Democratic Re-legitimation and its Limits in European Social Dialogue
Functional Representation, Institutional Balance and Regulatory Outsourcing in EU Governance
Keywords:
European Social Dialogue, Democratic Legitimacy, Institutional balance, Functional Representation, Legitimacy, Social PartnersAbstract
This article examines the European Social Dialogue as a distinctive mechanism in EU governance, institutionalized under Articles 154 and 155 TFEU, which allows social partners to negotiate agreements that may become binding EU law. Challenging traditional views of it as neo-corporatism or a deliberative complement to democracy, the study reconceptualizes it as “managed regulatory outsourcing”, where norm-drafting is delegated to organized interests but remains subject to Commission discretion, Council adoption, and limited parliamentary oversight. Drawing on theoretical frameworks of democratic legitimacy (input, output, throughput), institutional balance, and functional representation, the analysis highlights how this process redistributes authority without resolving the EU’s democratic deficit. Key case law, such as UEAPME and EPSU, underscores executive gatekeeping and constitutional constraints. Post-EPSU developments, including the 2023 Council Recommendation, reflect procedural expansion amid a shift to soft-law instruments, reinforcing hybrid legitimacy but diffusing accountability. The article concludes that while social dialogue innovates participatory governance, it reconfigures rather than eliminates legitimacy tensions, emphasizing the need for stronger accountability in EU multilevel structures.
References
Bellamy, R. (2019). A Republican Europe of States. Cosmopolitanism, Intergovernmentalism and Democracy in the EU. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139136303
Benz, A. (2015). Multilevel Governance in the European Union: Loosely Coupled Arenas of Representation, Participation, and Accountability. In S. Piattoni (Ed.), The European Union: Democratic Principles and Institutional Architectures in Times of Crisis (pp. 201–218). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716273.003.0010
Bisson, L. S. (2022). European social dialogue: History, characteristics, and perspectives. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 92(Suppl. 7), S660–S666. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1019331622130147
Bogg, A., & Dukes, R. (2013). The European Social Dialogue: From Autonomy to Here. In N. Countouris, & M. Freedland (Eds.), Resocialising Europe in a Time of Crisis (pp. 466–492). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107300736.028
Cárdenas Domínguez, F., Fernández García, M., & Molinero Gerbeau, Y. (2025). Revisiting European social dialogue: A systematic literature review. Open Research Europe, 5, 309. https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.21020.1
Carré, P., & Steiert, M. (2022). Social Europe without social dialogue: Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in C-928/19 P European Federation of Public Service Unions. European Constitutional Law Review, 18(2), 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019622000177
Cattaneo, A. (2018). Social dialogue and the regulatory power of governing bodies. The International Sports Law Journal, 17(3–4), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-018-0122-2
Cotter, J. (2025). Democracy Manifest? Ensuring the EU Legislature’s Democratic Legitimacy in the Face of National-Level Autocratisation. European Papers, 10(2), 489–515. https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/842
Curtin, D., & Meijer, A. J. (2006). Does transparency strengthen legitimacy? A critical analysis of European Union policy documents. Information Polity, 11(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-2006-0091
Delfino, M. (2020). The reinterpretation of the principle of horizontal subsidiarity in European social law. Biblioteca’‘20 Maggio’ (pp. 111–119). Vol. 1. University of Catania. Online: https://tinyurl.com/4pbffpyn
Dobbins, M., & Labanino, R. P. (2023). Corporatism and neo-corporatism. In M. Grasso, & M. Giugni (Eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Political Sociology (pp. 111–114). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803921235.00037
Dorssemont, F., & Van Malleghem, P.-A. (2021, September 21). Sounding the death knell for EU social dialogue?: The EPSU judgment as a turning point for EU labour law. Verfassungsblog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20210921-205411-0
European Commission. (2021). The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2767/45
European Commission. (2024, March 20). Labour and skills shortages in the EU: An action plan (COM(2024) 1507). European Commission. Online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_1507
Franssen, E., & Jacobs, A. (1998). The Question of Representativity in the European Social Dialogue. Common Market Law Review, 35(6), 1295–1312. https://doi.org/10.54648/199393
Gaitenidis, N. (2025). Ευρωπαϊκή διακυβέρνηση και κοινωνία των πολιτών. [European Governance and Civil Society] Papazisis Publishers.
Galetto, M., & Neri, S. (2026). The new European sectoral social dialogue for social services: The “bite” challenge, the coordination potential and the future of care. European Journal of Industrial Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/09596801261423744
Gatto, A. (2006). Governance in the European Union: A legal perspective. Columbia Journal of European Law, 12(2), 487–516. Online: https://tinyurl.com/y4e5w6vr
Grimm, D. (2017). The Constitution of European Democracy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198805120.001.0001
Guisset, A., Lenaerts, K., & Vangeel, N. (2025). How the EU shapes national social dialogue: A qualitative analysis of social partner’' involvement in the Recovery and Resilience Plans and Territorial Just Transition Plans. HIVA–- KU Leuven, Research Institute for Work and Society. Online: https://tinyurl.com/yj273p2c
Heidbreder, E. G. (2012). Civil society participation in EU governance. Living Reviews in European Governance, 7(2), 5–42. https://doi.org/10.12942/lreg-2012-2
Hromadska, N. (2025). European standards of social dialogue: Challenges and prospects of implementation in Ukraine. Public Administration and Regional Development, 28, 449–470. https://doi.org/10.34132/pard2025.28.07
Kelemen, R. D. (2020). The European Union’s authoritarian equilibrium. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(3), 481–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2020.1712455
Kerckhofs, P., Krokovay N., & Gustafsson, A.-K. (2021, October 27), Representativeness of the European social partner organisations: Live performance sector. Eurofound. Online: https://tinyurl.com/yvh44ynk
Knodt, M., Greenwood, J., & Quittkat, C. (2011). Territorial and Functional Interest Representation in EU Governance. Journal of European Integration, 33(4), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2011.582279
Koutrakos, P. (2019). Institutional balance and sincere cooperation in treaty-making under EU law. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 68(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589318000350
Kröger, S., & Friedrich, D. (2013). Democratic representation in the EU: Two kinds of subjectivity. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(2), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.746112
Larsson, B., Galetto, M., Weber, S., Bechter, B., & Prosser, T. (2020). What’s the point of European sectoral social dialogue? Effectiveness and polycontexturality in the hospital and metal sectors. Industrial Relations Journal, 51(5), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12305
Larsson, B., Heffernan, M., & Trif, A. (2025). Trust in relations between unions and employers in Europe: Final report. Online: https://tinyurl.com/4v6zje3j
Molina, O., & Rhodes, M. (2002). Corporatism: The past, present, and future of a concept. Annual Review of Political Science, 5, 305–331. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.112701.184858
Obradovic, D. (2006). Civil Society and the Social Dialogue in European Governance. Yearbook of European Law, 24(1), 261–329. https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/24.1.261
Ozols, E., Hristov, S. I., & Paster, T. (2025). Unions divided? Trade union attitudes towards the European Union’s Directive on Adequate Minimum Wages. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 46(2), 372–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X241245007
Pecinovsky, P. (2018). EU economic governance and the right to collective bargaining: Part I. Standard and extreme governance and the indicators and limits of the right to collective bargaining. European Labour Law Journal, 9(4), 374–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/2031952518817567
Persson, T., & Lindgren, K. O. (2008). Input and output legitimacy: Synergy or trade-off? Paper presented at the Swedish Political Science Association Meeting, Uppsala University.
Piattoni, S. (2011). The Problematic Coexistence of Functional and Territorial Representation in the EU. Journal of European Integration, 33(4), 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2011.579747
Rangone, N. (2022). Improving consultation to ensure the European Union’s democratic legitimacy: From traditional procedural requirements to behavioural insights. European Law Journal, 28(4–6), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12439
Sargent, J. A. (1985). Corporatism and the European Community. In W. Grant (Ed.), The political economy of corporatism (pp. 229–253). Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18041-7_9
Schmidt, V. A. (2013). Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’. Political Studies, 61(1), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00962.x
Schmidt, V. A. (2019). Politicization in the EU: Between national politics and EU political dynamics. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(7), 1018–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1619189
Schmidt, V. A. (2020). Conceptualizing legitimacy: Input, output, and throughput. In Europe’s crisis of legitimacy: Governing by rules and ruling by numbers in the Eurozone (pp. 25–55). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198797050.003.0002
Schmitter, P. C. (1994). The Future Euro-Polity and its Impact upon Private Interest Governance within Member-States. Droit et Société, 28, 659–675. Online: https://tinyurl.com/4ff6dttk
Skandamis, N. (2006). Το Παραδειγμα της Ευρωπαϊκής Διακυβερνησης: Μεταξυ Κυριαρχιας και Αγορας. [The example of European governance: Between sovereignty and market] Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Smismans, S. (2003). European Civil Society: Shaped by Discourses and Institutional Interests. European Law Journal, 9(4), 473–495. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0386.00187
Smismans, S. (2007a). The European social dialogue between constitutional and labour law. European Law Review, 32(3), 341–364.Online: https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/3000/
Smismans, S. (2007b). The Shadow of Hierarchy over Self-regulation in the European Union: The Case of the European Social Dialogue. In J.-C. Graz, & A. Nolke (Eds.), Transnational Private Governance and its Limits. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203939338
Smismans, S. (2008). The European social dialogue in the shadow of hierarchy. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0143814x08000822
Stephanou, C. A. (2006). La nouvelle gouvernance européenne: bilan et perspectives. Cahiers de droit européen, 42(5–6), 581–627.
Stephenson, P. (2023). Exploring the Throughput Legitimacy of European Union Policy Evaluation: Challenges to Transparency and Inclusiveness in the European Commission’s Consultation Procedures and the Implications for Risk Regulation. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 14(2), 351–370. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.33
Svetlozar, A. (2004). The EU “crisis of legitimacy” revisited: Concepts, causes, and possible consequences for European politics and citizenry. [Unpublished manuscript].
Trubek, M., & Trubek, L. G. (2007). New Governance and Legal Regulation: Complementarity, Rivalry or Transformation. Columbia Journal of European Law, 13, 539–564. Online: https://tinyurl.com/5ha9ce43
Velluti, S. (2022). The European Social Dialogue as a source of EU legal acts following EPSU: Collective bargaining and industrial relations get lost in translation. Common Market Law Review, 59(3), 871–888. https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2022055
