State-labour relations in illiberal times: The dissolution of social dialogue in Hungary

  • Rafael LabaninoEmail author


This chapter explains the dissolution of tripartite interest intermediation and the liberalisation of employment protection legislation in Hungary by comparing the 1999 partial reform and the 2012 full liberalisation. It argues that the causes for the success of this radical transformation of state-labour relations can be found both in the changes of the structural constraints and in the strategies of the different actors.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armingeon, Klaus. 2012. “The Impact of Political Parties on Labour Relations. European Post-Communist Democracies in Comparative Perspective.” In Party Government in the New Europe, edited by Hans Keman and Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, 113-136, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Armingeon, Klaus, Lucio Baccaro, Anna Fill, Jorge Galindo, Stefan Heeb, and Rafael Labanino. 2019. “Liberalization Database 1973-2013.” Bern and Geneva (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  3. Avdagic, Sabina. 2005. “State-Labour Relations in East Central Europe: Explaining Variations in Union Effectiveness.” Socio-Economic Review 3 (1): 24-25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avdagic, Sabina. 2006. “One Path or Several? Understanding the Varied Development of Tripartism in New European Capitalisms.” MPIfG Discussion Paper, No. 06/5, Köln: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.Google Scholar
  5. Bernaciak, Magdalena. 2015. “Beyond the CEE ‘Black Box’: Crisis and Industrial Relations in the New EU Member States.” Working paper 2015.05, Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.Google Scholar
  6. Bohle, Dorothee, and Béla Greskovits. 2012. Capitalist Diversity on Europe’s Periphery. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Green-Pedersen, Christopher. 2002. The Politics of Justification. Party Competition and Welfare-State Retrenchment in Denmark and the Netherlands from 1982 to 1998. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Héthy, Lajos 2000. “Országos jövedelempolitikai megállapodások. A múlt és a lehetséges jövő.” Közgazdasági Szemle 47 (January): 81-93.Google Scholar
  9. Héthly, Lajos, and Irén Ónodi. 2008. “Országos társadalmi párbeszéd - Az Országos Érdekegyeztető Tanács és a Gazdasági és Szociális Tanács.” Budapest: Foglalkoztatási és Szociális Hivatal.Google Scholar
  10. Häusermann, Silja, George Picot, and Dominik Geering. 2012: Review Article: “Rethinking Party Politics and the Welfare State: Recent Advances in the Literature.” British Journal of Political Science 43 (1): 221-240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kitschelt, Herbert. 2001. “Partisan Competition and Welfare State Retrenchment: When Do Politicians Choose Unpopular Policies?” In The New Politics of the Welfare State, edited by Paul Pierson, 265-302. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Komiljovics, Máté. 2011. “Government to Stop Consulting Unions on Minimum Wage.” Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 1 September 2011
  13. Komiljovics, Máté. 2012. “Unions Slam New Labour Code.” Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 30 January 2012
  14. Korkut, Umut, Alex de Ruyter, Manos Maganaris, and David Bailey. 2017. “What Next for Unions in Central and Eastern Europe? Invisibility, Departure and the Transformation of Industrial Relations.” European Journal of Industrial Relations 23 (1): 65-80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krén, Ildikó, and Zsuzsa Rindt. 2013. “New Labour Code Takes Full Effect.” Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 7 April 2013
  16. Lux, Judit. 2003. “Az Országos Érdekegyeztető Tanácstól az Országos Érdekegyeztető Tanácsig.” Eszmélet, 57 (Spring)
  17. Nacsa, Beáta, and András Tóth. 2004. “Social Dialogue and Conflict Resolution in Hungary.” Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions
  18. Neumann, László. 2005. “Trade Unions in Hungary: Between Social Partnership, Political Action and Organising Drive.” In Trade Unions Strategies in Central and Eastern Europe: Towards Decent Work, edited by Dimitrina Dimitrova and Jacques Vilrokx, 63-109. Budapest: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  19. Neumann, László. 2012. “Hungarian Unions: Responses to Political Challenges.” Management Revue 23 (4): 369-385.Google Scholar
  20. Neumann, László. 2018. “Hungarian Trade Unions from the Beginning of Transition to the New U-turn.” In Trade Unions in Transition - from Command to Market Economies, edited by Rudolf Traub-Merz and Tim Pringle, 317-346. Berlin: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.Google Scholar
  21., 22 February 2012. “Megalakult a versenyszféra érdekegyeztető testülete.”
  22. Népszabadság. 4 March 1999. “Alkut ajánlanak a munkavállalók.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  23. Népszabadság. 20 March 1999. “ÉT helyett Gazdasági Tanács?” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  24. Népszabadság. 22 March 1999. “Tüntettek a közszféra dolgozói.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  25. Népszabadság. 2 April 1999. “Bisonytalanodó kormánypárti támogatás.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  26. Népszabadság. 3 April 1999. “Elvi egyezség a párbeszéd átalakításáról.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  27. Népszabadság. 7 April 1999. “Nincs alku a társadalmi párbeszédről.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  28. Népszabadság. 8 April 1999. “ÉT-megszüntetés: a szakszervezetek még egyeztetnek.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  29. Népszabadság. 9 April 1999. “A szakszervezetek ott lesznek a GT ülésén.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  30. Népszabadság. 10 April 1999. “Lezárult az érdekegyeztetés korábbi rendszere.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  31. Népszabadság. 14 April 1999. “Az MSZOSZ egységes fellépést sürget.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  32. Népszabadság. 21 April 1999. “Búcsú az ÉT-től, éljen az OMT.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  33. Népszabadság. 9 April 2011. “Európa ez egyáltalán?” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  34. Népszabadság. 30 April 2011. “Elvárják a cégektől a béremelést.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  35. Népszabadság. 2 May 2011. “Fenn kell tartani az akcióegységet!” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  36. Népszabadság. 13 May 2011. “Bisonytalan többség.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  37. Népszabadság. 20 May 2011. “Egyeztetés a nemzeti konzultáció után.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  38. Népszabadság. 28 May 2011. “Megszűnik az OÉT.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  39. Népszabadság. 6 June 2011. “Gyomros helyett füles.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  40. Népszabadság. 30 June 2011. “Felkészülés a forró őszre.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  41. Népszabadság. 5 July 2011. “A magyarok nem akarnak ‘ingyensört’.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  42. Népszabadság. 11 October 2011. “Biodíszlet a kormányszínházhoz.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  43. Népszabadság. 12 October 2011. “Orbán: Ha nincs kijárat, ki kell törni!” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  44. Népszabadság. 3 December 2011. “Hatból csak hárman.” Népszabadság.Google Scholar
  45. Picot, George. 2009. “Party Competition and Reforms of Unemployment Benefits in Germany: How Small Changes in Electoral Demand Can Make a Big Difference.” German Politics 18 (2): 155-179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prugberger, Tamás, and Andrea Szöllös. 2012. “The New Labour Code in Hungary in the Mirror of the Regulations of the European Union and EU Member States.” SEER Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe 4/2012: 493-507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rindt, Zsuzsa. 2012. “Amended Strike Law One Year On.” Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 11 July 2012
  48. Szabó, Imre. 2013. “Between Polarisation and Statism - Effects of the Crisis on Collective Bargaining Processes in Hungary.” Transfer 19 (2): 205-213.Google Scholar
  49. Szabó, Imre. 2017. “Hungary: Inertia of the Old Actors, Constrained Innovation from the New.” In Innovative union practices in Central-Eastern Europe, edited by Magdalena Bernaciak and Marta Kahancová, 91-110. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.Google Scholar
  50. Scharle, Ágota, and Dorottya Szikra. 2014. “Recent Changes Moving Hungary Away from the European Social Model.” In The European Social Model in Crisis. Is Europe Losing its Soul? edited by Daniel Vaughn- Whitehead, 289-338. Cheltenham-Northampton: Edward Elgar, Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  51. Szikra, Dorottya. 2014. “Democracy and Welfare in Hard Times: The Social Policy of the Orbán Government in Hungary between 2010 and 2014.” Journal of European Social Policy, 24 (5): 486-500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Szikra, Dorottya, and Béla Tomka. 2009. “Social Policy in East Central Europe: Major Trends in the Twentieth Century.” In Post-Communist Welfare Pathways, Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe, edited by Alfio Cerami and Pieter Vanhuysse, 17-34. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  53. Tóka, Gábor, and Sebastian Popa. 2013. “Hungary.” In The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe. Third Edition, edited by Sten Berglund, Jokaim Ekman, and Kevin Deegan-Krause, 291-339. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  54. Tóth, András. 2000. “Attempts to Reform a Workers’ Movement without Mass Participation.” In Trade Unions in Europe - Facing Challenges and Searching for Solutions, edited by Jeremy Waddington and Reiner Hoffmann, 305-338. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.Google Scholar
  55. Tóth, András. 2001. “The Failure of Social-Democratic Unionism in Hungary.” In Workers after Workers’ States. Labor and Politics in Postcommunist Eastern Europe, edited by Stephen Crowley and David Ost, 37-58. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  56. Tóth, András. 2012. “The New Hungarian Labour Code - Background, Conflicts, Compromises.” Working Paper, Friedrich Ebert Foundation Budapest, June 2012Google Scholar
  57. Várnagy, Réka. 2011. “Hungary.” European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook 50: 991-998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Várnagy, Réka. 2012. “Hungary.” European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook 51: 129-135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Visser, Jelle. 2016. “ICTWSS Data base. version 5.1.” Amsterdam: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies (AIAS), University of Amsterdam, Accessed at 17 September 2018.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am MainFrankfurt-am-MainGermany

Personalised recommendations