development of research and results
2.9. The training pathway: improving union collective bargaining action to meet the challenges of digitalisation and MiFID II ( by Paola
Vin-ciguerra)
The challenge we set was to facilitate the search for the right balance between the organisational flexibility and productivity of financial firms and the protec-tion of workers in terms of labour regulaprotec-tion and health and safety.
Another objective of the action, more operational but no less important and ambitious, was to develop the synergy between trade unions at different levels, European, national and company ones, while at the same time improving their ability to negotiate and manage, together with companies, the policies and
(25) For the UNI ISO 22222 quality certification, two aspects are fundamental: the constant monitoring of the investment situation in a circular manner, based on the control of the financial planning process. The characteristics of the financial advisers in terms of ethics and qualification in terms of transparency and trust, as well as competence, experience and man-agement of any conflicts of interest. The UNI ISO 22222 certification is granted by the Ital-ian non-profit accreditation body Accredia, which operates under the supervision of the Ministry of Economic Development, through a process completely managed by third parties with respect to the consultants and organisations requesting it, so as to ensure fairness and impartiality.
instruments needed to effectively govern the effects of MiFID II and the digital-isation process in the workplace.
The entire itinerary of the project, not just the training course, was therefore oriented towards the construction of a network of trade unionists: 1) aware of the impact on the lives and work of European bank employees of the two phe-nomena underway, the implementation of the European directive MiFID II and the digital revolution, (knowledge objectives); 2) able to respond, with new op-erational methods, to the challenges of negotiation and to contribute effectively to the European social dialogue (change objectives).
Within this horizon of meaning, the pedagogical path undertaken, was aimed from the early stages of the project, to the empowerment of participants-union-ists, encouraging their disposition towards a greater assumption of responsibility and supporting their sense of self-efficacy, so as to become promoters of a change in their organisational context and in the dialogue with the employer counterpart.
Consistent with the objectives and the educational approach described above, the target group for the training course was identified among trade union nego-tiators in the financial sector from the project partner countries who, at the end of the course, would be able to put into practice what they had acquired in col-lective bargaining.
In line with the philosophy of the course, the partners also played an active and participatory role in all phases of the project, combining the research of the sci-entific partners with a fruitful activity of collecting and critically interpreting reg-ulations and agreements on the subject.
After the final conference on 23 September 2021, the participants committed themselves to disseminating the project results and negotiation guidelines in their respective countries and companies of origin.
2.9.1. The training course
The aim of the training course, held online on 15 and 16 July 2021, was twofold:
a) To improve participants’ knowledge of the impact of digitalisation and the implementation of the MiFID II directive on European credit institutions through discussions with scientific partners;
b) Strengthen participants’ awareness of their role as agents of change through the acquisition of innovative negotiation and business interlocution tools that can affect the organisation of work in the company.
The learning objectives of the training course were to enable participants to:
• Identify contractual action paths to respond to the challenges generated in the European financial sector by digitalisation and MiFID II with regard to:
labour law and contractual profiles; quality of work and health and safety of
workers in the workplace; company organisation and the demand for work/employment in the European financial sector.
• Increase awareness of their role as agents of change and knowledge.
• Exercise and disseminate a trade union culture based on competence, inno-vation and participation.
The teaching methodology used was active and participatory: the participants interacted lively with the experts and at the end of each scientific partners’ report were involved in individual or group reflection activities on what emerged from the desk research and field surveys.
The overall result of the two days of the course was a wealth of work in which emerged strongly the demand of the trade unionists present, almost all of whom were experienced negotiators, for a company system that is tailored to the needs of workers.
What also emerged was a conviction, unanimously shared by the participants, of a company policy that takes care of the individual and collective needs of workers through their direct involvement in management and employer decisions.
2.9.2. The evaluation system of the training process
The evaluation of training effectiveness constantly followed the training process and was based on the 4-level hierarchical evaluation model introduced in 1959 by Donald Kirkpatrick (26).
In order to measure the participants’ satisfaction (L1), but also to collect their perception of what they learnt and their further training needs (L2), an evaluation questionnaire was used, to which other more ‘qualitative’ methodologies of sat-isfaction and learning were added, such as the table round and the self-analysis at the end of the course.
As far as the on-going evaluations are concerned – aimed at measuring through-out the training course the level of involvement of the participants, on the one hand, and their learning process, on the other – various formal, but above all non-formal and informal tools were used. We are talking in particular about the work the participants did both outside the classroom (the analysis and collection of good practices, the spirit of collaboration and initiative in the various steps before and after the training event) and in the virtual classroom (group and indi-vidual work, interventions/questions in plenary, level of attention and listening shown).
Due to the limited duration of our action (2.5 years, of which only 2 months after the training intervention), the size of the target group (trade union organi-sations from 9 European countries) and the disruptive effect of the Covid-19 (26) J.D.KIRKPATRICK,W. KAYSER KIRKPATRICK, Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evalu-ation, Association for Talent Development, 2016.
pandemic, it was difficult to assess the organisational impact (L3-L4) within the formal project scope. However, during the last Steering Committee meeting, the project partners committed to disseminate the project results and guidelines and to report on awareness-raising activities after the official end of the European project.
2.9.3. The outcomes of the evaluation system L1 – Reactions
The final follow-up questionnaire, which collected the perception and satisfac-tion of the participants, showed a very high level of average satisfacsatisfac-tion (over 92%), and a very good awareness of the project topics following the training course.
Analysing the answers and especially the comments on the margins, the most appreciated aspects of the course were the sharing of knowledge between partic-ipants from different organisations and countries, the contribution of the experts and scientific partners, the working method and the positive and constructive atmosphere of the virtual classroom.
To the question ‘What progress has the course made for me?’ the most frequent answers were: a more comprehensive view; awareness of the different realities at European level; awareness and knowledge of all the key aspects of the topic;
awareness of the importance of the role of trade unions in taking an active part in effectively managing the impacts of MiFID II and digitisation on workers.
L2 – Learning
The group work, carried out in a well-structured manner and with great passion, showed a high level of commitment on the part of all participants.
The in-progress and end-of-course evaluations particularly showed the partici-pants’ growth in:
• Knowledge of the EU legislative framework and the challenges generated in the European financial sector by digitalisation and MiFID II
• The ability to identify pathways of contractual action to respond to current and future challenges in the European financial sector
• The competence on the contractual approach based on workers’ needs and scientific analysis of the context
• The awareness of a trade union culture based on participation and bilaterality
• The perception of being agents of change and knowledge.
The output, which emerged clearly from the participants during and at the end of the course, is the full, convinced and unanimous awareness that developing
company and transnational bargaining on the issue will be crucial for the protec-tion of all workers in the European financial sector.
L3 – Transfer (Transfer of learned skills into behaviour)
Level 3 of Kirkpatrick’s model was taken into account to assess partners’ dis-semination activities. The results diffusion and the activities to promote cultural and organisational/contractual change are among the most qualifying objectives of the project and the participants were involved in this delicate phase of the project and provided with a series of tools able to favour the process and facili-tate their task. In particular, a Dissemination Tool – an electronic document with project and scientific research outcomes, guidelines and policy recommendations – and a report form for the collection of dissemination activities and post-course initiatives were prepared and disseminated.