Rodriguez&Lucio - Narratives, Myths and Prejudice

445625
2012
EID34210.1177/0143831X12445625Fernández Rodríguez and Martínez LucioEconomic and Industrial Democracy
Article
Economic and Industrial Democracy
Narratives, myths and 34(2) 313–336

© The Author(s) 2012
prejudice in understanding
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0143831X12445625
employment systems: The eid.sagepub.com
case of rigidities, dismissals

and flexibility in Spain
Carlos Jesús Fernández Rodríguez

Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Miguel Martínez Lucio

University of Manchester, UK
Abstract
This contribution is intended to understand the complex issues that underpin the debate on ‘free
labour markets’ and job dismissal that has become very important in the context of the current
economic crisis. Irrespective of economic debates and their nuances, the article focuses on the
way related debates are shaped and how discussions about industrial relations, the labour market
and even the economy are structured. The article discusses this in the context of Spain, where
the debate has become a touchstone of national concern and external images of the country. In
the case of Spanish industrial relations, the free dismissal discourse has been and still is vital for
defining the way policy is prescribed, constructed and constrained.
Keywords
Contextualized comparisons, dismissals, flexibility, policy development, political discourse, Spain
Introduction
The Spanish labour market has been, since the transition to democracy in the mid-1970s,
affected by economic cycles, which have had a very deep impact on employment figures.
Unemployment (considered to be one of the main problems of the country) reached
numbers greater than 15% of the active population between 1980 and the year 2000, with
strong social consequences (Bilbao, 1999; Golsch, 2004). In periods of sustained
Corresponding author:
Carlos Jesús Fernández Rodríguez, Departamento de Sociología, Facultad CC. Económicas, Universidad
Autónoma de Madrid, Campus de Cantoblanco, c/ Francisco Tomás y Valiente 5, 28049 Madrid, Spain.
Email: carlos.fernandez@uam.es
Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

314 Economic and Industrial Democracy 34(2)
economic growth, the economy created new jobs, especially when the GDP was
increasing at more than 3% annually; nevertheless, many of these jobs disappeared once
the situation was defined by economic crisis. For example, while at the beginning of
2007 the unemployment rate was below 8% (after several years of being below 10% as
a result of economic growth driven by the construction sector), by April 2010, the month
before a set of unprecedented political measures were carried out to avoid a debt crisis,
there were more than 4.5 million people unemployed (20.05%),1 and numbers rose to
approximately 5 million (21.52%) in the third quarter of 2011.
During the years 2008–2011, the economic crisis was particularly intense in Spain and
there was an extreme period of job destruction. While this critical situation has been
considered to be the result of the exhaustion of a specific productive model (López and
Rodríguez, 2010), employers’ associations have developed a discourse blaming the
‘rigidity’ of the labour market, and in particular the cost of redundancy. This diagnosis has
been reinforced by external agents. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) recommended
in late 2008 that a reduction of the costs of dismissal and the development of new labour
market reforms would introduce more flexibility (IMF, 2008). The Bank of Spain
recommended similar policies, arguing that the labour market needed urgent reforms (see
e.g. Fernández Ordóñez, 2008; Gómez, 2009). Therefore the demands have been not only
to develop administrative reforms in dismissals procedures, such as collective dismissals
regulated by law that need administrative permission to make employees redundant
(Agencia EFE, 2009), but also to create a new type of flexible employment contract. This
‘anti-crisis contract’ would be indefinite but with new conditions: in the first two years,
the dismissal costs would only be equivalent to eight working days (in a normal fixed
contract they would usually be much higher) and, after that period, never more than 20
days per year, with a maximum of 12 months (Europa Press, 2009; Flotats and Méndez,
2009). This reduction in the cost of dismissal would be accompanied by other measures
related to the reduction of the administrative procedures involved in dismissing a worker,
plus reforms to unemployment benefits, more control over absenteeism from work, more
activation policies, more flexibility and decentralization in the negotiations with the trade
unions, and a stronger presence of private employment agencies in the Spanish labour
market. This position made negotiations with Spanish trade unions difficult, as the link
with marketization was clear within these ‘free labour market’ initiatives (Gómez and
Noceda, 2009).
There has been significant discussion in Spanish politics regarding the reasons for
such a poor performance in sustaining employment, and social scientists have also
developed an important body of research regarding the topic (see e.g. Koch, 2006;
Miguélez and Prieto, 1999, 2008; Pries, 1988; Toharia, 1986; Toharia and Malo, 2000).
One of the most influential views is that of a group of academics (mainly from the field
of orthodox economics) who have repeatedly pointed to the rigidity of the labour market
as the main reason, demonstrated by the excessive amount of employment regulation,
and the high cost of dismissal (see e.g. Bentolila and Dolado, 1994; Costain et al., 2010;
Dolado and Felgueroso, 2010; Lamo and Dolado, 1993; Malo and Pérez, 2003; Manifiesto
de los 100, 2009).
This interpretation has been shared by the main political bodies for several decades
and has become a key issue in the discourse of the employers’ associations (CEOE

Fernández Rodríguez and Martínez Lucio 315
– Confederación Española de Organizaciones Empresariales), which have argued that

the reasons why the Spanish economy is not able to create more jobs is directly related
to dismissal costs. Our argument in this article is that these political interventions have
played a key role in the framing of the industrial relations debate since the late 1970s,
shaping labour market reforms and becoming one of the main points of contention
regarding the reforms of the labour market (Navarro, 2009). During 2009 and 2010, the
employers’ associations (whose position became much less conciliatory during the
2008–2010 leadership of Gerardo Díaz Ferrán, an explicit supporter of neoliberal
policies) forced a break in the negotiations with trade unions and government over a
social pact related to the economic crisis until a reform of the labour market, which
implicitly reduced dismissal costs, was accepted (Agencia EFE, 2010a; Ramírez et al.,
2010). International institutions such as the IMF or the OECD also demanded reforms in
the Spanish labour market, and in spite of recognizing the important problem Spain had
with its productive model, their discourses focused on the dismantling of the ‘rigid’
labour market and the introduction of more flexibility (IMF, 2008, 2010). IMF reports in
2010 urged the Spanish government to do this as quickly as possible (IMF, 2010; see also
Agencia EFE, 2010b). This led to the emergence of a strong debate within Spanish
society (involving academics, political parties, the mass media, employers’ associations
and trade unions) related to the urgency of pushing through definitive labour market
reforms in which the cost of dismissal for employers would be substantially reduced (if
not quite to zero). It was argued that that reduction would help to improve the employment
figures. The reforms were supported enthusiastically by employers’ associations, some
economists and the conservative parties (and implicitly, the social democrats, who have
been pushing for labour market reforms in that direction since the 1980s), while it was
strongly opposed by trade unions, left-wing political parties and a substantial group of
intellectuals and academics. In pursuing this goal, several reforms have been put forward
and new reforms are still being developed, leading to a fracture between the advocates of
a more dynamic labour market, who dismiss strategies of flexibility only at the margin
(Toharia and Malo, 2000), and critics who despise the economic turn towards flexibility,
which is regarded as being out of control and spreading insecurity through the whole
labour market (Miguélez and Prieto, 2009).
This academic contribution is intended as an attempt to understand the political
dimension and impact of this debate on free dismissal,2 which has become a central feature
in the context of economic crisis. This article begins with a section on the way the debate
itself has been shaped historically, and how it frames the discussion around industrial
relations, the labour market and even the Spanish economy as a whole. Regardless of
differences that exist and concerns about change, the discourse on free dismissal has been
pivotal to the way policy is prescribed and contained. We outline substantive issues in
terms of labour markets, followed by the way that reforms have been structured through
this obsession with dismissals. Yet we feel that this can only be understood effectively if
we pay attention to the elements of the political discourse and processes that have shaped
these reforms and representations of Spanish industrial relations. We then focus on the
approaches to the way that politics and institutional contexts encompass labour markets
and debates on flexibility. Through these perspectives and approaches we present a four-
dimensional framework for understanding the way debates are framed and with what

consequences in terms of the representation of labour market issues both internally and
externally. We concentrate on how the emphasis on ‘dismissals’ in Spanish employment
relations have been framed, and how in turn they skew the understanding of flexibility and
labour market issues more broadly: (1) the construction of the employers’ and trade
unions’ agendas as well as their negotiation positions as an influence on the way that
labour market problems are framed; (2) the ideological construction of the subject of the
Spanish labour market in terms of the views of the ‘worker’ in Spain, how they contribute
to views of labour market mobility (or the lack of it), and how these views further distort
an understanding of the Spanish labour market; (3) the development of a binary character
in academic agendas in Spain related to labour market analysis, whereby questions of
costs and days worked in relation to dismissals become a primary focus of discussion at
the expense of other broader issues; and (4) the role of debates on regulation, the market
and management, and how they are framed by discourses such as managerialism that
applaud individualism and the need to remove ‘rigidities’, thus creating anxiety about
dismissal procedures and their regulation. In this respect we are concerned with not only
how labour market issues are constructed but also how in turn they close debates and
create a mythical understanding of a country’s employment system.
This forces us to attempt to understand the underlying politics and issues around
which employers and academics shape policy and politics; but also how these policies
and politics ossify and become almost independent features in the discussion of
employment relations. Issues and themes within labour markets are constructed in
specific regulatory contexts (Blyton and Martínez Lucio, 1995) and specific aspects of
identity and the political context influence the significance and meaning of different
issues in different national settings (Locke and Thelen, 1995). They are also the subject
of broader ideological and political influences that lead to a perpetuation of myths and
narratives about national context. Hence we need to note how debates frame the practices
and actors within industrial relations. This happens at four key levels, as stated above,
and discussed in a later section. These dimensions exist independently of the political
discussion of any specific economic element, but they are also configured and further
influenced by the way that elements – in this case, views of dismissal – emerge and are
referenced. This political question of social representation and mis-representation
requires greater attention to be paid to the way that key issues of economic reform are
prioritized.
The concept of free dismissal: The historical

development of a neoliberal obsession
The labour market context
Since the late 1970s, the rapid development of non-standard employment policies have
represented an attempt not only to adapt labour markets to the new realities introduced
by so-called lean production and neoliberal policies, but also to respond to the emerging
problem of massive unemployment generated by the oil crisis. Deregulation policies
were used with the aim of introducing flexibility in different organizational processes

(Atkinson, 1984; Boyer, 1987). While some flexibility was achieved, the most visible
outcome was a higher rate of structural unemployment and the degradation of employment
conditions for significant numbers of workers in most western countries (Kallenberg,
2009). This has led to widespread precarious labour conditions in certain European
countries (Rodgers and Rodgers, 1989; Tremmel, 2010) and the rise of a huge body of
academic and activist literature discussing these newly emerging labour identities. This
literature has ranged from empirical studies of ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ (Lindbeck and
Snower, 1988) and accounts of harsher living conditions (Bauman, 1998; Sennett, 1998),
to references to a new social ‘under’-class (Standing, 2011) with a revolutionary potential
(Hardt and Negri, 2004).
In the Spanish context, the widespread use of flexible labour policies has pushed the
discussion towards two main debates. The first is focused on different forms of precarious
employment and how they have affected the weaker groups of the labour market such as
women, immigrants and young people, in particular the latter (see Golsch, 2004; López
Calle, 2008; Prieto, 2009). Meanwhile, the second debate has highlighted the dualism of
the Spanish labour market that pushes a model that benefits an overprotected ‘working-
class aristocracy’ (mainly old male workers with long careers and whose dismissal costs
are so high that companies avoid to make them redundant in spite of their – supposed –
low productivity), while a large group of precarious workers (mainly young people,
women and immigrants) experience poor job conditions (Polavieja, 2003, 2006) and
have less access to improved opportunities in the workplace (Paugam and Zhou, 2007).
In the case of Spain, the question of labour market precariousness has been tied
politically to the issue of redundancy costs, and has taken a central position in terms of
both academic and political debates. There is a significant set of interventions and
concerns with regard to this issue as competing positions attempt to assert themselves. It
has become a defining factor in how employment, and even the economy, is understood
because of the extremely high level of unemployment since the 1970s, a dualist and
segmented labour market that excludes many younger and female workers and an
increasingly high level of informal and undocumented workers being exposed to
exploitative employers (Bilbao, 1999; López and Rodríguez, 2010).
However, one needs to realize that the debate is itself framing the way that labour
market issues and actors are represented and understood. Locke and Thelen (1995: 341)
speak of the need to understand the way employers encounter ‘different (institutional)
rigidities’, with different social actors and political agencies emphasizing the significance
and ‘valence of particular issues’. Labour market relations and issues are framed
politically and create images and perspectives that have direct and indirect effects in
labour market and economic terms. In Spain, discourses regarding ‘free dismissal’ must
be studied to understand how they frame political choices and meanings. For example,
the employers’ associations have adopted a neoliberal perspective on the future of
industrial relations, seeing them as a constraint to their legitimate authority in their
management of human resources. It is important to highlight that their discourse
references ‘rigidity’ and ‘regulation’ by linking and fusing the meaning of both in terms
of the Spanish employment relations system.3 The industrial relations system in Spain is
considerably weaker in real terms than in countries with an embedded social democratic

tradition, and the culture of collective agreements is significantly less developed (largely
for historical reasons, such as the long dictatorship). The extent of regulation is very
different from what is highlighted in these discourses; on the other hand, collective
agreements have usually been minimal and strategic agreements have been normative
rather than real and effectively implemented pacts. While trade unions and industrial
relations appear to have a strong influence in Spain, they are not as strong as neoliberal
arguments have suggested. There have been serious problems in terms of the
implementation of collective bargaining processes, and constraints on their content as
well as the limited regulatory reach of unions within smaller and medium-sized firms are
noticeable (Martínez Lucio, 1998, 2008).
While the regulation of dismissals has been complex in Spain, with various costs
attached, one could argue that it emerges from a compromise with the trade union move-
ment during the transition to liberal democracy in the 1970s. Spanish trade unions saw
such rights as a ‘victory’ and a form of compensation for their oppression during the
Francoist dictatorship. These rights were accepted during the high levels of mobilization
in the 1970s as a way of stabilizing employment relations and political relations (Alonso,
2007a). This regulation was part of a ‘political agreement’ that represented an implicit
pact between the working classes and the political class to establish a democratic society
with a social market economy (Rodríguez Cabrero, 2009). It is also important to point
out the importance in this settlement between state and labour of the social difficulties
brought by a traumatic unemployment rate – consistently one of the highest in the OECD
since the early 1980s (Laparra, 2006; Martínez Pastor et al., 2008; Miguélez and Prieto,
2008). This has been ignored in much of the orthodox economic texts that are ahistorical
in nature and remain silent in relation to these implicit agreements during the political
transition to democracy.
On the other hand, and in the light of this enormous growth of unemployment, one
question arises. Is it so difficult to dismiss or lay off people in Spain? More than a
million people were laid off in just one year (2009), according to the statistics.4 There
has been a surprisingly high number of Expedientes de Regulación de Empleo (collective
dismissals which need to be approved by the public administration), with more than
400,000 people affected in 2009 (including temporary and permanent dismissals). The
extent of job destruction has been extraordinary, and ironically the legal ‘obstacles’
have not halted this tendency. Moreover, there are issues here that provide an insight
into the specific image of the management approach in many Spanish companies. The
employers’ strategy seems to focus mainly on laying off workers rather than innovating
or investing in learning and research and development (R&D). The employers’ strategy
rests on a very short-term view in its orientation, disregarding long-term investment in
the workforce (Prieto, 2009). Finally, the level of flexibility is very high in Spain in
terms of numbers (Miguélez and Prieto, 2008), and this means that the legislation on
dismissal has not really affected the development of dualist traits and temporary
contracting en masse.
Unemployment has been a major feature in the Spanish labour market’s recent history,
reaching rates greater than 20% at least three times since the early 1980s: the worst
performance of the EU-27, with a rate of 21.52% in the third quarter of 2011 (see Figure 1).

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
II I I II I I II I I II I I II I I II I I II I I II
TI TIV 9 T TI TI TIV 4 T TI TI TIV 9 T TI TI TIV 4 T TI TI TIV 9 T TI TI TIV 4 T TI TI TIV 9 T TI TI
76 77 97 980 981 82 98 985 986 87 98 990 991 92 99 995 996 97 99 000 001 02 00 005 006 07 00 010 011
19 19 1 1 1 19 1 1 1 19 1 1 1 19 1 1 1 19 1 2 2 20 2 2 2 20 2 2 2
Figure 1. Unemployment rate in Spain, 1976–2011 (in percentages).

T = trimestre (financial quarter).
Source: Encuesta de Población Activa (EPA), and National Institute of Statistics (INE) data, 2011.
Table 1. Unemployment rate, 2007 and 2011 (in percentages).
Unemployment rate (%)
2011(III) 2007(II)
Both sexes
Total 21.52 7.95
Young people under 25 45.84 18.19
Non-Spanish 32.72 11.97
Men
Total 21.04 6.1
Women
Total 22.10 10.49
Source: Encuesta de Población Activa (EPA) and National Institute of Statistics (INE) data, 2011.
If we establish a comparison between the best Spanish employment data since the early
1980s (the second quarter of 2007, boosted by the housing boom and a long-sustained
growth of the economy) with the data available in 2011 (third quarter), we can see that the
crisis has affected unemployment in a dramatic way. Young people’s unemployment rates
are substantially higher than the EU average, and while unemployment rates are higher for
women than for men, the situation is reversed in the population aged under 25 years old
(see Table 1). This is probably because of the loss of low-skilled jobs in the construction
sector, mainly held by the male workforce. Immigrants have also been hit harder by the
crisis, with higher rates of unemployment than the average for non-immigrants as a result
of the collapse of the construction and related sectors.

Table 2. Precarious labour in Spain, 2007 and 2011.
Figures (in 000s; fixed-term contract also in %)
2011(III) 2007(II)
Both sexes
Total 15,179.4 16,779.4
Permanent contract 11,228.9 11,435.5
Fixed-term contract 3,950.4 (26.02%) 5,343.9 (31.85%)
Men
Total 8,067.8 9,548.3
Women
Total 7,111.6 7,231.0
Source: Encuesta de Población Activa (EPA) and National Institute of Statistics (INE) data, 2011.
Regarding labour precariousness, it is important to point out that, in Spain, different

social actors such as trade unions and government institutions have linked precarious
labour with fixed-term contracts rather than with other non-standard contracts (such as
part-time) or other situations that might imply subordination in the workplace (e.g. invol-
untary self-employment or internships). Therefore the data available focus mainly on
fixed-term contracts as a distinctive feature of precarious labour, and in this sense the
figures in Spain have been very high since the 1990s (see Table 2).
It is interesting to note that, according to statistics from the mid-1990s until
approximately 2008, even at times of ‘lower’ employment, 30% of the labour force was
on fixed-term contracts. These types of contract are typical of seasonal jobs in the hotel,
catering and tourism industries as well as in construction; and they have been widespread
in Spain since the mid-1990s. During the recent crisis, many of these fixed-term contracts
have not been renewed, helping employers to reduce dismissal costs and proving to be a
core element of their labour policies.
Another concern is that the structure of Spanish capital is highly fragmented between
finance, industrial, transnational, regional, and a relatively high degree of small and
medium-sized firms. The latter group are known to have a less effective approach to
implementing regulations in terms of legal norms and collective agreements. As a
consequence, many in the trade union movement are aware that such a fragmented
employer class, with its proliferation of small and medium-sized businesses, tends to
implement basic aspects of collective agreements, such as pay increases and dismissal
procedures where relevant, but not always other social content, so any undermining of
rights with regard to labour markets would further weaken the regulatory reach of unions
and the state in relation to the employment status of workers in the relevant sectors.
Therefore, the discourse of free dismissal must be seen as much as a normative and
ideological issue as a material one, and there are political calculations and concerns in

relation to the undermining of such a vital aspect of employment regulation. In the next
section of this article we discuss these developments in the context of the political agenda
and the development of employment relations reforms in Spain.
The development of labour market reforms in Spain

As mentioned earlier, the Spanish employment context has been characterized by a high
rate of unemployment since the transition to democracy in the 1970s. Many researchers
have highlighted structural problems in relation to unemployment: the historical delay in
the industrialization of the country and the flawed development of a Fordist system during
the long dictatorship of Franco, the low activity rate and the lack of a culture of innovation
and entrepreneurship, low competitiveness in the markets, etc. (Koch, 2006; Toharia,
1986). Moreover, the regulation of labour in Franco’s regime left a curious heritage. The
Fuero del Trabajo was the basic employment law of Francoism and it was intended to
establish a (state/authoritarian) corporatist model under an authoritarian rule. It developed
extensive regulations on labour markets, especially in exit limitations and favouring fixed
contracts as the basic employment norm (addressed mainly towards a male workforce
while pushing women into the domestic space) (Bilbao, 1993). The system maintained
very low levels of unemployment combined with low levels of activity, and pushed many
job-seekers into emigration. This was one of the ways the dictatorship limited the potential
for political opposition. The oil crisis of the early 1970s, in the final stage of the
dictatorship, was a turning point for this authoritarian-regulated system, as it resulted in
an extensive restructuring of Spanish capitalism, and the transition to democracy occurred
at the same time as a severe economic crisis (inflation over 20% and growing
unemployment) and strong social and political unrest (Alonso, 2007a).
The political exchanges during the transition to democracy played a part in forging a
political response to labour market issues. The Moncloa Pacts of 1977 were arranged
between most of the political parties, employers’ associations and some trade unions; the
Pacts meant that the Spanish economy would become a free market economy with social
aspects, and some macroeconomic stability was achieved (Fishman, 1996). That same
year, trade unions and employers’ associations were legalized, and a fragile industrial
relations system was constructed (Martínez Lucio, 1990). The first outcomes of the
negotiations were still under the influence of a political project shaped around the
construction of a labour citizenship, such as the Estatuto de los Trabajadores (Workers’
Statute) and some additional laws were influenced by a social democratic view (Alonso,
2007a). Nevertheless, the deepening nature of the crisis during the 1980s, the rise of
unemployment and the new policy adopted by the PSOE (the social democratic party
who ruled between 1982 and 1996 and from 2004 until 2011) to join the European
Economic Community (EEC) led to a change of direction. The position of the trade
unions weakened, while the more organized employers’ associations were increasingly
able to implement aspects of their emerging neoliberal agenda of blocking a deepening
of regulation and trade union influence (Martínez Lucio, 1990). This new scenario led to
the first labour market reform, in 1984, which introduced temporary contracts in spite of
trade union opposition. The reform in employment relations took place in a context of
strong industrial restructuring, whose goal was to adapt the Spanish economy to the new

post-Fordist paradigm (Alonso and Martínez Lucio, 2006). Since then, later labour
market reforms have been justified by the need to introduce more flexibility into the
labour market, meaning that the managerial position was adopted by the different social
democratic and conservative governments (Partido Popular – PP).
This view has gradually become hegemonic since the 1980s. Its effects on the regula-
tion of the Spanish labour market have been significant: the five main labour market
reforms (1984, 1994, 1997, 2006 and 2010) were inspired by calls for a more flexible
labour market by introducing a variety of non-standard employment such as the contrato
por obra y servicio or contrato en prácticas, among many others5 and reducing the costs
of dismissal (Zufiaur, 2009). The reform of 1994 was particularly important in that sense,
multiplying the contractual possibilities and introducing private employment agencies to
the system. Nevertheless, in spite of some positive results – the Spanish unemployment
rate reached a minimum of 7.95% at the beginning of 2007 – not all the outcomes were
satisfactory. Spain became the EU country with the highest rate of temporary contracts,
representing more than 33% of all labour contracts (Miguélez and Prieto, 2008), as well
as having a very low rate of productivity (IMF, 2010). Youth and female unemployment
also remained relatively high compared to other EU countries. This situation had strong
social consequences, spreading precariousness among certain social groups and multi-
plying new inequalities (Díaz-Salazar, 2003; Prieto, 2009).
Nevertheless, in spite of the introduction of flexibility, demands from the Spanish
employers’ associations for even greater levels of flexibility persisted. ‘Rigidity’ is
considered to be the main labour market problem, and in every economic crisis this
discourse reappears, influencing the development of an interest in the reduction of costs
as a source of ‘compromise’ between the different social actors, and putting the trade
unions in a defensive position. Therefore it is possible to argue that, through its historical
development, the discourse of free dismissal has been essential not only to push through
the reforms of the labour market, but also in setting the employment relations agenda
(Navarro, 2009). It is seen by neoliberals as a key piece of the modern traditionalist
jigsaw. Measures towards free dismissal seem to be considered as the solution that can
solve the problem of unemployment, whose rate in Spain has often been double that of
the rest of Europe. Employer representatives have highlighted the importance of
undertaking a labour market reform allowing for free dismissals (or similar options with
fewer labour rights, such as the new anti-crisis contract) (Agencia EFE, 2010a).
The emphasis on dismissals has been made in the following terms. First, according to
the employers’ associations, the layoffs are expensive compared to the average in the EU
(something we dispute below), and if they were cheaper the Spanish labour market could
create more jobs: the way that dismissals are regulated by legislation limits the authority
of the employer and undermines continuous change and innovation as the budget for
such possible investments is used to pay the high costs of dismissals. They also restrict
the emergence of a new workforce, as employers are reluctant to hire people whose level
of performance is still unknown; and have an impact on the workforce, as weaker groups
such as young people and women are pushed into precarious contracts, creating huge
inequalities and leading to a dualist labour market pictured as a struggle between insiders
and outsiders. It also places limits on the use of part-time contracts, which would be used
more extensively if temporary contracts weren’t so attractive as a means of avoiding

signing fixed contracts with employees. The reduction of dismissal costs would therefore
help to introduce flexibility, a more rational labour market and an improvement in the
competitiveness of Spanish companies.
The proposals of the employers’ associations and related organizations since 2008
have oscillated from a reduction of dismissal costs to the introduction of free dismissals
across the board – a position very similar to their agenda since the 1980s. The question
of dismissals has therefore become the central debate regarding Spanish employment
relations, overshadowing many others. Other issues, such as the peculiarities of the
Spanish productive model, have not been discussed effectively in political terms
(Navarro, 2007). This discourse of free dismissal is also seen by the neoliberals as a
means of underpinning stronger deregulation in the labour market.
Economic debates and the impact of the political: The

curious influence of the discourse of free dismissal in
framing actors and agendas
We must be sensitive to the contexts that shape the strategies of political elites and
movements. The manner in which a consensus is established is imperative to the Spanish
context, given the perceived and underlying tensions that emerge from its economic and
social characteristics. These historical factors therefore provide a series of concerns and
projects related to the state, which are addressed and utilized by contemporary
developments such as neoliberalism. Much depends on the development and manipulation
of existing discourses and concerns (Fairclough, 1989; Hall, 1988; Laclau and Mouffe,
1984). The link with other pre-established issues and discourses is a key factor
(Fairclough, 1995). This may require a process of alliance-building around a view of the
nation and its interests that is capable of superseding sectional interests (see Laclau and
Mouffe, 1984). Fundamental features of a discourse and how they change may also
depend on how contradictions and alternatives are highlighted by political actors. The
absence of such challenges – or the way challenges relate to a narrative constructed by a
dominant discourse, as in the union insistence on defending labour market redundancy
processes within a narrow and segmented approach – may assist a dominant argument by
constructing it as a type of ‘common sense’ and the only viable alternative. The
development of ‘select comparisons’ and particular reference points is therefore a vital
part of sustaining the legitimacy of a discourse (Martínez Lucio, 2002).
In this section, we discuss the influence of the debate about free dismissal at several
levels: (1) the shaping of the employer and trade union agendas as well as their negotia-
tion; (2) the ideological construction of the subject of the Spanish labour market; (3) the
development of a binary character in academic agendas in Spain related to labour market
analysis; and (4) how debates on regulation, the market and management are framed. The
argument put forward is that, when discussing ‘labour market rigidities’ and ‘free dis-
missals’, it is essential to understand that they are framed and politically constructed by
both academics and political actors: but also that the outcomes of these and the way
certain obsessions can emerge, as with the question of the economic cost to employers of
dismissals, will, in turn, frame responses and strategies in political economy across many

vectors and themes. As Locke and Thelen (1995) point out, such debates and concerns
can contextualize and frame representation and discussions within and between coun-
tries. The fascination with Spain, and in Spain, about such topics has less to do with hard
reality and more to do with stereotyping – and this contributes to the closure of debates
and the limiting of policy alternatives.
The effect on employer and trade union agendas as well as their

negotiations
The debate on dismissals in Spain has served as a focus for identity-forming across a
range of organizations. In the case of employers, the questions and concerns about dis-
missals has been an ongoing focus of the political discourse of employers’ organizations
and leaders since the early 1980s (Martínez Lucio, 1991). The diversity of business inter-
ests in Spain has been a major challenge to the formation of a common and consistent
identity and politics in the Spanish employer classes. The fissures between national and
multinational capital, and the differences between small and larger-scale capital, have
been salient features of Spanish capitalism (Martínez Lucio and Blyton, 1995). What is
more, regional differences, in terms of employer traditions and values, mean that a com-
mon view of employment and the role of the state has not been clearly achievable. On
emerging from the Francoist dictatorship, there was a need for a clearer and more precise
and explicit articulation of employment and economic interests that had been deferred or
seconded to the state. The different trajectories of the employer class has meant that a
common position vis-a-vis other stakeholders has not always been easily achievable.
Views varied in terms of their consistency, especially in the first two decades after the
death of General Franco, when the Spanish Right was evolving, albeit very slowly, away
from an authoritarian mindset. What is more, social democracy in Spain, after its election
to power in 1982, accommodated the interests of finance capital in its search for an alter-
native anchor in relation to the political right in its politics of alliances (Smith, 1998).
Hence differences between capitalist interests have been a real challenge to the develop-
ment of a clear, transparent and modernizing discourse within Spanish capital – instead,
capital has been reactive and critical of regulation.
The common cause of ‘free dismissals’, and more broadly ‘free labour markets’, means
that these structural differences among capital and the absence of an overarching narrative
could be overridden by employers. The call for free dismissals acted, and continues to act,
as a discourse that locates ‘unreconstructed’ Spanish workers and their organizations as a
common barrier to the realization of a modern employer and employment system. Since
the early 1980s, the employer class has called for greater liberty and freedom from
traditional constraints – which curiously combine the demands of workers with the legacy
of the political past in an ironic manner. Employers use this vision of the inflexible worker
as a narrative that views all employers as being bound by legal constraints and collective
forms of regulation. Hence the question of free dismissal has curious by-products of a
political nature. Yet it also has the negative effect of becoming a feature of political needs
and discourses that in some cases become autonomous and independent of any focused or
rational debate on the subject of labour market reform. They are mantras which, whether

appropriate or authentic, do in fact distort internal and open discussion. They become a
form of linguistic shorthand and part of the parlance within employer classes through their
formal networks, informal gatherings and learning areas (e.g. business schools) irrespective
of their validity (Knights and McCabe, 2003).
In terms of unions, there are some similar effects. The question of dismissal is
responded to by referencing the extreme level of labour market flexibility in terms of job
destruction and the extensive use of temporary contracting. It is argued by some that
trade unions have taken a defensive attitude towards this issue (Standing, 2011), with
insider interests dominating external ones. In the Spanish case, trade unions have
attempted to focus on organizing ‘outsiders’ through novel forms and structures.
However, the nature of the debate forces unions to take a defensive attitude, as their
strength and fitness for purpose is seen as being measured in terms of an ability to counter
serious reforms of the system of dismissal. Debates tend to shift to the question of labour
costs, the level of compensation for employment termination and the rights of workers to
severance payment. The question of dismissal and the defence of extant rights are seen
by particular trade unionists as a test of strength. That this debate is the subject of various
interpretations is clear, but there is a consensus that movement or concession on such
issues have to be scrutinized carefully and approached cautiously. This means that the
labour movement views concession on the subject of dismissals – irrespective of its
position – as consisting of a high level of risk in political terms and organizational
legitimacy. Hence debates on social dialogue in Spain may be extensive across a range
of issues, but piecing them together around reforms creates difficulties and increases
perceptions of risk. In 2009 and 2010, the breakdown of a broader social dialogue
between unions, the government and employers was linked to the inability to find
concessions on particular themes – and the raising of such themes by employers – such
as free dismissal. One could see such developments as the outcomes of a concern with
the way free dismissal skews and narrows the possibility of a more proactive dialogue
and debate on labour markets and change – leaving unions wary of employer motives.
Hence the system of neocorporatist relations, while formally prevalent, exists around
separate and fragmented concrete themes such as training, not only as a result of political
factors (Martínez Lucio, 2008) but also because of the way a social dialogue that cross-
references different subjects can lead to the sensitive and politicized question of
dismissals. The failure to create consensus on such features of the labour market means
that Spain has had a highly fragmented, if prolific, experience of social dialogue within
its industrial relations.
The impact of the debate of free dismissal as a subject must therefore be seen in terms
of the way it frames the positions and identities of institutions. However, it also frames
the way that workers and work itself are understood. The question of exit and departure
from employment has been elevated to become a source of critical concern – almost
above other issues such as recruitment, retention, training and so on. It is as if a particular
part of the chain and trajectory of human resource development and management is seen
as the benchmark for understanding the country’s industrial relations and employment
system irrespective of developments around other issues. The debate on the subject of
free dismissal – especially as depicted by the right and elements of the employer classes
– depicts the Spanish economy as being overregulated and lacking in organizational

innovation. What is more, it hides, or covers innovation in areas such as training and
social dialogue in relation to it.
The effect on the ideological construction of the subject of the Spanish

labour market in terms of workers and work itself
Within this depiction is the ideological construction of the Spanish worker. The image of
an ‘ineffective worker’, who feels no need to innovate and be productive within the
Spanish employment system, is perpetuated. Spanish consultancies and right-wing indi-
viduals play a vital part in the depiction of the Spanish economy along the lines of
Spanish inflexibility (Rusiñol, 2009). Implied in this is a view of workers as not being
subjected to the modern push for change as a result of their permanent link to employ-
ment, because the cost of their termination prohibits employer-led change. This plays –
willingly or unwillingly – into a racist depiction of Spanish workers as immobile, slow
and left behind by progress. Free dismissal as a subject that will resonate internationally
is helped by the way it coils itself around and through this image of Spanish workers.
They are seen as seeking the enchufe – the ‘link’ ‘or plug’ into work – with the aim of
never expending high levels of effort at work. The question of free dismissals is therefore
seen as a vital part of the reform of this image and reality as perceived in various seg-
ments of Spanish society. Free dismissal thus takes on a role as a cathartic possibility of
change, reform and freedom from the past. That the reality of the need for employment
stability in the context of rapidly changing labour markets or economic uncertainty dur-
ing the 20th century is rarely discussed does not come into the dominant and forceful
impact of the discourse of free dismissal. Hence, work and the worker are configured as
being ‘unsolidaristic’ and ‘inward-looking’. Workers are less concerned with the content
of work and its realization, and more concerned with maintaining it at all costs. Spanish
workers are seen as not working hard enough. In our view, this plays to a curious, even
racist, tradition within Europe, encouraged by the Spanish Right, which sees Spanish
workers as deviant, corrupt and untrustworthy (just like the prototypical Spaniard in the
Black Legend; see e.g. Maltby, 1971). The discourse of Spanish Fascism was often
focused on this view of Spanish workers: the idea of Spain needing discipline and control
is the subject of many historical studies (see Caro Baroja, 1970, for a review; and Preston,
1995). This is a vital historical feature of far-right discourse regarding the ‘anarchic’
workforce that needs external discipline. Where once it was the authoritarian religious,
militarist state (1939–1975), it now becomes the hard ‘invisible hand’ of the market
which supposedly will play this ‘disciplinary’ role and ‘equalize’ employment access to
other, less ‘privileged’ aspects of Spanish society, such as older workers in stable jobs.
The persistence of these images of work in Spain – the so-called sick man of Europe,
and of a ‘black Spain’ as a cruel and fanatically inward-looking nation (Gutiérrez Solana,
2000) – continues to be perpetuated in various media and political circles irrespective of
developments and innovations within the country. Spain is viewed as being about high
costs (a metaphor for corruption) and the inability to manage workers across the labour
market – the contextual factor commonly seen in many papers or discussions. It distorts
the vision of work in Spain and places undue emphasis on one dimension of employment
– and one that may in fact be incorrectly understood given labour turnover and high

levels of numerical flexibility. It leads to an image of the country in which it is viewed as

mismanaged and in need of reform – a new ‘black legend’, where selfish and idle workers
need to become more flexible to meet the requirements of a knowledge economy.6
This is clearly seen as a specific topic of international interest. High unemployment in
Spain – which has seen some of the highest levels in Europe since 1980 – is linked not
to the uneven nature of the development of the Spanish economy, the limited extent and
presence of stable sectors, the gendered nature of the labour market, and other factors,
but to the ‘inability to fire workers’ that would allow employers to take on more staff and
take greater risks in terms of employment were dismissal costs to be lower. The link in
discursive terms between employment exit and unemployment configures a view of
unions as being defensive of established interests, and workers as being unable to articu-
late a broader view of change and renewal. Furthermore, the law and the state are seen as
having failed to evolve from the previous period of authoritarianism, which is now
encapsulated within the workers, who defend aspects of previous practices of the law.
Employers are now the victims, where once they were seen as the oppressors, working
alongside the dictatorship against workers and their interests as free agents, something
that is a curious redefining and manipulation of the Francoist legacy.
The effect on academic agendas in Spain related to labour market

analysis
The question of free dismissal as a feature of the narrative of Spanish employment
relations is therefore highly significant and influential as to how it actually configures
views and agendas – let alone the understanding of history, as we have just illustrated. It
forms a metaphor for the failure of trust relations at the very centre of Spanish industrial
relations, irrespective of developments and a host of innovations. Yet it also influences
the way the debate has evolved in terms of academia. The way in which the debate has
grouped itself around sociological and economic differences suggests that a major
question in academia is whether the cost of dismissal prohibits employment and economic
development, and whether it is responsible for high levels of short-term contracting.
During 2009, a series of manifestos and counter-manifestos on the impact of regulations
led to a range of acrimonious engagements regarding the legitimacy of academics, let
alone their arguments (Manifiesto de los 100, 2009; Manifiesto de los 700, 2009). The
citations of academics were used to argue whether the position of critics of marketization
and free dismissals was credible. The Manifesto of the 700 economists (compared to the
Manifesto of the 100 economists) argues that:
It is not by promoting dismissal . . . that the labour market can progress towards a more
productive economic model. The . . . simplification of the dismissal procedure [and reduction
in costs] . . . would . . . result in a general precariousness among workers and the cheapening of
dismissals costs. Thereby if it is unanimously agreed that there are no connections between the
current economic crisis and [the current form of] labour market regulation, it is by no means
logical to take advantage of the current situation to reduce or eliminate social rights. In more
vigorous terms, we consider it politically indecent to try to justify that workers assume a
substantial share of the economic costs of the crisis. (Manifiesto de los 700, 2009)7

According to these academics, it was seen as important to promote measures to face

the economic crisis, but they should not be addressed towards labour market reform.
They demanded policies that would help to develop a new productive model based on
innovation and high value-added activities. They argued that all reform must take into
account the centrality of labour in the economic structure.
The nature of the debate has reinforced the quantitative study of employment at the
expense of a minority trend regarding the quality of work. The question of employment
termination works to constrain and skew academic concerns and debates – the yin and
yang of the debate leaves many topics uncovered or occupying peripheral areas.
Developments on issues such as learning, development and health at work are relatively
marginal within Spanish economic departments and even in many industrial relations
groupings. Law departments have become fixated with the transactions and processes of
dismissals rather than their context, except for specific cases (see e.g. Valdés Dal-Ré
et al., 2005).
Policy and discourse in the liberal economy: The framing of debates

on regulation, the market and management
Irrespective of one’s position in this debate, the current neoliberal posturing in terms of
labour markets must be understood in terms of the way it has configured political
discourse. It forms part of the employer project and the right-of-centre project to develop
a more Anglo-Saxon dimension to Spanish employment relations and economic
processes. This is seen to be a major referent within Spanish political discourse (Martínez
Lucio, 2002). It takes various forms.
The first is the way free and less restricted labour markets are seen as being central to
the high levels of employment creation in the UK and the USA. The ability to create new
jobs in a range of post-industrial sectors has been vital to the reduction of unemployment
in the UK. The dynamism of these economies is in certain circles associated with the
emergence of marketized approaches. This interest in the value-creating possibilities of
deregulated market relations has emphasized the importance of a newly defined vision of
‘free’ economic relations in the renewal of the Spanish economy. The political transition
of the 1970s and 1980s based on institutional democratization and decentralization has
been supplanted by an economic transition based on using markets, and the interest in
markets, to curtail and condition the social. This was very clear in the way that economic
development was seen in both market and marketized terms during the Socialist
government of Felipe González in the 1980s and 1990s:
We are justly celebrating . . . initiating a long and difficult march, accompanied, but also in
competition with, the most developed countries of the world. . . . But it is certain that there will
be as much sweat in the future as there was before and that some of the favourable conditions
of past years – such as the income from privatisation or abundant European structural funds –
will not be at our disposal in similar amounts to help us. . . . In the difficult march that we are
going to proceed upon . . . we only need to fear the hardening of dogmatic positions or the
inability to complete the necessary reforms due to demagogy or political cowardice. (Boyer,
1988: 28; author’s translation)

The second form it takes is a desire to maintain a minimal regulation. The new Anglo-
oriented drive is seen as viewing the state in terms of providing a series of minimums;
and being less predisposed to a Nordic view of social support. The interest in the way the
state is organized around internal markets, agencies and outsourcing relations, and pri-
vate and public partnerships, is the outcome of a curious synergy between the social
democratic and right-wing governments of Spain since 1982, the first Thatcherite mod-
els of regulation and more recently, the UK’s Third Way social democratic forms. Cross-
referencing between the two countries – privatization from the UK model and the system
of health management from the Spanish model – has reinforced a view of the state as a
purchaser of services rather than a provider.
The third form is the unconstrained employer and manager – the ‘hero manager’, who
must be free to continue with the process of value creation. The opening of the Spanish
economy to foreign capital and economic growth during the second half of the 1980s after
joining the EU helped to expand the influence of new managerial ideologies, mainly
imported from the USA (Fernández Rodríguez and Gantman, 2011; Rodríguez Ruiz and
Martínez Lucio, 2010). Many of these managerial discourses, disseminated jointly by
business schools, the economic press or the companies themselves, highlighted the
importance of strong leadership in companies. The ‘hero manager’ becomes the model to
follow: someone extremely dynamic and intuitive, whose vision and values will lead the
company to successful economic performance. This charismatic leadership includes the
employees, turning over responsibility to them to innovate and create value for the company.
In these discourses, a call for freedom is emphasized, demanding the disappearance or
reduction of anything that might prevent it: thus bureaucracy, trade unions and any collective
action not encouraged or promoted by management is considered to be a threat to effective
business management (Alonso, 2007a; Du Gay, 2007).
The anchor for many of these developments is the notion of the free entrepreneur and
the benefits of markets for a liberal ‘post-authoritarian’ Spain – and the aspect of free
dismissal is a curious leitmotif which encapsulates this shift and creates a common parlance
relating to change. The exorcizing of the bureaucratic obsession and legacy of Spanish
economic relations is bound up with this reference to the concept of ‘freedom’. The
emergence of a new-right set of networks, media interests and consultancy firms linked to
key individuals on the right, but also in the centre, has continued to lobby against established
labour market practices on dismissal, among others. Neoliberalism has articulated (Laclau
and Mouffe, 1984) a view of labour market freedom in terms of individual choice and
managerial discretion – with management being the restrained saviour tackling Spanish
inaction. Within this approach, business schools are now viewed as being a major
institutional space for generating a new post-collective, post-welfare and post-national set
of managers (Alonso, 2007b). The cult of flexibility is driven by an Anglo-American view
of the state (Albarracín, 2006) and employer culture. Hence the ‘free’ in ‘free dismissal’
takes on a specific meaning – it is about allowing managers and business leaders to use
their unbridled discretion.
For this reason, the technical question of dismissal is bound up with a range of identity
and political issues that make a strategic and social dialogue on the matter very difficult.
It frames the way that links between actors and industrial relations develop. The current
crisis is awash with images of the Spanish. In the main this reinforces a vision of dark,

corrupt Spain, which in many cases is not a reality, as we can see from the social dialogue
on learning and support for immigrants. However, it dominates as an image of
intransigence, lack of innovation and cronyism, which misrepresents various complexities
and realities in the system.
Conclusion: The political framing of flexibility and the

importance of narratives and myths in shaping social
dialogue
The debate on labour market flexibility in Spain shows how contextual factors emerge
and become the focus of political agendas and processes. They serve as metaphors of
broader ‘ills’ and ‘challenges’, and therefore become mythical features of economic
debate. They establish a discussion in terms of the presence, or not, of such factors, the
consequences for the environment of such factors, and ultimately are dominated by an
approach that denies the more complex realities and compromises of which they are
formed. In Spain, the image of workers being virtually impossible to dismiss has taken
on such importance that the quality of employment, the nature of work and the reality of
flexibility on contractual terms are pushed into the background. This frames the
discussion about Spain, pulling the emphasis in public policy away from the debate on
quality, participation and work-related learning – all of which have seen significant
developments but are hidden by the powerful metaphor of dismissal. The debate has
stereotyped Spain and its labour market realities ethnically; it has provided an indicator
for identifying traits which distort discussion and reality. These are features of industrial
relations and debates about labour markets which need to be further explored, and which
configure choices and policies. The case of the UK and the debate on the ‘British worker’
in the 1960s and 1970s gave rise to a series of policy reforms and ultimately to ruptures
by the New Right, which responded to political as much as economic imperatives.
Increasingly, if we wish to understand the construction and development of employment
systems then we need to look not only at contextual comparisons, as recommended by
Locke and Thelen (1995), but also at obsessions, metaphors and discursive distortions
that frame our understanding (and misunderstanding) of national contexts. Debates on
the labour market become frameworks within which meaning and decisions evolve; and
this seems to be a salient feature of the way – rightly or wrongly – that labour markets
are understood and even engaged with.
In the case of Spain, we believe that the debate highlights four ways in which industrial
relations debates are framed. First, there is the content of debate and how it is constructed.
The debate has created a series of zero-sum agendas for employers and trade unions,
configuring the nature of their relations even if dialogue exists across various fronts.
Second, there is the ideological construction of the subject: in the case of the Spanish
labour market, workers and work images are perpetuated that misrepresent their nature.
They feed an ideological ‘industry’ where inflexibility is discussed but is not nuanced or
functional. Third, academic and research agendas become marked by binary debates that
ultimately undermine and trivialize broader democratic dialogue and shift the focus to
tests of strength around quantitative agendas. It creates questions that prevent deeper

debates about control and social progress, and defensive strategies predominate. Finally,
the framing of debates on regulation, the market and management perpetuates a view that
sees markets as counter to the state in a simple and rudimentary manner, ensuring that
flexibility is seen in terms of points of entry and exit and not in the nature and quality of
work, participation, job enrichment and real social and personal innovation. Debates on
labour markets take on different meanings in different contexts, as academics have
argued, but they also close, stereotype and create ideological rigidities and myths, which
can have as much of an impact on policy processes as the problem they seek to resolve.
What this means is that the debate has closed off possibilities of a continuous, deeper
structural dialogue; in that respect, employers have been successful politically in terms
of their agendas. Solutions to issues may not necessarily emerge from the specific topic
under discussion, such as labour dismissal costs, but from the way a dialogue and set of
institutional relations may develop.
Funding and acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (projects with refer-
ences CSO2011-29941 and JC2011-0162). We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers
for their suggestions and Keith Povey for the copy-editing.
Notes
1. Data from INE – Instituto Nacional de Estadística (Spanish National Institute of Statistics),
2010. Data are available at: www.ine.es.
2. We use the term ‘free dismissal’ because this is the term used in the debate we are studying.
It refers to an ideal situation for employers in which the cost of dismissing one employee
would be zero in monetary terms (compared to the context at the time of writing where the
Spanish legislation forces employers to pay monetary compensation to employees when the
latter are made redundant; the amount is calculated on the basis of seniority). We recognize
that there are costs in social, economic and political terms that emerge from dismissals and
redundancy more broadly, but as we are focusing on the political discourse, we maintain this
term as it is central to the terminology in Spain.
3. Regarding procedures of dismissal, it is surprising to note that the indexes provided by
institutions such as the World Bank show that Spanish labour market regulation, while
pictured as being very rigid, does not seem to provide too many barriers to dismissing
employees in comparison to other countries. In the 2009 Doing Business report, the World
Bank included an index entitled ‘Difficulty of Firing’, which shows that Spanish conditions
are among the least difficult for that purpose: of the EU-15 countries, almost all (with the
exception of the Republic of Ireland, the UK, Denmark and Belgium) score higher in this
index. In the same report it is noted that Spain is in position 160 in the Employing Workers
Rank, and the numbers compared to other EU countries show a poor performance in the
standards considered to be ‘good’ for doing business. Nevertheless, countries such as
Germany and Portugal offer more weeks of salary as dismissal costs while maintaining an
unemployment rate lower than 10%. On the other hand, in Denmark there are no dismissal
costs as their ‘flexicurity’ model guarantees high and very long-term unemployment benefits,
thus introducing new complexities into this debate (Wilthagen and Tros, 2004). Hence it does
not seem possible to rely only on simple causal logic to explain that high Spanish
unemployment is related to excessive dismissal costs.

4. Data from INE, Instituto Nacional de Estadística (Spanish National Institute of Statistics),
2009. Data are available at: www.ine.es.
5. Contrato por obra y servicio is a fixed-term contract used for an unspecified time and related
to the development of a specific project. Contrato en prácticas is aimed at graduates and
implies a two-year contract with a lower salary and access to training.
6. This ‘black legend’ about the Spanish economy is clearly reinforced in times of crisis. It is
interesting to note that, since 2008, international economic journals such as The Economist,
Newsweek or Financial Times have published harsh articles about the structural problems of
the Spanish economy, companies and labour force. Thus from the ‘smiling Spain’ of the late
1990s (praised by the British press as a country that had finally modernized its government,
able to balance its public finances according the Maastricht criteria and thus join the
Eurozone), the emphasis is nowadays on its membership of the infamous (and certainly rac-
ist-inflated) group of the insultingly so-called ‘PIGS’ (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain)
– countries with strong budget deficits and a certain economic and managerial backwardness,
which makes them unable to remain competitive in the international markets (especially in
the high value-added market niches). These pejorative acronyms and images seem to confirm
the persistence of stereotypical images about Spain that are reinforced by the free dismissal
discourses we are discussing here.
7. The text selected here is from pages 482–483; authors’ translation.
References
Agencia EFE (2009) Díaz Ferrán cree que la Administración no debería autorizar los ERE para
que fueran más rápidos. La Voz de Galicia, 17 February. Available at: www.lavozdegalicia.
es/dinero/2009/02/17/00031234869073100152536.htm?utm_source=buscavoz&utm_
medium=buscavoz (accessed 11 January 2011).
Agencia EFE (2010a) La-CEOE-achaca-a los salarios y-al-coste-del despido la destrucción de
empleo. La Vanguardia, 19 January. Available at: www.lavanguardia.es/economia/fiscalidad-
empresa/20100119/53873680185/la-ceoe-achaca-a-los-salarios-y-al-coste-del-despido-la-
destruccion-de-empleo.html (accessed 11 January 2011).
Agencia EFE (2010b) El Gobierno generaliza el contrato con 33 días de indemnización. El País,
16 June. Available at: www.elpais.com/articulo/economia/Gobierno/generaliza/contrato/33/
dias/indemnizacion/elpepueco/20100616elpepueco_10/Tes (accessed 11 January 2011).
Albarracín D (2006) Are we moving towards a post-Fordist state? Full employment of the European
workforce. In: Alonso LE and Martínez Lucio M (eds) Employment Relations in a Changing
Society: Assessing the Post-Fordist Paradigm. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Alonso LE (2007a) La crisis de la ciudadanía laboral. Barcelona: Anthropos.
Alonso LE (2007b) Las lógicas de acción. Por un estudio sociohistórico de la vida organizacional.
In: Fernández Rodríguez CJ (ed.) Vigilar y organizar. Una introducción a los Critical
Management Studies. Madrid: Siglo XXI, pp. 317–338.
Alonso LE and Martínez Lucio M (eds) (2006) Employment Relations in a Changing Society:
Assessing the Post-Fordist Paradigm. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Atkinson J (1984) Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower Management. IMS Report 89. Brighton:
Institute of Manpower Studies.
Bauman Z (1998) Work, Consumerism and the New Poor. Philadelphia, PA: Open University
Press.
Bentolila S and Dolado JJ (1994) Labour flexibility and wages: Lessons from Spain. Economic
Policy 9(18): 52–99.
Bilbao A (1993) El contexto histórico de las ordenanzas laborales. Economía y Sociología del
Trabajo 21–22: 62–71.

Bilbao A (1999) El empleo precario: Seguridad de la economía e inseguridad del trabajo. Madrid:
La Catarata.
Blyton P and Martínez Lucio M (1995) Industrial relations and the management of flexibility: A
comparison of Britain and Spain. International Journal of Human Resource Management 6(2):
271–292.
Boyer R (1987) Labour flexibilities: Many forms, uncertain effects. Labour and Society 12(1):
107–129.
Boyer R (1988) The Search for Labour Market Flexibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Caro Baroja J (1970) El mito del carácter nacional y su formación con respecto a España. Madrid:
Seminarios y Ediciones.
Costain J, Gimeno JF and Thomas C (2010) Fluctuaciones del empleo en un mercado de trabajo
con contratación dual. Available at: www.bde.es/webbde/SES/Secciones/Publicaciones/
InformesBoletinesRevistas/BoletinEconomico/10/Mar/Fich/art3.pdf (accessed 26 February 2011).
Díaz-Salazar R (2003) Trabajadores precarios: El proletariado del siglo XXI. Madrid: HOAC.
Dolado J and Felgueroso F (eds) (2010) Propuesta para la reactivación laboral en España. Available
at: www.crisis09.es/propuesta/?page_id=755 (accessed 11 February 2011).
Du Gay P (2007) Organizing Identity: Persons and Organizations ‘After Theory’. London: Sage.
Europa Press (2009) La CEOE propone un contrato de crisis con una indemnización de ocho
días por año. Cinco Días, 22 April. Available at: www.cincodias.com/articulo/economia/
CEOE-propone-contrato-crisis-indemnizacion-dias-ano/20090422cdscdseco_32/ (accessed
11 January 2011).
Fairclough N (1989) Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fairclough N (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
Fernández Ordóñez MA (2008) Discurso de apertura del Seminario de alto nivel sobre experiencias
en el mercado laboral: Hacia mercados de trabajo eficientes/FMI-Banco de España. Available
at: www.bde.es/webbde/es/secciones/prensa/intervenpub/gobernador/mfo110510.pdf (accessed
11 December 2010).
Fernández Rodríguez CJ and Gantman ER (2011) Spain and Argentina as importers of management
knowledge (1955–2008): A comparative analysis. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences 28(2): 160–173.
Fishman RM (1996) Organización obrera y retorno a la democracia en España. Madrid: CIS.
Flotats A and Méndez J (2009) La CEOE pide abaratar el despido para afrontar la crisis. El País,
26 September. Available at: www.elpais.com/articulo/economia/CEOE/pide/abaratar/despido/
afrontar/crisis/elpepieco/20080926elpepieco_3/Tes (accessed 11 January 2011).
Golsch K (2004) Employment flexibility in Spain and its impact on transitions to adulthood. Work,
Employment and Society 17(4): 691–718.
Gómez MV (2009) El Banco de España se enfrenta al Gobierno por el coste del despido. El
País, 2 December. Available at: www.elpais.com/articulo/economia/Banco/Espana/enfrenta/
Gobierno/coste/despido/elpepueco/20090212elpepieco_2/Tes (accessed 11 January 2011).
Gómez MV and Noceda JM (2009) El diálogo social encalla por la fuerte resistencia de la patronal.
El País, 23 July. Available at: www.elpais.com/articulo/economia/dialogo/social/encalla/
fuerte/resistencia/patronal/elpepueco/20090723elpepieco_2/Tes (accessed 11 January 2011).
Gutiérrez Solana J (2000) La España negra. Granada: Comare.
Hall S (1988) The Hard Road to Renewal. London: Verso.
Hardt M and Negri TA (2004) Multitude. New York: Penguin.
IMF (2008) Spain: 2008 Article IV consultation – Concluding statement of the mission. Available
at: www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2008/120908.htm (accessed 26 January 2011).
IMF (2010) Spain: 2010 Article IV consultation – Concluding statement of the mission. Available
at: www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2010/052410.htm (accessed 26 January 2010).

Kallenberg A (2009) Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition.

American Sociological Review 74(1): 1–22.
Knights D and McCabe D (2003) Organization and Innovation: Gurus Schemes and American
Dreams. Milton Keynes: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.
Koch M (2006) Roads to Post-Fordism: Labour Markets and Social Structures in Europe.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Laclau E and Mouffe C (1984) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic
Politics. London: Verso.
Lamo A and Dolado J (1993) Un modelo de mercado de trabajo y la restricción de oferta en la
economía española. Investigaciones Económicas 17(1): 87–118.
Laparra M (2006) La construcción del empleo precario. Madrid: FOESSA/Cáritas.
Lindbeck A and Snower D (1988) The Insider–Outsider Theory of Employment and Unemployment.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Locke RM and Thelen K (1995) Apples and oranges revisited: Contextualised comparisons and the
study of labour politics. Politics and Society 23(3): 337–367.
López I and Rodríguez E (2010) Fin de ciclo: Financiarización, territorio y sociedad de
propietarios en la onda larga del capitalismo hispano (1959–2010). Madrid: Traficantes de
Sueños.
López Calle P (2008) La desmovilización general. Jóvenes, sindicatos y reorganización productiva.
Madrid: La Catarata.
Malo M and Pérez J (2003) Individual dismissals in Europe and the United States: A model on the
influence of the legal framework on firing costs. International Journal of Law and Economics
15(1): 47–63.
Maltby WS (1971) The Black Legend in England. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Manifiesto de los 100 (2009) Propuesta para la reactivación laboral en España. Available at: www.
crisis09.es/PDF/restart-the-labor-market.pdf (accessed 6 February 2011).
Manifiesto de los 700 (2009) El trabajo, fundamento de un crecimiento económico sostenible.
Revista del Derecho de Extremadura 5: 481–483.
Martínez Lucio M (1990) Trade unions and communism in Spain: The role of the CCOO in the
political projects of the left. Journal of Communist Studies 6(4): 80–99.
Martínez Lucio M (1991) Employer identity and the politics of the labour market in Spain. West
European Politics 14(1): 41–55.
Martínez Lucio M (1998) Spain: Regulating employment and social fragmentation. In: Ferner A
and Hyman R (eds) Changing Industrial Relations in Europe, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Martínez Lucio M (2002) Legitimar el mercado: El neoliberalismo y el ‘juego’ de la integración
monetaria europea en España. Cuadernos de Relaciones Laborales 20(2): 385–409.
Martínez Lucio M (2008) ¿Todavía organizadores del descontento? Los retos de las estrategias de
renovación sindical en España. Arxius de Ciencias Sociales 18 (June): 119–133.
Martínez Lucio M and Blyton P (1995) Constructing the post-Fordist state? The politics of labour
market flexibility in Spain. West European Politics 18(2): 344–366.
Martínez Pastor JI, Bernardi F and Garrido L (2008) Increasing employment instability among
young people? Labor market entries and early careers in Spain since the mid-1970s. In: Blossfeld
H-P, Buchholz S and Kurz K (eds) Young Workers, Globalization and the Labor Market:
Comparing Early Working Life in Eleven Countries. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA:
Edward Elgar, pp. 129–153.
Miguélez F and Prieto C (eds) (1999) Las relaciones de empleo en España. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Miguélez F and Prieto C (2008) L’autre côté de la croissance de l’emploi en Espagne: une précarité
qui se perpétue. Travail et Emploi 115: 45–57.

Miguélez F and Prieto C (2009) Transformaciones del empleo, flexibilidad y relaciones laborales
en Europa. Política y Sociedad 46(1–2): 275–287.
Navarro V (2007) Los salarios en España. Temas para el Debate 155: 73–75.
Navarro V (2009) Las supuestas rigideces laborales. Público, 4 June. Available at: blogs.publico.
es/dominiopublico/1322/las-supuestas-rigideces-laborales/ (accessed 6 December 2010).
Paugam S and Zhou Y (2007) Job insecurity. In: Gallie D (ed.) Employment Regimes and the
Quality of Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Polavieja JG (2003) Temporary contracts and labour market segmentation in Spain: An
employment-rent approach. European Sociological Review 19(5): 501–517.
Polavieja JG (2006) The incidence of temporary employment in advanced economies: Why is
Spain different? European Sociological Review 22(1): 61–78.
Preston P (1995) Franco: A Biography. London: Fontana.
Pries L (1988) Calificación, relaciones laborales y mercado de trabajo: El concepto de ‘estrechez del
ámbito empresarial’ en España. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas 41: 81–114.
Prieto C (ed.) (2009) Calidad del empleo en España: Una aproximación teórica y empírica.
Madrid: Ministerio de Trabajo e Inmigración.
Ramírez BP/Europa Press/Agencia EFE (2010) Ejecutivo, patronal y sindicatos se dan dos
reuniones más para pactar la reforma laboral. El Mundo, 31 May. Available at: www.elmundo.
es/mundodinero/2010/05/31/economia/1275310642.html (accessed 17 December 2010).
Rodgers G and Rodgers J (1989) Precarious Jobs in Labour Market Regulation: The Growth of
Atypical Employment in Western Europe. Brussels: International Institute for Labour Studies.
Rodríguez Cabrero G (2009) La construcción sociohistórica de la reforma social en España. In:
I Congreso REPS, Oviedo, Spain.
Rodríguez Ruiz Ó and Martínez Lucio M (2010) The study of HRM in Spain: The Americanization
of Spanish research and the politics of denial? The International Journal of Human Resource
Management 21(1): 125–143.
Rusiñol P (2009) El-lobby-neoliberal-del PP boicotea a España en EEUU. Público, 19 April.
Available at: www.publico.es/internacional/239598/el-lobby-neoliberal-del-pp-boicotea-a-
espana-en-eeuu (accessed 17 December 2010).
Sennett R (1998) The Corrosion of Character. New York: WW Norton.
Smith WR (1998) The Left’s Dirty Job: The Politics of Industrial Restructuring in France and
Spain. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Standing G (2011) Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury.
Toharia L (1986) Un fordismo inacabado entre la transición política y la crisis económica: España.
In: Boyer R (ed.) La flexibilidad del trabajo en Europa. Madrid: Ministerio de Trabajo y
Seguridad Social.
Toharia L and Malo M. (2000) The Spanish experiment: Pros and cons of the flexibility at the
margin. In: Esping-Andersen G and Regini M (eds) Why Deregulate Labour Markets? Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Tremmel JC (ed.) (2010) A Young Generation under Pressure? Heidelberg: Springer.
Valdés Dal-Ré F, Santos Ruesga MÁ and Zufiaur JL (eds) (2005) Transformaciones laborales en
España: a XXV años de la promulgación del Estatuto de los Trabajadores. Madrid: Ministerio
de Trabajo y Asuntos Sociales.
Wilthagen T and Tros TF (2004) The concept of flexicurity: A new approach to regulating
employment and labour markets. Transfer 10(2): 167–186.
World Bank (2009) Doing Business Report 2008. Available at: www.doingbusiness.org/reports/
doing-business/doing-business-2009 (accessed 7 December 2010).
Zufiaur JL (2009) La gota malaya de la reforma laboral. Relaciones laborales: Revista Crítica de
Teoría y Práctica 2: 1193–1204.

Author biographies
Carlos Jesús Fernández Rodríguez is lecturer in sociology at Universidad Autónoma de
Madrid. His research interests are sociology of organizations, sociology of labour and
industrial relations. He has published several books and peer-reviewed articles in those
knowledge areas, mostly in Spanish. He has a background in economics, sociology and
business studies.
Miguel Martínez Lucio is professor at the University of Manchester, Manchester Business
School. His research is concerned with the changing patterns of rights and regulation
within employment relations and human resource management. He has a background in
political science and labour studies. He has a wide body of publications with many peer-
reviewed articles in international journals and books.

Rodriguez&Lucio - Narratives, Myths and Prejudice

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rodriguez&Lucio - Narratives, Myths and Prejudice

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

445625

Economic and Industrial Democracy

Narratives, myths and 34(2) 313­–336

case of rigidities, dismissals

Carlos Jesús Fernández Rodríguez

Miguel Martínez Lucio

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

– Confederación Española de Organizaciones Empresariales), which have argued that

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

The concept of free dismissal: The historical

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Figure 1. Unemployment rate in Spain, 1976–2011 (in percentages).

Table 1. Unemployment rate, 2007 and 2011 (in percentages).

Unemployment rate (%)

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Table 2. Precarious labour in Spain, 2007 and 2011.

Figures (in 000s; fixed-term contract also in %)

Regarding labour precariousness, it is important to point out that, in Spain, different

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

The development of labour market reforms in Spain

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Economic debates and the impact of the political: The

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

The effect on employer and trade union agendas as well as their

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

The effect on the ideological construction of the subject of the Spanish

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

levels of numerical flexibility. It leads to an image of the country in which it is viewed as

The effect on academic agendas in Spain related to labour market

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

According to these academics, it was seen as important to promote measures to face

Policy and discourse in the liberal economy: The framing of debates

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Conclusion: The political framing of flexibility and the

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Funding and acknowledgements

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Kallenberg A (2009) Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition.

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

Downloaded from eid.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on March 22, 2015

You might also like

Narratives, myths and 34(2) 313–336