As We Fight for a Bigger Welfare State, We Should Avoid the Ghent System

Many Nordic countries use the “Ghent” unemployment system, where unions rather than the state administer benefits. Some on the Left have applauded this approach — but leftists in the US would do well to avoid it.

Professional rope access technician standing on roof (hub) of wind turbine between blades and antennas and looking up on the blade. Dramatic sky behind. Hands on hips

A technician performs maintenance to a wind turbine in Sweden. (Charlie Chesvick / Getty Images)


In the United States, unemployment benefits are financed by employer-side payroll taxes and then administered by state agencies. The benefit amounts are earnings-related, meaning they are designed to replace a percentage of an individual’s prior earnings up to a point. There is technically a minimum unemployment benefit level that eligible recipients cannot fall below, but it is very low, and eligibility for this benefit does not extend to all unemployed people, only unemployed people with a sufficient work history.

Overall, the US unemployment system is quite bad, both in its design and in its practical functioning. This naturally raises the question of whether other countries do it better and, if so, whether we should copy them.

One alternative approach to unemployment benefits is called the Ghent system. Broadly speaking, in this system, unemployment benefits are managed by unions and financed by union member dues. This system originated in Ghent, Belgium, but has taken its most prominent form in the Nordic countries.

Sorry, but this article is available to active subscribers only. Please log in or become a subscriber.