Case studies
Links
Resources > Dutch case studies
ITS, the lead partner in the Mobility Centres project, has prepared case studies of companies in the Netherlands which have established mobility centres.

The first company profiled here is Stork Mobiel, the mobility centre of Stork.
Stork [Stork Mobiel]
Stork is a large conglomerate employing over 20,000 people of which 13,000 are based in the Netherlands. The company is involved in a number of sectors including capital goods, machinery, engineering and services to businesses. It is also active in the textile, food, energy, gas and aviation sectors.
Stork is highly decentralised with approximately 80 operating companies. These are grouped into five strategic business units (SBUs) which report to a small head-office unit. The SBUs are responsible for developing their own business plans and the operating companies within the SBUs often consist of several plants which are also highly autonomous.
The companies within the Stork group are facing continuous change and must contend with rapidly changing technology, shorter delivery times, shorter product life spans, etc. The net result that the demand for personnel is therefore increasingly subject to fluctuation. It is estimated that between 20-30 per cent of Stork's employees are "flexible" i.e. temporary or freelance.
The autonomy of the operating companies within the group also applies to personnel policy. The companies are free to reduce/increase their work-forces. Though this approach has a number of advantages, it has a significant disadvantage from a group point of view in that some operating units may have a surplus of personnel while others may have a shortage. Similarly, some plants are faced with lack of demand and idling machinery while others are attempting to recruit skilled workers in a tight labour market. But because of the autonomy within the group there was little interaction between the operating companies in terms of balancing out supply and demand for employees. In addition to the higher costs associated with redundancy payments and recruitment costs within the group, another issue for Stork as a whole is the loss of skilled workers which was often a consequence of its decentralised personnel policy.
The central works council in Stork along with the trade unions had sought for some time to enhance employees' employment security and career opportunities. In 1994, it developed the Techmobiel policy document which it submitted to, and was accepted by, the management board of Stork. The latter decided to carry out a study of labour market flexibility within the group and set up a steering group to oversee the process. The steering group consisted of representatives of management (including the personnel department), trade unions, the central work council and, at a later date, Start, the temporary employment organisation.
The study showed that there was large differences between the levels and nature of the work in the various operating companies but that there was an underlying need to make employees in the group more flexible and employable.
The steering group chose to establish a mobility centre as a separate company, Stork Mobiel B.V., in order to achieve flexibility and mobility of employees within the group. The task of Stork Mobiel was to organise, co-ordinate and facilitate the internal labour market and relations with the external labour market. The Stork Mobiel is a joint venture between Stork and Start and while it is under no obligation to make a profit -- unlike its sister companies within the Stork group -- it must be financially independent.
The Central Works Council stressed the fact that the Stork Mobiel should not focus solely on employees being made redundant i.e. it did not want it to function as a curative type of mobility centre. The Central Works Council feared that a curative type of mobility centre would lead to Stork Mobiel developing a negative image among employees. Instead it wanted that the mobility centre to function as an instrument to organise labour market flexibility within the group and to offer employment security and career opportunities to employees.
The Stork Mobiel was piloted initially in the North Holland and Rijnmond region in March 1998 and then in a second region a year later.
From the outset, Stork Mobiel provided labour market mediation, secondment and training/education services. Its client base included employees who positions had disappeared, staff members who were interested in pursuing job opportunities in other parts of Stork, apprentices and newcomers from the external labour market. Stork Mobiel would either second these clients in temporary work (some times with the input of additional training) or place them in a permanent job in one of the Stork operating companies or help them find a job in the external labour market.
Stork Mobiel has to earn its position within Stork by offering services to the other companies in the group. The operating companies are not obliged to use the services of Stork Mobiel but they must report their vacancies and notify Stork Mobiel of anticipated slow-down in the demand for labour. Each operating company also had to appoint a Stork Mobiel co-ordinator who was usually a member of the personnel department.
To aid the mobility process, consultants with experience in labour mediation were appointed in the two pilot regions. The role of the consultants was to match vacancies in the operating companies with employees who are seeking work.
Stork as a group has always been concerned with enhancing the employability of its employees through the provision of training. In particular, the group has sought to increase the level of training provided to craft workers with a view to broadening and deepening their skill levels. With the acute shortage of craft workers in the external labour market, one of Stork Mobiel's first tasks was to facilitate the internal mobility of craft workers within the group.
Both Stork management and the Central Works Council were active in promoting awareness of Stork Mobiel. The promotional activity was directed at both line management and employees.
An evaluation of Stork Mobiel indicated that despite the investment in time and effort, it had not met the expectations of employees and managers. The promotional activity undertaken by the Central Works Council found that not all employees were enthusiastic about the mobility centre. Managers feared that Stork Mobiel would undermine their autonomy and they feared that its work in enhancing the mobility of craft workers would result in them losing key employees.
The key findings of the evaluation of Stork Mobiel were:

The numbers of employees placed in either temporary or permanent positions fell short of the target set for Stork Mobiel;

While employees are familiar with the concept of employability and mobility, few are prepared to do anything about it;

Employees have strong loyalties to their own operating company and less so with Stork as a group. Placement or secondment to another company within the Stork group is regarded as being the same as being placed in a company outside of the group;

Although mobility and employability is regarded as problem area at operating company level, it is not yet integrated into policy planning;

The operating companies see Stork Mobiel as being an internal temporary work agency having little labour supply to offer. Some operating companies believed that for some categories of temporary workers they were better off using external labour supply agencies.
The evaluation of Stork Mobiel resulted in a number of recommendations. One such recommendation was that Stork as a group should become more pro-active in developing mobility policies. The management of the group preferred however that mobility services should only be provided to the operating companies that wanted it, thus maintaining their autonomy. The Central Works Council would prefer that all operating companies be required to use the services of Stork Mobiel in order to guarantee its future existence.