The Long Road to Flexicurity: The Development of Job Security Regulations in Denmark and Sweden

Flexicurity has become a prominent policy recommendation in recent years. However, little is known about the actual development of flexicurity in the country most often associated with it – namely Denmark. This is particularly the case for one of the three ‘pillars’ of flexicurity: low levels of job security regulations. This article fills this gap in the scholarly literature. It demonstrates that regime attributes are often not the result of policy making by wise policy designers, but unintended consequences of contingent choices made with the purpose of winning shortterm political gains. Comparing the development of job security regulations in Denmark and Sweden, the article shows that the two countries followed a similar path until the late 1960s. In both, job regulations were part of collective agreements. However, in the 1960s the labour movement started to demand more restrictions, which resulted in the 1974 Employment Protection Act in Sweden. No such change happened in Denmark. Two crucial differences can explain this unequal development. First, societal pressure for regulation was larger in Sweden than in Denmark. And second, the Swedish labour movement was stronger and more unified. When the Danish trade union movement could have turned to the political arena, the 1973 ‘earthquake’ election and the resulting fragmentation of the party system closed the window for all-left majority governments in Denmark. Without reliable partners to the left and no majority of their own, Danish Social Democrats were not able to pass restrictive job security regulations against the will of employers’ associations.