This article shows that member state governments' ability rather than their willingness to implement directives drives uneven implementation of European Union labor policy. Analysis of 186 labor policy infringement cases against 15 member states between 1978 and 2000 shows that administrative oversight mechanisms that concentrate authority in the hands of government and exclude interest group participation enhance governments' ability to resolve conflicts with the Commission over implementation. Mechanisms that depend on cooperation with interest groups inhibit the resolution of these conflicts. This finding undermines the common prescription that increasing interest group involvement should improve member state governments' implementation of EU laws.
Aberbach, J.D. (1990) Keeping a Watchful Eye: The Politics of Congressional Oversight. New York: Brookings Institution Press.
2.
Bailer, Stephanie and Gerald Schneider (2006) `Nash versus Schelling? The Importance of Constraints in Legislative Bargaining', in Robert Thomson, Frans N. Stokman, Christopher H. Achen and Thomas König (eds) The European Union Decides, pp. 153—77. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Balla, Steven J., with Christopher J. Deering (2001) `Oversight over Time and across Committees: An Operational Measure of Police Patrols and Fire Alarms ', paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, 19—22 April.
4.
Beck, Thorsten, George Clarke, Alberto Groff, Philip Keefer and Patrick Walsh ( 2001) `New Tools in Comparative Political Economy: The Database of Political Institutions', World Bank Economic Review15(1): 165—76.
5.
Blom-Hansen, Jens (2005) `Principals, Agents, and the Implementation of EU Cohesion Policy', Journal of European Public Policy12(4): 624—48.
6.
Börzel, Tanja A. (2001) `Non-Compliance in the European Union: Pathology or Statistical Artefact?', Journal of European Public Policy8(5): 803—24.
7.
Börzel, Tanja A. (2006) `Participation through Law Enforcement: The Case of the European Union', Comparative Political Studies39(1): 128—52.
8.
Börzel, Tanja A., Meike Dudziak, Tobias Hoffman, Diana Panke and Carina Sprungk (2007) `Recalcitrance, Inefficiency, and Support for European Integration: Why Member States Do (Not) Comply with European Law', Harvard University Working Paper.
9.
Chayes, A. and A.H. Chayes (1993) `On Compliance', International Organization47(2): 175—205.
10.
Dai, Xinyuan (2005) `Why Comply? The Domestic Constituency Mechanism ', International Organization59(2): 363—98.
11.
Downs, George W., David M. Rocke and Peter N. Barsoom (1996) `Is the Good News about Compliance also Good News about Cooperation?', International Organization50(3): 379—406.
12.
European Commission (1995) Senior Labour Inspectors' Guide. Luxembourg City.
13.
Falkner, G., M. Hartlapp, S. Leiber and O. Treib (2002) `Transforming Social Policy in Europe? The EC's Parental Leave Directive and Misfit in the 15 Member States', paper presented at the 13th International Conference of Europeanists , Chicago, IL.
14.
Falkner, G., M. Hartlapp, S. Leiber and O. Treib (2004) `Non-Compliance with EU Directives in the Member States: Opposition through the Backdoor?', West European Politics27(3): 452—73.
15.
Falkner, G., M. Hartlapp, O. Treib and S. Leiber (2005) Complying with Europe: EU Harmonisation and Soft Law in the Member States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Garrett, G., R.D. Keleman and H. Schulz (1998) `The European Court of Justice, National Governments, and Legal Integration in the European Union', International Organization52(1): 149—76.
17.
Greene, William H. (1993) Econometric Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
18.
Haverland, M. (2000) `National Adaptation to European Integration: The Importance of Institutional Veto Points', Journal of Public Policy20(1): 83—103.
19.
Hille, Peter and Christoph Knill (2006) `“It's the Bureaucracy, Stupid”: The Implementation of the Acquis Communautaire in EU Candidate Countries, 1999—2003', European UnionPolitics7(4): 531—52.
20.
Hooghe, L. and G. Marks (1997) `Contending Models of Governance in the European Union', in Alan W. Cafruny and Carl Lankowski (eds) Europe's Ambiguous Unity: Conflict and Consensus in the Post-Maastricht Era, pp. 21—44. London: Lynne Rienner.
21.
Huber, John D. and Charles Shipan ( 2002) Deliberate Discretion: Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Jensen, Christian B. (2004) `Inspecting the Inspectors: Overseeing Labor Inspectorates in Parliamentary Democracies', Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions17(3): 335—59.
23.
Kennedy, Peter (1998) A Guide to Econometrics (Fourth Edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
24.
Kilroy, B. (1999) `Integration through the Law: ECJ and Governments in the EU', dissertation, UCLA.
25.
Laver, Michael and W. Ben Hunt (1992) Policy and Party Competition. New York: Routledge.
26.
Lupia, Arthur and Mathew D. McCubbins (1994) `Learning from Oversight: Fire Alarms and Police Patrols Reconstructed', Journal of Law, Economics and Organization10(1): 96—125.
27.
McCubbins, Matthew D. and Thomas Schwartz. (1984) `Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms', American Journal of Political Science28(1): 165—79.
28.
McCubbins, Mathew D., Roger G. Noll and Barry R. Weingast (1989) `Structure and Process, Politics and Policy Administrative Arrangements and the Political Control of Agencies ', Virginia Law Review75(2): 431—82.
29.
Markovits, Andrei S. and Otto Alexander (1992) `German Labor and Europe 1992', Comparative Politics24(2): 163—80.
30.
Martin, L.L. (1995) `The Influence of National Parliaments on European Integration', in Barry Eichengreen, Jeffery Frieden and Jurgen von Hagen (eds) Politics and Institutions in an Integrated Europe, pp. 65—92. Berlin: Springer .
31.
Martin, Lisa ( 2000) Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
Mastenbroek, Ellen (2003) `Surviving the Deadline: The Transposition of EU Directives in the Netherlands', European Union Politics4(4): 371—95.
33.
Mbaye, H. (2001) `Why National States Comply with Supranational Law: Explaining Implementation Infringements in the European Union', European UnionPolitics2(3): 259—81.
34.
Nicolaides, Phedon (2004) `The Political Economy of Multi-Tiered Regulation in Europe', Journal of Common Market Studies42(3): 599—618.
35.
Pahre, Robert (1997) `Endogenous Domestic Institutions in Two-Level Games and Parliamentary Oversight of the European Union', Journal of Conflict Resolution41(1): 147—74.
36.
Peters, G. (1992) `Bureaucratic Politics and the Institutions of the European Community', in A. Sbragia (ed.) Euro-Politics: Institutions and Policymaking in the `New' European Community, pp. 75—122. Washington DC: Brookings Institution.
37.
Raworth, Philip (1995) `Regional Harmonization of Occupational Health Rules: The European Example', American Journal of Law and Medicine21(1): 7—44.
38.
Ray, Leonard (1999) `Measuring Party Orientations towards European Integration: Results from an Expert Survey', European Journal of Political Research36: 283—306.
39.
Scheuer, Steen (1998) `Denmark: A Less Regulated Model', in Anthony Ferner and Richard Hyman (eds) Changing Industrial Relations in Europe, pp. 146—70. Malden, MA: Blackwell Press.
40.
Siedentopf, H. and J. Ziller (1988) `The Implementation of Community Legislation by the Member States: A Comparative Analysis', in H. Siedentopf and J. Ziller (eds) Making European Policies Work: The Implementation of Community Legislation in the Member States, pp. 1—87. London: Sage Publications.
41.
Steinmo, S., K.A. Thelen and F. Longstreth (1992) Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Sverdrup, U. (2004) `Compliance and Conflict Management in the European Union: Nordic Exceptionalism', Scandinavian Political Studies27(1): 23—43.
43.
Tallberg, J. (2003) `Paths to Compliance: Enforcement, Management, and the European Union', International Organization56(3): 609—43.
44.
Treib, Oliver (2007) `Implementing and Complying with EU Governance Outputs', Living Reviews in European Governance, URL (accessed March 2007): http://europeangovernance.livingreviews.org/Articles/lreg-2006—1/ .
45.
Tsebelis, George (1995a) `Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism, and Multipartyism', British Journal of Political Science25: 289—36.
46.
Tsebelis, George (1995b) `Conditional Agenda-Setting and Decision-Making inside the European Parliament', Journal of Legislative Studies1 (Spring): 65—93.
47.
Tsebelis, George (1996) `More on the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: A Response to Moser', American Political Science Review (90)4: 839—44.
48.
Tsebelis, George (1999) `Veto Players and Law Production in Parliamentary Democracies: An Empirical Analysis', American Political Science Review (93)3: 591—609.
49.
Tsebelis, George (2002) Veto Players: An Introduction to Institutional Analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press.
50.
Wessels, Wolfgang and Dietrich Rometsch (1996) `German Administrative Interaction and European Union', in Yves Mény, Pierre Muller and Jean-Louis Quermornne (eds) Adjusting to Europe: The Impact of the European Union on National Institutions and Policies. New York: Routledge.
