The adherence of German workers to collective bargaining agreements, and consequently to the pay rates established through these agreements, has shown continued and significant decline. This information derives from the federal government’s response to an inquiry submitted by the party The Left.
According to the report, the number of collective agreements declared general mandatory for an entire industry has dropped sharply since the year 2000. Statistics show that in 2025, applications for a general mandatory declaration (AVE) were almost eighty percent fewer than in 2000. While 137 such applications were filed in 2000, only 30 were filed in 2025. Over the same period, the total number of general mandatory agreements has also more than halved, falling from 551 to 216. This trend is particularly stark in the retail sector, where the Ministry of Labour noted that 27 AVE applications were submitted in 2000, but zero have been filed since 2024.
This gradual erosion of collective bargaining coverage has been noticeable for years. Currently, fewer than half of all employed workers operate in businesses covered by collective bargaining agreements, compared to over two-thirds in 2000. The purpose of the AVE mechanism is to extend existing wage agreements to entire sectors, thereby ensuring that even non-bargaining companies comply with the typically better standards set by the agreements. However, the employer sector holds a powerful double veto right over the AVE process, a right the government’s response notes is frequently utilized.
Pascals Meiser, a politician from The Left, has called for a massive reform of the general mandatory declaration instrument. He argued that for Germany to reach the European Union’s stated goal of at least 80 percent coverage through collective bargaining, there must be a substantial increase in the number of agreements granted this status. Yet, Meiser observed that despite recent reforms, the instrument remains, ostensibly, a dull tool. He concluded that only by simplifying the application process and abolishing the employers’ double veto right-which he suggested contributes to a targeted policy of obstruction-could policy improve.
