At the level of the education system we find paid educational leave in several
“Lifelong learning has not been the specific subject of agreements between the so- cial partners up to now, but it is the background for multiple efforts, including collective agreements, (...) to facilitate lifelong learn- ing.”
“Agreements between the social partners (...) not only cover workers with “regu- lar” jobs but also those in the growing number of ‘non-typical jobs’.”
CEDEFOP
countries in different forms; it is often constituted or implemented through agreements between the social partners and offers training facilities which respond to individual needs and which do not nec- essarily have to be selected in keeping with company requirements. The classi- cal example of paid educational leave which has been instigated by the social partners and guaranteed through legisla- tion is to be found in France. Here, the individual has a right to participate in a training scheme - average duration in 1993: 950 hours - however, the financing has to be approved by the funds organi- zations belonging to the social partners in line with existing priorities and avail- able resources. It has been observed that the share of paid educational leave is extremely small in comparison to the training provided by the enterprise: 0.2% of persons with a right to educational leave actually make use of this right as against 20% who participate in the con- tinuing training provided by the compa- ny’s training plan. This is why an attempt has been made in the last few years to couple paid educational leave more closely with company requirements. In 1994 the feature “training time capital” (capital temps de formation) was contrac- tually established and legally ensured; through this, under certain conditions, individual educational leave can also be taken within the framework of a company training project, i. e. when company and individual interests coincide. In Denmark too, there are possibilities of getting re- lease from work for continuing training on the basis of collective agreements and legal provisions: through the job rotation model, developed by the social partners and ensured through legislation, the grant- ing of educational leave (and other job release possibilities such as parental leave) to employees is linked to the re- cruitment of unemployed persons as sub- stitutes.
The financing arrangements for continu- ing training have a significant impact on the exploitation of opportunities for life- long or job-long learning. In a number of countries, issues related to the provision of resources for the continuing training of employees, for risk groups on the la- bour market, or for freely chosen indi- vidual qualifications, or related to the di- vision of resources between the compa-
nies, have been the subject of agreements at sectoral or company level. Examples for the sectoral regulation of resource endowment or resource use are mainly to be found in the French-speaking and the Mediterranean countries. The legal regulation - brought about through the activities of the social partners - on the “training account” in the Federal state of Upper Austria in Austria created an in- strument which enables the refund of the individual costs of continuing vocational training. Motivation to participate in train- ing schemes can also be created through the recognition of qualifications. This is why activities of the social partners are also directed towards new ways of vali- dating qualifications which are not ac- quired in formal education/training meas- ures or are acquired outside the conven- tional education/training system. The new system of “competence-based qualifica- tions” in Finland recognizes qualifications acquired through job experience and - in contrast to the UK NVQ system - integrates them in the vocational education and training system and relates them to the qualifications of the regular vocational training system. The social partners are actively involved in the implementation of this new system.
In several countries we find the establish- ment of a global system of continuing training through the social partners. In France this developed historically: through agreements between the social partners which were moderated by the State and subsequently incorporated in labour leg- islation, a system of (outside-the-com- pany) continuing training was built up which includes job-release regulations for individual continuing training and its organization and funding; however, in- company continuing training is not in- cluded in this system. In Spain a tripartite agreement and a bilateral convention be- tween the social partners laid the foun- dations in 1992 for a continuing training system based on social concertation and the responsibility of the social partners for sectoral and corporate implementa- tion. Financial support of in-company continuing training from the funds main- tained through employer and employee contributions is coupled with the estab- lishment of in-company or joint inter-com- pany training plans. This means that the national agreement itself already makes
“The classical example of paid educational leave which has been instigated by the social partners and guaranteed through legis- lation, is to be found in France.”
“In Denmark too, there are possibilities of getting re- lease from work for con- tinuing training on the ba- sis of collective agreements and legal provisions.”
“Examples for the sectoral regulation of resource en- dowment or resource use are mainly to be found in the French-speaking and the Mediterranean coun- tries.”
“The legal regulation (...) on the “training account” in the Federal state of Upper Austria in Austria created an instrument which ena- bles the refund of the indi- vidual costs of continuing vocational training.”
CEDEFOP provision for implementation right down
to the company level. A global system of this nature can set up the framework con- ditions for the provision of (vocational) lifelong learning opportunities, but the ac- tual implementation will have to take place essentially at the company level.