We spoke with him on the day of our joint workshop at the European Parliament, Skills and competence to overcome the crisis (2 March 2010).
In the wake of the crisis, do you feel that the principles of flexicurity enunciated in 2007, especially with regard to human capital, are still valid?
I would argue that they are, although some researchers in Denmark are now saying that perhaps flexicurity is a bit old-fashioned! Their new word is “mobication” – which means “mobility for education” - for all people, inside and outside the labour market.
It’s true that we very much need this kind of mobility, but I think that flexicurity can cover this perfectly well. Perhaps what underlies this proposal is the feeling that, in Denmark, collective agreements have favoured security more than flexibility.
What are your personal expectations for Europe 2020? What do you think the priorities should be?
To my mind, education and training is a priority for all levels of the labour force. But my heart burns for the unskilled. I think it will be very, very difficult in the future for people without education to find a job. The risk in the near future is that in some areas there will be a large number of unskilled and unemployed workers, coexisting with an unmet demand for highly-qualified workers.
In Denmark, if you’ve unemployed and low-skilled but have worked for several years in one sector, our schools can make an individual plans for you. Of course the system is not perfect. Right now, you get six weeks for self-planned education. But an unskilled person can’t really manage in six weeks to acquire new skills and move to another sector...
If you think about it, the people we call “unskilled workers” are actually very specialised in their own specific area. What they lack is a broader education or skills set. And that is what makes it difficult for them to move to another sector.
Let me give you an example. Right now a lot of slaughterhouses are closing in Denmark, and moving to other countries with lower salaries. These jobs are not coming back. The people working there now will therefore they need to develop new skills.
But finding the right way to do this is not easy. If a slaughterhouse worker wants to enter construction, our rules now tell him, “no, you can’t train for a construction job, but you can train to work in a childcare centre”. Now I’m sure they’d do fine in that job too, but if someone wants to go into construction, they should be able to do so.
How much of a balance do you think we need to strike between upskilling low-qualified workers and promoting high-level skills - which are needed for innovation and competitiveness?
I don’t think you can say that one goal is more important than the other. Clearly, a more robust, innovative and competitive economy will also create jobs at the lower end of the spectrum. But my personal focus is the unskilled workers. They must acquire skills and competence so they can cope with future challenges. I have a fear that if we are not able to tackle the rising unemployment rate, we may no longer have jobs in industry to absorb these people, not only in Denmark but in the rest of Europe.
How can Cedefop help the European Parliament and the Employment Committee search for solutions?
Cedefop can continue to be very useful to us by providing us with analyses on education levels in Europe, and on the new trends in companies – for instance, on green technology, this is an area where we will be focusing on in future education.
Also, Cedefop’s work can definitely contribute to the issue of mobility. We should do more to implement the European Qualifications Framework, and to have all education and knowledge recognised and validated, including for migrants. We have to find a way to recognise these qualifications. We have not been good enough in transforming the education migrants bring into recognisable qualifications in our society.
Interview: Ioanna Nezi, 2 March 2010