Negotiating authoritarianism and its limits: Worker-led collective bargaining in Guangdong Province

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chloé Froissart

Contrary to some scholars’ assertions, worker-led collective bargaining has become a practical reality in China, especially as seen in Guangdong Province between 2011 and 2015. This article analyses the practices and strategies of negotiation to show how this is possible in a regime that recognizes neither independent trade unions nor the right to strike. Labour NGOs have become a catalyst for collective action that enables workers to change the power balance with employers, official unions and local authorities and alter their response to labour conflicts. This article thus challenges the concept of ‘bargained authoritarianism’ by stressing social actors’ ability to carve out a space for negotiating authoritarianism despite obvious limits and tightening political constraints. However, collective bargaining will remain ad hoc and localized as long as trade unions and local authorities refuse to strike a durable alliance with workers and labour NGOs.

Tempo Social ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-156
Author(s):  
Baptiste Giraud

This article reviews how French trade union are coping with the neo-liberal policies since the early 1980s. It shows their divergent reactions, and how these liberal reforms are implemented in a context of transformation of trade union action: the use of strikes is more difficult at the same time as the relationship between trade unions and collective bargaining is transformed in a logic of depoliticizing their strategies of action. These developments did not prevent a resurgence of strikes in the 2000s. It reveals the limits of the trade unions’ power of political influence, that implies the use of collective action. However, strikes have declined further in recent years, revealing the weakening of trade union mobilisation power.


2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 688-700
Author(s):  
Marie-Armelle Souriac

The right to strike has been recognised in France, even as a right guaranteed by the Constitution, since 1946. Strikes in the public sector are subject to specific legal regulation, including requirements for minimum notice periods and, in some circumstances, minimum service requirements. This contribution examines these special legal features of public-sector strikes. It is necessary to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities of the management of public enterprises (or administrative authorities) and the government. The article also considers alternative (and new) forms of collective action and agreements. In the future there may well be even greater scope for the regulation of strikes to be covered by collective bargaining.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-151
Author(s):  
Giulia Giulia ◽  
Giovanni Orlandini

Introduction: the Italian way to internal devaluation; 1.a Precarization of labour and weakening of trade union action at company level (amendment of dismissal law); 1.b Circumvention of the CCNL by means of exceptional employment contracts; 1.c Downward competition on labour costs by means of outsourcing and value chains; 1.d Promotion of decentralized collective bargaining and its power to derogate from the law and freezing of collective bargaining in the public sector; 2. The trade union(s) strategies; 2.a Bargaining strategy; 2.b Judicial strategy; 2.c Confrontational strategy; 3. New challenges for workers and new challenges for their organization(s); 3.a Italian trade unions’ strategies; 3.b Alternative experiences of (and in favour of) precarious workers; 4. Anti-austerity protests: the involvement of trade unions and social movements; 5. Concluding remarks; Bibliography.


Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clarence Tshoose

The issue of organizational rights facing minority unions has been a quagmire since the advent of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995(hereinafter “the LRA”). This quagmire exists, notwithstanding the fact that the Constitution affords every trade union the right to engage in collective bargaining (s 23 of the Constitution, 1996). The acquisition of organizational rights by trade unions plays a crucial rolein as far as collective bargaining is concerned. It is through collective bargaining that unions are able to negotiate with employers regarding the terms and conditions of employment. Commentators have often viewed the LRA as favouring larger unions and as conferring clear advantages on unions with majority support at the industry level. Chapter III of the LRA regulates collective bargaining. Whereas this chapterostensibly promotes a pluralistic approach to organizational rights it is unequivocally biased towards majoritarianism. This is the case despite minority trade unions fulfilling an important role in the current labour system especially when it comes to the balance of powerin the employment arena. In light of the above, the legal quagmire faced by the minority unions in the quest for acquiring organisation rights in terms of the relevant provisions of the LRA is clearly illustrated by the decision in South African Post Office v Commissioner Nowosenetz No ((2013) 2 BLLR 216 (LC) (hereinafter “ the South African Post Office case”)).


Author(s):  
Johan Kruger ◽  
Clarence Itumeleng Tshoose

The advent of the new political dispensation in 1994 heralded the coming of a new labour dispensation. Labour relations and labour policies changed significantly from that which prevailed under the previous government. The review of the labour legislation framework was at that stage a priority for the new government, with specific focus on the review of the collective bargaining dispensation. The abuse of trade unions under the previous government gave rise to a unique entrenchment of labour rights in the Constitution. The drafters thereof were determined to avoid a repetition of this abuse after 1994. Section 23 of the Constitution goes to great lengths to protect, amongst others, the right to form and join a trade union, the right of every trade union to organise and the right of every trade union to engage in collective bargaining. In furtherance of section 23(5) of the Constitution, the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 was promulgated. One of the most significant changes of the LRA was that it now provided for legislated organisational rights. Commentators have often viewed the LRA as favouring larger unions and as conferring clear advantages on unions with majority support at the establishment or industry level.  It is within this context that this article examines the impact of section 18 of the LRA on the constitutionally entrenched right of every person to freedom of association, the right of every trade union to engage in collective bargaining, and the right of every trade union to organise. Furthermore, this article explores the justifiability of the impact of section 18 on minority trade unions in terms of international labour standards and the Constitution. In part one the article examines the concept of majoritarianism, pluralism and industrial unionism in the context of South African Labour market. Part two deals with the impact of section 18 of the LRA on minority Trade Unions. Whilst part three explores the concept of workplace democracy. Part five investigates the applicability of international labour standards in the context of the right to freedom of association. Part four ends up with conclusion and recommendations on the impact of section 18 of the LRA.


2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Malmberg

The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has made it clear that collective action taken by trade unions under certain circumstances might violate the freedom of services and the right of establishment under the Treaty (Articles 49 and 56 TFEU). However, the Court has not addressed the issue of which remedies are to be available against a trade union arranging such an ‘EU-unlawful’ collective action. This question was dealt with by the Swedish Labour Court (Arbetsdomstolen) in its final judgment in December 2009. The article discusses this judgment and presents an alternative understanding of the EU law requirements concerning remedies for EU-unlawful collective actions.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siqi Luo

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how different actors interacted to influence local labour legislation in the case of the collective bargaining regulations in Guangdong Province, China, using long-term observation and in-depth interviews. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses the case study method to investigate the process of local labour law-making in China. First, the primary data focus on a series of in-depth interviews conducted in 2014. In Guangdong Province, the author collected the thoughts of three well-informed provincial and municipal-level trade union officials, one government official, five scholars and lawyers, four enterprise union chairs and three labour activists. Second, these interviews are triangulated with legislative documents and the author’s observation of three public meetings. Held at various times from 2011 to 2014, these meetings were organized to discuss different legislative drafts on collective bargaining. Findings The six-year process of adopting collective bargaining legislation in Guangdong presents a complex picture as different actors joined the process at different times and engaged in different ways. Labour strikes were a crucial force in drawing the attention of both the local and central governments and functioned as a means to repeatedly make collective labour relations a policy “issue” for the government, particularly in 2010. Another actor – the local official trade unions – played a decisive role by not only putting the “issue” into the decision-making agenda, but by also providing policy alternatives based on workers’ bargaining practices. At the same time, business associations, using slow economic growth as an excuse, exerted their economic leverage to pressure for suspension of the first two rounds of legislation. Nevertheless, the new political leadership assuming office in 2013, using an adoptive but restrained logic, pushed for the enactment of the compromise regulation. Research limitations/implications Guangdong Province and its emerging collective labour regimes are not representatives of China, but they are at the frontier of the labour field. Thus, this case study was an example of the “most dynamic” interaction with the “most participative” actors and perhaps the “most pro-labour” of China’s official trade unions. Originality/value This paper is original and draws special attention to the dynamic process of the local law-making and the rationales of different actors in China.


2006 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rabiu Sani Shatsari ◽  
Kamal Halili Hassan

Collective bargaining is the best mechanism to attain a cordial relationship between employers and employees. It is also an effective forum to agree on terms and conditions of employment. In order to achieve such purposes, industrial relations systems in a country must provide legal mechanism to enable parties to bargain collectively with a view to concluding a collective agreement. The ILO has adopted a convention providing a framework for member states to enact laws that would facilitate such a mechanism. In this respect, Malaysia has enacted the Industrial Relations Act 1967, which provides among others a mechanism for collective bargaining. In this article we argue on the extent of the right of Malaysian workers to collective bargaining in the context of the ILO standards. Here we argue that despite the legal mechanism available that facilitates collective bargaining between the two parties, Malaysian workers and their trade unions face some difficulties in bargaining with their employers.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-185

The article is devoted to the study of the freedom of association of workers as an important element of the mechanism of the protection of labour rights, and also as a tool for effective social dialogue aimed at improving working conditions and ensuring the socio-economic well-being of workers. It is established that although the right to form and join trade unions under the ECHR is part of the right to freedom of association, its content is quite broad, as it is determined by the purpose of such association, which is to protect the interests of workers. Therefore, a wide range of collective redress, including the right to collective bargaining and the right to strike, are now an integral part of the right of workers to form or join trade unions. The study pays special attention to the analysis of the case-law of the ECtHR, which allowed the author to identify key elements of the content of the right of employees to association and determine the positive and negative obligations of the state that are necessary to ensure its effectiveness and protection. Taking this analysis into account and examining the national case-law, gaps in the legal regulation of freedom of association of workers in Ukraine have been identified, and proposals for their elimination have been made. Keywords: freedom of association; trade union; protection against discrimination; strike; collective bargaining; case-law of the ECtHR


Obiter ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
ME Manamela

Access to information promotes values of transparency, openness, and accountability that are important for a progressive constitutional democracy. Section 32(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (hereinafter “the Constitution”) provides that “everyone has the right of access to information held by the state or by another person that is required for the exercise or protection of any rights”. It is submitted that the word “everyone” in this provision, includes trade unions and employees and that the words “another person” in the provision include employers. Employees and their trade unions, therefore, have the right of access to information that the employer has, which may be required for the exercise or protection of their rights. Section 32(2) of the Constitution, further provides that “legislation may be enacted to give effect to this right”. The Promotion of Access to Information Act (2 of 2000 (PAIA)) gives effect to the right of access to information in general, however, for purposes of this discussion, the Labour Relations Act (66 of 1995 (LRA)) gives effect to the right through a number of provisions; including its sections 16 and 189. While section 16 requires the employer to disclose to a representative trade union all relevant information that will enable trade union representatives to effectively perform functions, which are listed in section 14(4); section 189 regulates the disclosure of information in the context of dismissals based on operational reasons of the employer.The above is in line with the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Collective Bargaining Standards Recommendation 163 (1981) which provides that “measures adapted to national conditions should be taken, if necessary so that parties have access to the information required by meaningful negotiation”. Section 23(5) of the Constitution grants every trade union a right to engage in collective bargaining. This right is protected and supported through provisions mentioned above which permit trade unions to request relevant information, which is important for the effective exercise of the right. This, however, has often proved to be problematic; largely due to the fact that on the one hand, trade unions need information, while on the other hand, employers sometimes regard this as an invasion of privacy. Employers often refuse to divulge information requested by trade unions as they think that the disclosure of information will also negatively affect their bargaining power or that sensitive information may get to competitors and jeopardize their business. Business South Africa (BUSA) raised concerns regarding the right to disclosure of information in its submissions to the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) during the drafting of the LRA as it regarded the obligation to disclose information to trade unions as a threat and an encroachment into management prerogatives. This argument was largely based on commercial secrecy; confidentiality and that disclosure of information would impede effective decision-making.In view thereof, it is important that there be a balance between the right of trade unions to information and the employer’s duty to disclose the information. This analysis will consider the relevant provisions of the LRA that grant trade unions the right to information and employers’ duty to disclose the information, to determine the balance between the interests of trade unions and employers regarding disclosure of information. It will also look at the position in the United Kingdom (UK) in order to determine whether there are lessons to be learned for South Africa.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document