The Management of Redundancies in Europe: The Case of Germany

The paper presents the findings of comparative and interdisciplinary legal and economic study on managing labour redundancies in seven EU member countries. It is structured for immediate comparability between the systems examined. The introductory section contains an account of the evolution of the German labour market, with special reference to redundancy trends, of the features of the programmes for managing redundancies, of the roles of firms and the ‘external environment’ in handling workforce adjustments. The second section presents a map of policies that work to prevent labour redundancies (preventive measures) such as flexibility, training etc. Next, the instruments for handling temporary labour redundancies (retentive measures) are examined (e.g. short-time working, temporary layoffs etc.). The following section is devoted to instruments and programmes involved in the management of permanent labour redundancies (expulsive measures), e.g. collective dismissals, severance pay etc. The final section provides an overall assessment of the German system for managing labour redundancies, and briefly discusses the national debate on the prospects for reform, in light of the principles and policies of convergence set forth by the European Commission.     

Towards a re-conceptualization of flow in social contexts

The antecedents and outcomes of individual-level flow are well documented in a large body of literature. However, flow does not only occur in isolation - quite to the contrary, recent evidence suggests that social interaction can facilitate the experience of flow. Therefore, we propose a taxonomy, which distinguishes five different flow states according to two global factors: interactional synchrony and self-other overlap. Solitary flow bears all characteristics developed by Csikszentmihalyi. Co-active flow is facilitated or hampered by the presence of other people. Private interactive flow emerges on the grounds of a minimal unidirectional interaction with more passive others; only the active subject is in flow. In shared interactive flow, a fully synchronized activity between group members takes place and all group members are in flow. In group flow, all members reach a level of complete self-other overlap with the group, which leads to a collective experience of flow on the group-level. In addition to differences and commonalities of the different types of flow, suggestions for how to induce and study social flow are discussed.