analyzed the presence or absence of the elements in each category. When the elements of the employability did not apply to any category we placed it in the ‘Other’ section in order to detect those specific parameters of the vulnerable groups. We analyzed it using frequencies and percentages.
Results showed a great heterogeneity of indicators, although they were mainly focused on individual dimensions (skills and personal attributes) (89.70%); very rarely on personal circumstances (access to resources, family responsibilities) (9.66%); and very few contextual factors (0.64%).
Analyzing the open category of ‘Others’, employability in vulnerable groups is conceived as a competence and / or ability of the person that includes personal attributes and minimally influenced by the personal circumstances. The most important were personal care, interpersonal communication, or specific professional skills. Regarding the content that reflects the deficiencies of pre-employment socialization, we found absenteeism, job search techniques and training / insertion itineraries.
This research ends with a debate-reflection about the training-work ling and about the integral formation of the person.
We found that evaluation of employability from WISE is mainly based on personal competencies as personal skills and attributes, although they analyse some variables that can mediate it. Thus, it emphasizes the person’s responsibility to develop their work (Fugate, Kinicki, and Ashforth, 2004; Salognon, 2007), which de-responsibilizes the rest of the social agents (De Lara and Andrade, 2008). From this perspective, inequalities are due to the person’s lack of ability to apply for certain jobs. This individual perspective is a legitimizing element of the social and labor context.
However, not all the elements that allow the person to access and maintain employment depend directly on the worker, since having employability skills does not guarantee obtaining and keeping a job. Therefore, on another hand, from a critical perspective employability does not depend solely on the responsibility of the individual, but also on the needs of the market, the preferences of the employer, the characteristics of the job or the worker personal circumstances (Bauman, 2005; Beck and Beck-Genshein, 2002). Moreover, employability is a complex concept, which must include macro (social, political and ideological structures) and micro aspects (individual factors and immediate social contexts) to cope with unemployment and marginalization (Llinares et al., 2016).
In this sense, the data derived from the analysis of instruments reflect that in vulnerable groups we have to broaden the vision of the usual employability indicators to both individual and personal circumstances that clearly affect the process of social and labor insertion of individual at risk.
To conclude, there is a need to generate new empowering educational projects with the individual that seek lifelong training and empowerment. This requires the analysis and intervention on individual employability factors, and a more realistic and global perspective that considers the specific limiting circumstances starting from Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998, 2006), that integrates the individual in their context taking into account their personal circumstances and contextual factors.
On the other hand, we have to continue deepening on the elements of employability to be fostered in the educational system that provide the subject with comprehensive training, including the acquisition of knowledge and professionalization as claimed in the current context. In this way, employability becomes the instrument of analysis and intervention, but also of reflection.
Comentarios y notas de jurisprudencia
Isabel Rodríguez Martínez (Coordinadora)
Sobre el órgano judicial competente para resolver la casación frente a normas de derecho civil autonómico. Comentario al Auto 8857/2018, de 5 de septiembre, de la Sala de lo Civil del Tribunal Supremo
Joaquín J. Marco MarcoDescargar Ver resumen
El Auto 8857/2018, de 5 de septiembre, de la Sala de lo Civil del Tribunal Supremo determina la competencia respecto de la resolución de un recurso de casación planteado por una cooperativa gallega frente a una sentencia en apelación de la Audiencia Provincial de A Coruña. El Auto, que reitera la posición de otro Auto de marzo de 2015, supone una modificación en la línea jurisprudencial de la Sala Primera del Tribunal Supremo al considerar que la competencia, por tratarse de derecho civil autonómico –no derecho foral- corresponde al Tribunal Supremo y no al Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia, como se había venido considerando anteriormente.
BOUT THE COMPETENT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY TO RESOLVE THE CASSATION APPEAL AGAINST AUTONOMIC CIVIL LAW
Comment to the judicial order 8857/2018, september 5, of the civil chamber of the Supreme Court
The Order 8857/2018, September 5, of the civil chamber of the Supreme Court determines the jurisdiction regarding the resolution of a cassation appeal filed by a Galician cooperative against a judgment on appeal from the Provincial Court of A Coruña. The Order, which reiterates the position of another Order of March 2015, involves a modification in the jurisprudential line of the first chamber of the Supreme Court, considering that the jurisdiction, being autonomic civil law -not special law- corresponding to the Supreme Court and not to the Superior Court of Justice of Galicia, as previously presented.
La condena a la cobertura del déficit concursal. Comentario a la Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo 597/2018, Civil, de 31 de octubre (Roj: STS 3679/2018)
Ana Belén Campuzano LaguilloDescargar Ver resumen
La cuestión que aborda la Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo de 31 de octubre de 2018 es la relativa al alcance de la condena a la cobertura del déficit concursal, en el supuesto, planteada a los miembros del consejo rector de una cooperativa. En este contexto, se analiza la condena a la cobertura del déficit concursal prevista en nuestra legislación de insolvencia, desde la perspectiva de las modificaciones legales introducidas en la misma y su interpretación.
THE SENTENCE FOR THE COVERAGE OF THE INSOLVENCY DEFICIT
Commentary to the Supreme Court Judgment 597/2018, Civil, of October 31 (Roj: STS 3679/2018)
The issue proposes by the Supreme Court Judgment of October, 31, 2018, is the scope of the sentence for the coverage of the insolvency deficit, in the case, raised to the members of the governing council of a cooperative. In this context, the sentence of the insolvency deficit coverage provided for in our insolvency legislation is analyzed, from the perspective of the legal modifications introduced in it and its interpretation.
Derechos de sindicación y libertad sindical en las Cooperativas de Trabajo Asociado. Comentario a la Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (Sala de lo Social), de 8 de mayo de 2019. Roj: 1944/2019
Manuel García JiménezDescargar Ver resumen
El Tribunal Supremo, en su Sala de lo Social, declara que “los socios trabajadores de las cooperativas de trabajo asociado tienen derecho a afiliarse al sindicato de su elección y el sindicato tiene derecho al ejercicio de la acción sindical en defensa de los derechos e intereses de sus afiliados en este tipo de cooperativas”. Dicho pronunciamiento, rompe con la tradicional negación de los derechos colectivos laborales de los socios en las cooperativas de trabajo y supone un reto organizativo para su armonización con los causes democráticos propios de la identidad cooperativa, pero, al mismo tiempo, abre una vía para cuando, a través de dichos cauces, el ejercicio de derechos laborales básicos se ve limitado. Todo un reto, en especial para las grandes cooperativas.
UNION RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF UNION IN WORKER COOPERATIVES
Commentary to the Supreme Court (Social Chamber) Judgment of May 8, 2019.
The Supreme Court, in its Social Chamber, declares that the worker members of the worker cooperatives have the right to join the union of their choice and the union has the right to exercise union action in defence of rights and interests of its members in this type of cooperatives. Said pronouncement breaks with the traditional denial of collective labor rights in worker cooperatives and represents an organizational challenge for its harmonization with the democratic causes of cooperative identity, but, at the same time, opens a way for when, through of said channels, the exercise of basic labor rights is limited. Quite a challenge, especially for large cooperatives.
Práctica concertada de boicot a terceros de los socios cooperativistas y responsabilidad de la cooperativa. Sentencia de la Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo del Tribunal Supremo núm. 1497/2018
Javier Guillem CarrauDescargar Ver resumen
Este comentario de jurisprudencia aborda una cuestión de gran interés en el ámbito de derecho cooperativo que consiste en la aplicación del derecho de la competencia a las cooperativas por actuaciones de sus socios; esto es, el levantamiento del velo en la imputación por conductas anticompetitivas en un caso de boicot es la pieza clave de este litigio.
BOYCOTT BY COOPERATIVE MEMBERS AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COOPERATIVE
Judgment of the Chamber of Administrative Proceedings of the Spanish Supreme Court núm. 1497/2018
This case law comment digs into a question of interest in the context of the Cooperative Law: the application of Competition Law to a Cooperative based on the anticompetitive behavior of its members. Piercing the corporate veil in order to charge the anticompetitive practice of a boycott is the jigsaw of this legal proceedings.
Amalia Rodríguez González y Itziar Villafáñez Pérez (Coordinadoras)
La baja como causa de finalización de la relación societaria entre la persona socia y la sociedad cooperativa
Aitor Bengoetxea AlkortaDescargar
El ejercicio del cargo de patrono en las fundaciones, de M ª Eugenia Serrano Chamorro
José Antonio Orejas CasasDescargar
Fundamentos del derecho de la discapacidad
Miguel Ángel Cabra de LunaDescargar
Tributación del crowdfunding
José Francisco Sedeño LópezDescargar
El carpooling o viaje en coche compartido. Especial referencia a BlaBlaCar
Rafael García PérezDescargar
Reseñas de jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo sobre entidades de Economía Social
Enero 2019 – Marzo 2020 / María José Arnau Cosín y Jesús Olavarría Iglesia
Reseñas de legislación sobre entidades de Economía Social
Diciembre 2019 – Mayo 2019 / Gemma Fajardo García