The Extent and Location of Collective and Individual Bargaining in Britain and USA
Introduction
The collective and individual bargaining systems that are in place in the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA) have numerous similarities and differences. This essay concentrates on the extent and location of collective and individual bargaining in these two countries. Collective bargaining is the process whereby workers organise collectively and bargain with employers regarding the workplace. In various national labour and employment law contexts, collective bargaining takes on a more specific legal meaning. In a broad sense, however, it is the coming together of workers to negotiate their employment. Basically, individual bargaining is same as collective bargaining. However, collective bargaining is relation of group of employees and employers while individual bargaining is the relation of one employee between employers. (ref) makes clear that individual bargaining is an agreement which concluded one employee's organisations and one employer determine employment relations between employers and employees with a company activity; individual bargaining is negotiations between a single employee and his employer. It is important to note that all the differences and similarities of the two respective countries could not be included in this essay due to the word restriction.
In the United Kingdom collective bargaining has become, and has received endorsement for many years as, the dominant and most appropriate means of regulating workers' terms and conditions of employment. An example of such an endorsement comes from Tony Blair (1999) when he stated that “I see trade unions as a force for good, an essential part...
... middle of paper ...
...eans that most bargaining is at workplace level).
In regards to individual bargaining, the USA protects the employee with the at-will doctrine. The at-will doctrine seems to be superior to the UK methods of protecting the employee, especially in regards to benefits received and instant dismissal. As the at-will doctrine as evolved through the courts during the last 50 years, it covers all aspects of unfair dismissal. Also, it seems that individual bargaining has become the dominate negotiation tactic for both employer and employee in both the respective countries, In the indefinite future, the US and the UK will undoubtedly continue to undertake a mixed system of individual bargaining, collective bargaining, and individual statutory rights in governing the employment relationship with the primary emphasis on individual bargaining and individual statutory rights.
To conclude this analysis on the basis of the labor’s extensive history, Sloane & Witney (2010) propose, “it is entirely possible that labor’s remarkable staying power has been because of the simple fact that to many workers, from the nineteenth century to the present, there really has been no acceptable substitute for collective bargaining as a means of maintaining and improving employment conditions” (p.80). In the end, it is important to anticipate unions and employers presently work together to find solutions that will enhance collective bargaining strategies and practices to serve the interest of both parties.
David Brody argues that the rise of contractual or collective bargaining relationships during the post WWII era formalized the relationship between employers and unions, but simultaneously began to put a break on shop floor activism. Explain Brody’s argument and, where relevant, incorporate Weber’s theory of bureaucracy.
The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. Role of Labor Unions in Labor Markets. In R. C. Free (Ed. 21st Century Reference Series.
I hail from Ukraine, the country that is still not a member of the European Union, nevertheless is definitely a European country. Therefore, I have always been interested in the EU laws, policies, priorities, regulations and so on to contrast Ukrainian reality with that of the EU states. Now I live and study in the country I have always had an innate and subconscious love to – the USA, the country known as the country of big opportunities. As the result, I became increasingly interested in the US laws and regulations, in particular employment and labor laws. To combine these two passions I decided to prepare a paper that compares the US and EU labor and employment laws.
Fletcher says that when unions and politics come together, people especially interpret unions’ missions and their power critically. He does not expand on how he titles the myth, but skims the surface on union consensus regarding politics. The myth is about the belief that “unions should stay out of politics and focus on what’s happening in the workplace” (Fletcher 65).
After the Civil War, many ideologies developed into the United States of America. Some of these ideologies included the free labor ideology and the producerist ideology. Free labor endorsed the belief that by removing slavery, or any other kind of barrier, everyone had an equal chance to try to get wealth (Farless). The producerist ideology tried to stay to the customary view of society and it stressed the importance of viewing the community instead of an individual (Farless). With these two ideologies, they had an impact on labor. By believing in the producerist ideology, people would be staying with tradition, and that leaves no change for our world. Many laborers wanted change, which led to problems for the laborers.
In Australia, industrial relations system has been shaped by diverse legislative Acts and political forces coupled with judicial decisions at both the state and federal level. This evident in the sense that there have been diverse amendments of the 1904 Act in light of increased pressures in the industrial sector. This elicited mixed reactions from the employees and employers, among other stakeholders in the industry. However, due to the disadvantages and/or drawbacks of the centralized system of collective bargaining in comparison to the advantages or positive aspects of the decentralized approach of collective bargaining, employers have favored departure from the centralized wage-fixing. Against this backdrop, it behooves us to explore the reasons as why employers have favored the decentralization of Collective bargaining in Australia.
In dealing with a person’s livelihood, and often, sense of self, it is of no surprise that ethical issues regarding employment practices are of great concern. The issues of employment at will and due process contracts in the workplace are among the most widely contentious in the realm of employment. Employment at will is the doctrine that employment may be ended, by either party, for good, bad or no cause at all.1 Due process, on the other hand, is the employment practice in which a person may appeal a decision as a means of receiving an explanation and the opportunity to argue against it.2 Employment at will is the standard in the majority of private corporations today and is argued for relentlessly by freedom of contract enthusiasts, however, it is becoming ever more apparent that employment at will contracts reflect the old corporate maxim where the single bottom line, profit, is accented and the well being of other stakeholders, in this case the employee, are of little or no influence. Due process should be accepted as the prevalent employment system as it shelters employees from the hostile actions of the more powerful employer, provides a stable, bilateral contract between both parties and portrays the growing ethical concerns of society.
Unions traditionally were “a continuous association of wage earners for the purpose of maintaining or improving the condition of their employment” (Webb & Webb, 1894, as cited in Bryson, 2011b, slide 7). Their function was to campaign for compassionate management procedures, equivalent bargaining power between employers and employees, and for fairness and democracy to be initiated into the workplace (Bryson, 2011a). Union activity at this time tended to focus on nationwide bargaining for industrial groups (Geare, 1983, as cited in Haynes, 2005), with their role seen as wage bargainers and in...
United States of America. National Employment Law Project. National Employment Law Project. N.p., Jan. 2011. Web. 18 May 2014.
A collective bargaining agreement collectively sets the terms on which an employer offers individual work contracts to each of its employees in the bargaining unit. A bargaining agreement, also herein referred to as a labour agreement, is a legally enforceable written commitment, which states the rights and duties of all parties involved. The labour agreement should be made in good faith and is intended to be observed and not violated. The National Labour Relations Act obligates employers and unions to bargain in good faith concerning terms and conditions of employment, including hours and wages. Like any normal contract, competent parties must enter into a labour agreement. However, a labour agreement is unique from other legal contracts in that there is no consideration involved and nothing tangible is exchanged. Many, but not all, unions require formal ratification of a new labour contract by a majority membership acceptance, which is determined through vote by the members. Until majority approval of those voting in a ratification election is received, the proposed labour contract is not final. While each labour agreement is unique to the needs of an organization and its employees, most agreements include five issues: (1) Management Rights, (2) Union Security, (3) Wages and Benefits, (4) Individual Security (Seniority) Rights, and (5) Dispute Resolution. Management Rights “Management” is the process of working with people and resources to accomplish organizational goals by making the best possible use of money, time, materials and people. The management process, when properly executed, involves a wide variety of activities including planning, organizing, directing and controlling. It is management’s role to perform all of these functions in order to maximize results.
The laws and regulations surrounding Industrial Relations since the 1900’s have, at each reform, placed tighter constraints on the amount of power unions are able to exert. The reforms have also radically increased managerial prerogative, through an increased use of individual bargaining, contracts and restrictions imposed on unions (Bray and Waring, 2006). Bray and W...
Traditional literature in the field of labor relations has focused immensely on its benefit towards the employer and in the process equating it to working rules. This has been so despite the field being expected to cover the process of, labor management, union formation, and collective bargain; all which are anticipated to create a positive employer-employee relationship. This relationship is said to be positive if there exist a balance between employment functions and the rights of the laborer. Also important to note, is that this relation is equally important to the public sector as it is to the private one. Therefore, to ensure a mutually conducive labor environment exists, effective labor management process and inclusive negotiation program should be adopted (Mulve 2006; Walton, 2008).
Collective bargaining may happen in several kinds of fields, ranging politics to sports. It allows appropriate settlement of disputes and issues that benefit both parties involved, producing a result that is not one-sided. Collective bargaining is “the negotiation of wages and other conditions of employment by an organized body of employees” (Beal, Wickersham, & Kienast 5). Four issues that are probable components of a collective bargaining agreement are:
Godfrey et al. (2014) refer to collective bargaining as a confrontational process that involves negotiation between conflicting parties in order to find a mutually acceptable agreement. The LRA acknowledges trade unions and employers’ organisations as representatives of employers and employees by providing them with specific organisational rights as well as methods to create forums in which bargaining can take place (Grogan 2015).