place des salariés

autres publications Gouvernance Normes d'encadrement parties prenantes place des salariés Publications

Parution récente : La place des salariés dans l’entreprise

Ouvrage qui mérite d’être lu : « La place des salariés dans l’entreprise » chez Mare et Martin. Un bel ouvrage d’Emmanuelle Mazuyer dont je recommande la lecture…

Résumé

Cinquante ans après les accords de Grenelle qui ont acté la création de la section syndicale dans les entreprises, et au moment des débats autour de la loi PACTE ambitionnant de « mieux associer les salariés à la vie et aux résultats des entreprises », ces contributions du présent ouvrage, mettent en perspective les questions fondamentales que soulève la problématique de la représentation et de l’implication des salariés dans l’entreprise.

Elles ont été pensées et organisées suivant la progressivité des formes d’association et de participation des salariés, de la verticalité vers davantage d’horizontalité, moins d’autoritarisme et peut-être plus de démocratie.

Cet ouvrage offre ainsi des regards croisés sur les différentes modalités de participation et d’implication (financière, actionnariale, syndicale, directe) des salariés à la gouvernance de l’entreprise. Critique, il interroge la distinction habituelle de la répartition des pouvoirs entre détenteurs du capital et force de travail dans l’entreprise. Novateur, il envisage les salariés en tant que parties prenantes ou actionnaires, voire dirigeants d’entreprises dans certains cas, afin d’offrir une vision large du rôle qu’ils peuvent jouer. Ouvert, il permet une lecture pluridisciplinaire (droit et économie) et comparée (droit anglais) sur la place des salariés dans l’entreprise.

À la prochaine…

autres publications Gouvernance place des salariés

Employee Participation in Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility : à découvrir !

Nouveau working paper de Martin Gelter pour le compte de l’ECGI intitulé : « Employee Participation in Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility » (Law Working Paper No. 322/2016, juillet 2016).

 

The chapter investigates the impact of employee participation on the board of directors or supervisory board (particularly codetermination) on corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Conceptually, it is important to distinguish between “internal” and “external” CSR. Internal CSR relates to practices of the firm regarding groups with which it is in a long-term contractual relationship such as employees. Employee participation systems serve to protect employees from shareholder opportunism and shift the balance in the distribution of corporate rents in favor of employees, which is why they clearly have an impact on internal CSR. The situation is much less clear for external CSR, which is concerned with effects of corporate activities that are externalities, for example pollution.

I argue that there may sometimes be a tradeoff between internal and external CSR: If a firm is more profitable because it scores badly in terms of external CSR (e.g. because it habitually pollutes), employees may benefit similarly as shareholders. In fact, the interests of shareholders and employees may be largely aligned in this respect, with both either benefiting or being harmed concurrently.

 

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

autres publications mission et composition du conseil d'administration Normes d'encadrement Nouvelles diverses place des salariés

Système allemand de codétermination : un modèle exportable ?

Alors que Theresa May a fait part de son intérêt d’importer en Grande-Bretagne le système allemand, MM. Horst Eidenmüller,  Mathias Habersack, Caspar Behme et Lars Klöhn  reviennent sur la pertinence de cette proposition en jetant un regard prudent (de chercheurs !) sur ce système : « Corporate Co-Determination German-Style as a Model for the UK? » (18 juillet 2016).

 

On 13 July 2016, Theresa May took up office as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Only shortly before, she had made headlines when she proposed to adopt European-style worker representation on the boards of leading companies.

Corporate co-determination hence seems to gain a certain degree of popularity with the British government – which is highly astonishing, considering that it was the UK which most fiercely fought against co-determination on a European level. It was mainly the diverging views of the UK and Germany on co-determination which have thwarted projects like the Draft Fifth Company Law Directive or the establishment of a European Private Company (Societas Privata Europaea, SPE). It is downright ironic that while the UK now shows an interest in co-determination, the concept is being questioned in Germany after decades of lying dormant. The reason for the new German discussion of co-determination are doubts regarding the compatibility of its specific form of co-determination with higher-ranking Union law. This post provides a brief overview of the most recent developments in German co-determination law that were the focus of a joint Oxford/Munich conference at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) in Munich in March 2016.

 

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

autres publications engagement et activisme actionnarial place des salariés Structures juridiques

Qui est propriétaire de l’entreprise ?

C’est à cette question que s’attaquent Virgile Chassagnon et Xavier Hollandts dans un article intitulé : « Who are the owners of the firm: shareholders, employees or no one? » (Journal of Institutional Economics, 2014, Vo. 10, pp 47-69).

Voici le résumé :

The issue of firm ownership is an ongoing debate. For several decades, contractarian theory has undoubtedly shaped the academic debate in both law and economics. Proponents of this approach suggest that shareholders can legitimately be considered the owners of a firm because they hold shares. This approach, though attractive, is legally incorrect. Legal scholars have noted that a corporation cannot legally belong to shareholders or other stakeholders; no one owns the firm (and a corporation). The question of firm ownership masks the following crucial issue: Who should govern the firm? In this article, after returning to the theoretical debate on firm ownership and explaining why a firm cannot be owned, we shall analyze power as the core of firm governance. This approach is a potentially relevant and accurate way to address the problems of specific human investment, collective creation and productive (consummate) cooperation in modern firms.

 

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian