CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AGREEMENTS: An ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Legal dimensions of international framework agreements – Sobczak Given the lack of a legal framework, the social partners have had to invent and test new solutions. Different actors representing workers have signed existing IFAs. All IFAs mentioned above have been signed by an ITUF, but some of them have been co-signed by the company’s EWC or by national trade unions. IFAs signed by international trade union federations All IFAs are signed by one or more ITUFs organized at sector level. Signing at this level avoids two main obstacles facing transnational collective bargaining at company level. First, it excludes the debates on the legal personality of subsidiaries and subcontractors. The sector-level trade union federation is intended to represent workers in all companies worldwide, the only criterion being that the companies with whom it signs an IFA belong to the relevant economic sector. Second, it avoids conflicts between the different national laws that define both the legitimate workers’ representatives as well as the procedures for collective bargaining. This process seems coherent with the aim of establishing social norms at transnational level to choose an actor situated at same international level as the company. However, neither national, European nor international labour law norms confer on ITUFs the power to negotiate collective agreements. Some national trade unions may not want to grant such a role to international federations, whose role they see only as coordinators of national federations’ work. This explains why, before signing an IFA, ITUFs usually consult national unions, at least those of the country in which the holding company is headquartered. <strong>An</strong> ITUF signing an IFA creates a problem of asymmetry between the two sides in the bargaining process. Whereas workers’ representatives are organized at sector level, their partner is an individual group of companies and not a sector-level employers’ association. This asymmetry contrasts with the existing legal categories in labour law, which distinguish between sectoral agreements and company agreements. It may thus represent a further obstacle to the recognition of IFAs as collective agreements as they exist at national level. IFAs signed by European works councils As of December 2006, 12 of the 49 existing IFAs were co-signed by ITUFs and the EWC of the relevant company. More and more companies are opting for this approach, in some sectors more than others. For example, almost all IFAs signed by the International Metalworkers 119
Cross-border social dialogue and agreements Federation (IMF) are co-signed with the company’s EWC. In addition, the negotiation process in several companies was started within the EWC, even if the EWC did not ultimately sign the agreement. In other cases, the EWC has a role in implementing and monitoring the IFA. This highlights the fact that the EWC is increasingly perceived by management as a legitimate — or even the natural — discussion partner for companies headquartered in the EU. Contrary to negotiations with the ITUF, talks conducted between the company and its EWC do not create an asymmetry in levels of representation. Negotiating with the EWC further allows the IFA negotiations to more easily take into account the specific issues of the company and to establish permanent relations between the signatory parties, which may be more difficult with an international federation whose scope of activities is much broader. There are of course weaknesses when IFAs are signed by EWCs. From a legal viewpoint, this action is a problem in that the Directive has not granted bargaining powers to the EWC, but has limited its powers to information and consultation (European Council, 1994). This is because the transposition of the Directive into national laws does not prescribe that members of the EWC be trade union representatives, whereas collective bargaining in many EU Member States is the exclusive domain of trade unions. If the EWC is to have the power to conclude collective agreements, its composition will probably have to change in order to ensure that only trade union representatives can be appointed to it. <strong>An</strong>other problem is that the EWC does not represent the workers of subsidiaries from non-EU countries, even if some companies have decided to transform their EWC into an international council for information and consultation. Furthermore, workers of subcontractors are not represented by any company’s EWC. When analysing these weaknesses, one must nevertheless take into account that EWCs are not the only signatories on the workers’ side: EWCs co-sign with an ITUF. Combining the legitimacy of both forms of workers’ representation seems to be a pragmatic solution, even if, legally, the status of the IFA remains unmodified because it is signed by two parties that have no legal power to sign such a document. IFAs signed by national trade unions As of December 2006, 22 out of the 49 IFAs were co-signed by ITUFs and the national trade unions of the country where the holding 120
Page 1 and 2:
CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AG
Page 3 and 4:
Published by the International Inst
Page 5 and 6:
Cross-border social dialogue and ag
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Contributors Dominique Bé, an econ
Page 15 and 16:
Contributors Nathan Lillie is Assis
Page 17 and 18:
Acronyms BWI Building and Wood Work
Page 19 and 20:
Introduction Konstantinos Papadakis
Page 21 and 22:
Introduction - Papadakis each with
Page 23 and 24:
Introduction - Papadakis above. Thi
Page 25 and 26:
Introduction - Papadakis tices unde
Page 27 and 28:
Introduction - Papadakis role of co
Page 29 and 30:
Introduction - Papadakis veaux enje
Page 31 and 32:
Chapter 1 International framework a
Page 33 and 34:
International framework agreements:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80: Cross-border social dialogue and ag
Page 81 and 82: Chapter 3 International framework a
Page 83 and 84: International framework agreements
Page 125 and 126: Part 3 Legal dimensions 113
Page 129: Cross-border social dialogue and ag
Page 169 and 170: Part 4 Varieties of dialogue and re
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Chapter 8 The ILO Maritime Labour C
Page 201 and 202:
The ILO Maritime Labour Convention,
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Chapter 9 A report on the European
Page 229 and 230:
A report on the European Commission
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Appendix
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291:
show all

CROSS-BORDER SOCIAL DIALOGUE AND AGREEMENTS: An ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?