social model, they provided comprehensive as opposed to targeted social protection
(Ringold, 1999). This has led some to argue that there is limited disparity in welfare
polices between the new and old member states, since during communist rule these
societies enjoyed cradle grave welfare states (Kittel, 2002: 14). However, others argue
that "the communist welfare state was well adapted to the old economic order and –
precisely for that reason—is systematically and predictably ill suited to a market
economy" (Barr, 2002: 27). Opinions differ as well on the impact of various forces since
the collapse of communism. One study finds that, contrary to the expectations of
globalization, the welfare states in east central Europe have remained relatively robust, in
large part because of their "proximity to a trading bloc with strong welfare state norms
and commitments" (Orenstein and Hass, 131). Others see the EU having less impact than
international financial institutions, especially the IMF and the World Bank, which have
tended to push a "triad" of policies: privatization, especially of pensions; the
decentralization of social policy to regional level, and the means testing of social
assistance, the consequences of which tend to push societies away from comprehensive
social protections toward the "safety net model" found in more liberal economies
(Kapstein and Milanovic, 2002: 10).
Indeed, most countries in the region have begun to move toward targeted
spending. Spending is also lagging behind EU norms. According to a recent "Report on
Social Inclusion" issued by the European Commission, as a percentage of GDP,
aggregate expenditure on social protection – pensions, healthcare, unemployment
benefits, social assistance, family and child allowances – is substantially lower in the new
member states than in the EU 25 as a whole, where the average is approximately 27% of
GDP. The exception again is Slovenia, which is close to the EU average; other than
Poland, which has struggled with its pension system, no other new member state spends
more than 20% of its GDP on social protection (Report on Social Inclusion 2005: 47)
Needless to say, since the GDP's themselves are significantly smaller in these countries,
the absolute value of benefits is also substantially lower, a factor that might play a role in
decisions about labor migration.
One area where the level of welfare spending impacts labor directly is in the level
of spending on labor market policies. Despite the weak labor markets and high
Convention