In June 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada took a thorough look at why collective bargaining is considered a human right. In Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, the Court made the following observations: In the United States, approximately three-quarters of private sector employees and two-thirds of public sector employees are entitled to collective bargaining. This right has been granted to American workers by a series of laws. The Railway Labour Act granted collective bargaining to railway workers in 1926 and now applies to many transport workers, for example in airlines. In 1935, the National Labour Relations Act clarified the bargaining rights of most other private sector workers and established collective bargaining as “U.S. policy.” The right to collective bargaining is also recognized by international human rights conventions. A collective agreement (CBA) is a written legal contract between an employer and a union that represents employees. The CBA is the result of an extensive negotiation process between the parties on issues such as wages, hours of work and working conditions. In the United States, the National Labor Relations Act (1935) covers most collective agreements in the private sector.
The Act prohibits employers from discriminating, spying, harassing, dismissing or taking revenge on workers on the basis of their trade union membership when they participate in campaigns or other “concerted activities”, form company unions or refuse to bargain collectively with the union representing their workers. It is also illegal to require a worker to join a union as a condition of employment. [12] Trade unions are also able to ensure safe working conditions and adequate remuneration for their work. In Finland, collective agreements are universally valid. This means that a collective agreement in an economic sector becomes a universal legal minimum for the employment contract of each individual, whether unionized or not. For this condition to apply, half of the workers in this sector must be unionized and therefore support the agreement. Workers are not forced to join a union in a particular workplace. Nevertheless, most sectors of the economy are subject to a collective agreement with an average trade union organization of 70%. An agreement does not prohibit higher wages and better benefits, but sets a legal minimum, similar to a minimum wage. In addition, an agreement on national income policy is often, but not always, reached that includes all trade unions, employers` associations and the Finnish government. [1] Collective bargaining is a bargaining process between employers and a group of workers to reach agreements to regulate labour wages, working conditions, benefits and other aspects of workers` compensation and rights.
The interests of workers are usually represented by representatives of a trade union to which the workers belong. Collective agreements entered into as part of these negotiations generally set out salary ranges, hours of work, training, health and safety, overtime, complaint resolution mechanisms and rights to participate in the affairs of the workplace or company. [1] The right to collective bargaining is recognized by international human rights conventions. Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights identifies the ability to organize trade unions as a fundamental human right. [5] Point 2(a) of the International Labour Organisation`s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work defines “freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining” as an essential right of workers. [6] The Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (C087) and several other conventions protect collective bargaining in particular by establishing international labour standards that prevent countries from violating the right of workers to co-operate and bargain collectively. [7] Although the collective agreement itself is not enforceable, many of the terms negotiated relate to compensation, conditions, leave, pensions, etc. These conditions are included in an employee`s employment contract (whether the employee is unionized or not); and the employment contract is of course enforceable. If the new conditions are unacceptable to individuals, they can oppose their employer; but if the majority of employees have given in, the company will be able to dismiss the plaintiffs, usually with impunity. The right to collective bargaining with an employer enhances the human dignity, freedom and autonomy of workers by giving them the opportunity to influence the establishment of workplace rules and thus gain control over an important aspect of their lives, namely their work. Collective bargaining is not only a tool for pursuing external objectives. on the contrary, [it] is inherently valuable to have self-government experience.
Collective bargaining enables workers to achieve a form of democracy in the workplace and to ensure the rule of law in the workplace. Workers have a voice in influencing the establishment of rules that control an important aspect of their lives. [8] In 24 U.S. states,[13] workers working in a unionized company may be asked to contribute to representation costs (p.B. at disciplinary hearings) if their colleagues have negotiated a union security clause in their contract with management. Contributions are usually 1 to 2% of salary. However, union members and other workers covered by collective agreements receive, on average, a wage premium of 5 to 10% compared to their non-unionized (or unlicensed) colleagues. [9] Some states, particularly in the south-central and southeastern regions of the United States, have banned union security clauses; This can be controversial because it allows some net beneficiaries of the collective agreement to avoid paying their share of the costs of contract negotiations. Regardless of the state, the Supreme Court has ruled that the law prevents a person`s union dues from being used without consent to fund political concerns that may be contrary to the individual`s personal policies. Instead, in states where union security clauses are allowed, these dissidents may choose to pay only the portion of dues that goes directly to workers` representation. [14] The United States recognizes collective agreements. [9] [10] [11] It is important to note that the employer and the union are required to respect this agreement once a collective agreement has been concluded.
Therefore, an employer should seek the assistance of a lawyer before participating in the collective bargaining process. In Common Law, Ford v A.U.E.F. [1969][8], the courts have already ruled that collective agreements are not binding. Second, the Industrial Relations Act 1971, introduced by Robert Carr (Minister of Labour in Edward Heath`s cabinet), provided that collective agreements were binding unless a written contractual clause provided otherwise. After the fall of the Heath government, the law was reversed to reflect the tradition of legal abstention from labour disputes in British industrial relations policy. Collective agreements in Germany are legally binding, which is accepted by the population and does not give rise to any concern. [2] [exam failed] While in Britain there was (and probably still is) a “she and us” attitude in industrial relations, the situation in post-war Germany and some other northern European countries is very different. In Germany, the spirit of cooperation between the social partners is much stronger. For more than 50 years, German employees have been represented by law in the management bodies of companies. [3] Management and employees are considered together as “social partners”. [4] The Act is now included in the Trade Unions and Labour Relations (Codification) Act 1992, at p.
179, according to which collective agreements are conclusively considered not legally binding in the United Kingdom. .