The modern European concept of collective labour relations is based on the social dialogue, which represents an opportunity for ensuring permanent social peace. The social dialogue is regulated by the provisions of the primary European law, conducted at the supranational level by the social partners functioning in the European social area. It is also an important model for conducting dialogue by the social partners in the EU Member States and for establishment by the authorities of particular EU Member States of the principles and procedures for the social dialogue in the labour law systems. The freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and quality of collective labour relations are the fundamental elements of the European social model. The collective bargaining as being a part of this model should promote workplace democracy, redistribution of resources, and efficiency of employment relations. However, collective agreements that may be concluded at the European level are still a novelty in the legislative system of European labour law and they do not play a role as the alternative sources of European labour law.
The modern European concept of collective labour relations is based on the social dialogue, which represents an opportunity for ensuring permanent social peace. The social dialogue is regulated by the provisions of the primary European law, conducted at the supranational level by the social partners functioning in the European social area. It is also an important model for conducting dialogue by the social partners in the EU Member States and for establishment by the authorities of particular EU Member States of the principles and procedures for the social dialogue in the labour law systems. The freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and quality of collective labour relations are the fundamental elements of the European social model. The collective bargaining as being a part of this model should promote workplace democracy, redistribution of resources, and efficiency of employment relations. However, collective agreements that may be concluded at the European level are still a novelty in the legislative system of European labour law and they do not play a role as the alternative sources of European labour law.
The modern European concept of collective labour relations is based on the social dialogue, which represents an opportunity for ensuring permanent social peace. The social dialogue is regulated by the provisions of the primary European law, conducted at the supranational level by the social partners functioning in the European social area. It is also an important model for conducting dialogue by the social partners in the EU Member States and for establishment by the authorities of particular EU Member States of the principles and procedures for the social dialogue in the labour law systems. The freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and quality of collective labour relations are the fundamental elements of the European social model. The collective bargaining as being a part of this model should promote workplace democracy, redistribution of resources, and efficiency of employment relations. However, collective agreements that may be concluded at the European level are still a novelty in the legislative system of European labour law and they do not play a role as the alternative sources of European labour law.
The modern European concept of collective labour relations is based on the social dialogue, which represents an opportunity for ensuring permanent social peace. The social dialogue is regulated by the provisions of the primary European law, conducted at the supranational level by the social partners functioning in the European social area. It is also an important model for conducting dialogue by the social partners in the EU Member States and for establishment by the authorities of particular EU Member States of the principles and procedures for the social dialogue in the labour law systems. The freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and quality of collective labour relations are the fundamental elements of the European social model. The collective bargaining as being a part of this model should promote workplace democracy, redistribution of resources, and efficiency of employment relations. However, collective agreements that may be concluded at the European level are still a novelty in the legislative system of European labour law and they do not play a role as the alternative sources of European labour law.
The article emphasizes that accounts of European social policy generally present a minimalist interpretation of European Union involvement. The sovereign nation-state allows no relevant role for the EU in social policy. The Union's sphere is market building, leaving social policy to citizenfocused, national welfare state, its sovereignty formally untouched though perhaps endangered indirectly by growing economic interdependency. Three welfare state models (liberal, social-democratic, conservative) are discussed in the article. The author highlights that the welfare states are national states. The article defines and discusses European social model as a set of European Community and member-state legal regulations, but also as a range of practices aimed at promoting a comprehensive social policy in the European Union. The European social model has developed alongside the different steps taken towards European integration, that confirms how this model is related to EU economic and political integration. The common values, that includes European social model, such as democracy, individual rights, free collective bargaining, equality of opportunity for all, and social welfare and solidarity are discussed in the article. The article gives the set of different elements of the European social model major of them labour law on worker's rights, employment, equal opportunities, antidiscrimination, etc., that can be characterized as "European society". The progress of European social model depends on the growth of European economies, the development of knowledge societies, and the modernization of work organization that requires constant adaptation. ; Straipsnio tikslas – nustatyti pagrindinius Europos socialinio modelio bruožus ir elementus, aptarti svarbiausias vertybines nuostatas, atskleisti šio modelio problemiškumą ir santykinumą Europos Sąjungoje. Tuo tikslu analizuojama socialinės politikos raida nuo Europos Bendrijos sukūrimo iki paskutiniosios Europos Sąjungos plėtros Vidurio ir Rytų Europos link, atskleidžiamas jos vaidmuo integraciniuose procesuose ir transformacija nuo ekonominės politikos priedėlio į savarankišką politiką. Straipsnyje aptariama gerovės valstybės samprata ir modeliai, pabrėžiamas jos nacionalinis pobūdis. Išryškinant valstybės narės nacionalinės socialinės politikos ir ES socialinės politikos skirtumus, pabrėžiami pastarosios socialinio reguliavimo uždaviniai.
Relation of Trade Unions and Works Councils. Representation of employees is based on the right to freely join associations. Employees implement this right at the companies by joining Trade Unions or by electing their representatives – Works Councils or employees' trustees. According to an enforced employee representation model in Lithuania, these representatives act together at the company level within the limits of their authority. Following enactment of a new Labour Law in Lithuania in 2016, as an exclusive right, Trade Unions were given the opportunity to initiate collective bargaining and to contract collective agreements, while the responsibility to implement information and consultation among employees was assigned to the Works Councils. The legislator, through such adjustment, sought to clearly distinguish the fields of activities of employee representatives' work, further avoiding competition and collision between them. However, when analysing each form of social partnership in a broader context, it is apparent that in certain cases work activities of employee representatives, while implementing their functions, still clash, which may lead to cooperation between them. Employee representatives have an opportunity to cooperate during collective bargaining, where in a case of agreement the Works Councils provide information about the employer to Trade Unions. Cooperation is also accomplished through information and consultation procedures in case of a dismissal of group of employees or a transfer of business or its part. At the same time, the new law has delimited the activities of employee representatives' work in the field of labour disputes – Trade Unions have been given an exclusive right to initiate collective labour disputes of interests, while Works Councils – an opportunity to initiate and represent employees in collective labour disputes of rights. However, when analysing employee representatives' work opportunities in the area of collective labour disputes, there is still a certain collision between the activities of employee representatives, which is proposed to address the representation of Trade Union members in the company to the Works Council. Thus, when the new regulation of employee representatives' activities was established in Lithuania in 2016, the cooperation of employee representatives was consolidated and their mutual competition was avoided.
Relation of Trade Unions and Works Councils. Representation of employees is based on the right to freely join associations. Employees implement this right at the companies by joining Trade Unions or by electing their representatives – Works Councils or employees' trustees. According to an enforced employee representation model in Lithuania, these representatives act together at the company level within the limits of their authority. Following enactment of a new Labour Law in Lithuania in 2016, as an exclusive right, Trade Unions were given the opportunity to initiate collective bargaining and to contract collective agreements, while the responsibility to implement information and consultation among employees was assigned to the Works Councils. The legislator, through such adjustment, sought to clearly distinguish the fields of activities of employee representatives' work, further avoiding competition and collision between them. However, when analysing each form of social partnership in a broader context, it is apparent that in certain cases work activities of employee representatives, while implementing their functions, still clash, which may lead to cooperation between them. Employee representatives have an opportunity to cooperate during collective bargaining, where in a case of agreement the Works Councils provide information about the employer to Trade Unions. Cooperation is also accomplished through information and consultation procedures in case of a dismissal of group of employees or a transfer of business or its part. At the same time, the new law has delimited the activities of employee representatives' work in the field of labour disputes – Trade Unions have been given an exclusive right to initiate collective labour disputes of interests, while Works Councils – an opportunity to initiate and represent employees in collective labour disputes of rights. However, when analysing employee representatives' work opportunities in the area of collective labour disputes, there is still a certain collision between the activities of employee representatives, which is proposed to address the representation of Trade Union members in the company to the Works Council. Thus, when the new regulation of employee representatives' activities was established in Lithuania in 2016, the cooperation of employee representatives was consolidated and their mutual competition was avoided.
Relation of Trade Unions and Works Councils. Representation of employees is based on the right to freely join associations. Employees implement this right at the companies by joining Trade Unions or by electing their representatives – Works Councils or employees' trustees. According to an enforced employee representation model in Lithuania, these representatives act together at the company level within the limits of their authority. Following enactment of a new Labour Law in Lithuania in 2016, as an exclusive right, Trade Unions were given the opportunity to initiate collective bargaining and to contract collective agreements, while the responsibility to implement information and consultation among employees was assigned to the Works Councils. The legislator, through such adjustment, sought to clearly distinguish the fields of activities of employee representatives' work, further avoiding competition and collision between them. However, when analysing each form of social partnership in a broader context, it is apparent that in certain cases work activities of employee representatives, while implementing their functions, still clash, which may lead to cooperation between them. Employee representatives have an opportunity to cooperate during collective bargaining, where in a case of agreement the Works Councils provide information about the employer to Trade Unions. Cooperation is also accomplished through information and consultation procedures in case of a dismissal of group of employees or a transfer of business or its part. At the same time, the new law has delimited the activities of employee representatives' work in the field of labour disputes – Trade Unions have been given an exclusive right to initiate collective labour disputes of interests, while Works Councils – an opportunity to initiate and represent employees in collective labour disputes of rights. However, when analysing employee representatives' work opportunities in the area of collective labour disputes, there is still a certain collision between the activities of employee representatives, which is proposed to address the representation of Trade Union members in the company to the Works Council. Thus, when the new regulation of employee representatives' activities was established in Lithuania in 2016, the cooperation of employee representatives was consolidated and their mutual competition was avoided.
Relation of Trade Unions and Works Councils. Representation of employees is based on the right to freely join associations. Employees implement this right at the companies by joining Trade Unions or by electing their representatives – Works Councils or employees' trustees. According to an enforced employee representation model in Lithuania, these representatives act together at the company level within the limits of their authority. Following enactment of a new Labour Law in Lithuania in 2016, as an exclusive right, Trade Unions were given the opportunity to initiate collective bargaining and to contract collective agreements, while the responsibility to implement information and consultation among employees was assigned to the Works Councils. The legislator, through such adjustment, sought to clearly distinguish the fields of activities of employee representatives' work, further avoiding competition and collision between them. However, when analysing each form of social partnership in a broader context, it is apparent that in certain cases work activities of employee representatives, while implementing their functions, still clash, which may lead to cooperation between them. Employee representatives have an opportunity to cooperate during collective bargaining, where in a case of agreement the Works Councils provide information about the employer to Trade Unions. Cooperation is also accomplished through information and consultation procedures in case of a dismissal of group of employees or a transfer of business or its part. At the same time, the new law has delimited the activities of employee representatives' work in the field of labour disputes – Trade Unions have been given an exclusive right to initiate collective labour disputes of interests, while Works Councils – an opportunity to initiate and represent employees in collective labour disputes of rights. However, when analysing employee representatives' work opportunities in the area of collective labour disputes, there is still a certain collision between the activities of employee representatives, which is proposed to address the representation of Trade Union members in the company to the Works Council. Thus, when the new regulation of employee representatives' activities was established in Lithuania in 2016, the cooperation of employee representatives was consolidated and their mutual competition was avoided.
The object of the work - the minimum wage. The aim - to study the impact of the minimum wage on labour market indicators. The results of the research showed showed that the level of the minimum wage is set by the state, employers and by consensus of the trade union. Currently, more than 90 percent of all countries in the world have laws and regulations that set a minimum wage. In the European Union, 22 of the 27 Member States currently have a minimum national wage, although countries such as Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Australia and Italy do not. These countries choose to set minimum wages through collective bargaining. The size of the minimum income is determined in two ways: as a certain percentage of the average income or on the basis of the minimum subsistence income. Economic indicators should be taken into account by policy makers when setting the minimum wage. If the minimum wage is set too high or increased too much could have an unexpectedly large impact on the country's population and labour market performance. The literature identifies 16 key labor market indicators that are designed to analyze, compare, and then apply a variety of solutions to improve countries' economic development. The impact of the minimum wage on labor market indicators in 2008–2021 has been performed. The analysis showed that Granger is the causal link between the minimum wage and gross domestic product, the unemployment rate, the inactive population, the number of job vacancies and labour force participation. This means that the minimum wage affects these indicators. The result showed that a one-euro increase in the minimum wage would increase the gross domestic product by 105.06 million, the number of inactive population decreases by 0.028%, and the activity of the labour force increases by 0.075%. The model developed between the minimum wage and the number of job vacancies is insignificant, so the impact assessment could not be assessed.
The competitive environment encourages organizations to find ways to increase the efficiency of their activities. A new approach to A. Comte sociocracy paradigm, which was oriented towards the creation of a new type of state governance, has been transformed and adapted to the practice of improving organizational management. The article analyses the paradigm of sociocracy as a comprehensive management system that enables employees to be involved in the decision-making process to work together. To identify and formulate the nature of sociocracy as a new paradigm for management of organization, the fundamental principles were supported by theoretical research based on scientific literature sources and publications of management practices. The methods of collecting, analysing, comparing and summarising of information as well as logical generation of conclusions were used for the research. The benefit of new management paradigm for organization and its employees, confirming the effectiveness of the practical application of sociocracy was found in the course of the research. The concept of sociocracy was created by the philosopher A. Comte (Auguste Comte 1798–1857) in the context of a new model of state governance (John-Stuart Mill, 2005). On the basis of sociocrasy a new concept holocracy was created in the US, which exaggerates the "benefits" of the organization and calls to forget personal needs and to devote to a higher goal in the US (Hallas, 2013). The Dutch pacifist and educator Kees Bioke (Boeke) (Hall, 2013) has practically implemented a sociocracy management model at the Bilthoven School in the Netherlands, which has existed till nowadays. Beginning around 1970, Gerard Endenburg developed a management and governance method called Sociocracy while managing his electrical engineering corporation, Endenburg Electrotechnik, in the Netherlands. G. Endenberg developed a management system as an alternative to the classical hierarchical management system. The sociocracy decision-making method has grown in cybernetics, systemic thinking organizations that have had a tremendous impact on commercial activity in America (Mirzagitova, 2014). In Lithuania, the developers of the websites "Meetings", "Talent Safari", and "Primum Esse" disseminate the ideas of sociocracy and teach company leaders about the new paradigm of management that enables employees to be involved in the decision-making process. The essence of sociocracy is to allow people to delegate decisions to expert groups. As all groups of professionals have to report to the whole community, and are selected with the consent of each member, the decision-making process takes place both from the bottom to the top and from the top to the bottom. This creates feedback circles, and thus ensures good communication throughout the organization. The groups of experts act as partly independent in discussing all issues in the meetings of their members, in which each member has equal rights. The groups (referred to as small circles, called Endenberg's rings) have frequent meetings for tactical issues. The decisions made in the group must be in line with the general organization policy. Big groups (big rings) rarely meet and deal with only very important issues. The group leader usually organizes decision-making process by taking operational decisions unilaterally. The method of sociocracy enables all members of an organization to be involved in the organization's management process, where everyone can express their opinion. One of the essential aspects of sociocracy is its dynamism, and therefore sociocracy can be called dynamic management, as it emphasizes the abundance of challenges in today's business environment, where the need for quick and just solutions is necessary. The demand for dynamic management creates some important general constraints on any techniques used: speed and coordination. One of the most important tasks of the company is to organize teamwork and decision making in accordance with the principles of dynamic management. Dynamic management logic considers human power to be an essential element of progress, and effective human collaboration is necessary for the results of the organization. Dynamic management is needed in order to be able to respond flexibly and act in each situation (for example, when it comes to changing opinions because new information is received or previous solutions failed) to enable people to act on their own, quickly and independently, in the same harmonious manner with others. The goal of dynamic management is to combine the paradox: to operate in a harmoniously changing environment, while moving forward quickly and dynamically; to save what works and change what does not work immediately as soon as the "voltage" is identified. The following are demonstrated by the dynamic management of the organization: the decentralization of individual areas of activity; human resources realize their potential freely; setting priorities for action; the involvement of members of the organization in decisionmaking. The introduction of sociocracy as a new organizational management paradigm in the business sector would provide the following benefits: improving decision-making quality throughout the organization, problem solving and teamwork communication, enhancing leadership quality, and increasing the efficiency of meetings. The content analysis revealed the fact that autocracy is not suitable for collective bargaining, and voting as a way of democracy does not allow to make good decisions; therefore, the new organizational management paradigm – sociocracy of practical application helps to improve company management and improve effectiveness.
The competitive environment encourages organizations to find ways to increase the efficiency of their activities. A new approach to A. Comte sociocracy paradigm, which was oriented towards the creation of a new type of state governance, has been transformed and adapted to the practice of improving organizational management. The article analyses the paradigm of sociocracy as a comprehensive management system that enables employees to be involved in the decision-making process to work together. To identify and formulate the nature of sociocracy as a new paradigm for management of organization, the fundamental principles were supported by theoretical research based on scientific literature sources and publications of management practices. The methods of collecting, analysing, comparing and summarising of information as well as logical generation of conclusions were used for the research. The benefit of new management paradigm for organization and its employees, confirming the effectiveness of the practical application of sociocracy was found in the course of the research. The concept of sociocracy was created by the philosopher A. Comte (Auguste Comte 1798–1857) in the context of a new model of state governance (John-Stuart Mill, 2005). On the basis of sociocrasy a new concept holocracy was created in the US, which exaggerates the "benefits" of the organization and calls to forget personal needs and to devote to a higher goal in the US (Hallas, 2013). The Dutch pacifist and educator Kees Bioke (Boeke) (Hall, 2013) has practically implemented a sociocracy management model at the Bilthoven School in the Netherlands, which has existed till nowadays. Beginning around 1970, Gerard Endenburg developed a management and governance method called Sociocracy while managing his electrical engineering corporation, Endenburg Electrotechnik, in the Netherlands. G. Endenberg developed a management system as an alternative to the classical hierarchical management system. The sociocracy decision-making method has grown in cybernetics, systemic thinking organizations that have had a tremendous impact on commercial activity in America (Mirzagitova, 2014). In Lithuania, the developers of the websites "Meetings", "Talent Safari", and "Primum Esse" disseminate the ideas of sociocracy and teach company leaders about the new paradigm of management that enables employees to be involved in the decision-making process. The essence of sociocracy is to allow people to delegate decisions to expert groups. As all groups of professionals have to report to the whole community, and are selected with the consent of each member, the decision-making process takes place both from the bottom to the top and from the top to the bottom. This creates feedback circles, and thus ensures good communication throughout the organization. The groups of experts act as partly independent in discussing all issues in the meetings of their members, in which each member has equal rights. The groups (referred to as small circles, called Endenberg's rings) have frequent meetings for tactical issues. The decisions made in the group must be in line with the general organization policy. Big groups (big rings) rarely meet and deal with only very important issues. The group leader usually organizes decision-making process by taking operational decisions unilaterally. The method of sociocracy enables all members of an organization to be involved in the organization's management process, where everyone can express their opinion. One of the essential aspects of sociocracy is its dynamism, and therefore sociocracy can be called dynamic management, as it emphasizes the abundance of challenges in today's business environment, where the need for quick and just solutions is necessary. The demand for dynamic management creates some important general constraints on any techniques used: speed and coordination. One of the most important tasks of the company is to organize teamwork and decision making in accordance with the principles of dynamic management. Dynamic management logic considers human power to be an essential element of progress, and effective human collaboration is necessary for the results of the organization. Dynamic management is needed in order to be able to respond flexibly and act in each situation (for example, when it comes to changing opinions because new information is received or previous solutions failed) to enable people to act on their own, quickly and independently, in the same harmonious manner with others. The goal of dynamic management is to combine the paradox: to operate in a harmoniously changing environment, while moving forward quickly and dynamically; to save what works and change what does not work immediately as soon as the "voltage" is identified. The following are demonstrated by the dynamic management of the organization: the decentralization of individual areas of activity; human resources realize their potential freely; setting priorities for action; the involvement of members of the organization in decisionmaking. The introduction of sociocracy as a new organizational management paradigm in the business sector would provide the following benefits: improving decision-making quality throughout the organization, problem solving and teamwork communication, enhancing leadership quality, and increasing the efficiency of meetings. The content analysis revealed the fact that autocracy is not suitable for collective bargaining, and voting as a way of democracy does not allow to make good decisions; therefore, the new organizational management paradigm – sociocracy of practical application helps to improve company management and improve effectiveness.
