Bargaining Laws Covering Public Employees
The enactment of rules permitting public sector mutual negotiation in the U.S states lacks consistency due to the disparities in desires and political goals of the diverse states. This means that in states where workers can enjoy collective agreements, they still utilize politics and mixed forms of habitual representation.
Moreover, some states set tough rules against the unions and does not recognize them formally. In addition, other states also ban negotiations, strikes, and any form of arbitrations leading to binding pacts with employees (Slater, 2004)
Impasse Resolution Procedures
Regularly company management and union leaders may fail to concur on contract conditions resulting into a stalemate. This development necessitates third party involvement to facilitate resolution of the two party’s lack of harmony.
Mediation is a procedure of settling these divergences where the third party tends to attain deliberate consensus between unions and employers (Riccucci, 2006). Arbitration becomes the last step in settling rows entailing submission to a third party any unsettled disputes for ultimate resolution. The procedure regularly finds application in industrial settings. Employers also utilize union shops procedure to handle impasses (Riccucci, 2006).
This entails employers accepting to maintain union workforce only on its payroll and may recruit non-union personnel given that they agree to join the workers union within a specific period. There is conciliation method where a third party conducts dispute resolution through informal means to try to settle the disagreements.
Public Employees Right to Strike
Public employee’s right to strike does is unnecessary since the public civil service system exists to address their grievances. The workers freedom to strike should be outlawed or constrained. This is because public employees avail services, which are central to the well being of the community. Uniformed employees are not allowed whatsoever to picket.
However, some employees have the chance to strike but with a surety that the consequences of their action will not result into problems affecting the public well-being. The government avails other means of settling disputes including arbitration (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008).
Public Employees Right to Interest Submission for Dispute Resolution
Public employees should submit attention dispute to ultimate and obligatory arbitrations instead of holding a legally acquired strike order. The importance of this is that the employees can have an opportunity to try settlement.
Legal strike may lead to more problems and loss of time and profits for the company. In addition, legal strikes may lead to victimization of other employees who may be discharged.
Arbitration may provide enhanced outcomes since even after strikes union will have to negotiate with the employers for better deals. An opportunity to achieve the same end coming parallel with striking, the workers need to chose arbitration.
Reasons for Slow Development of Labor Unions in Latin American Countries
The labor unions in Latin America apparently develops slowly than in the U.S. reasons for this scenario may include the rate of employment, which declines in many sectors. This results to companies discharging workers or failing to hire people.
The low number of workforce has had an impact on unionization level in the Latin America (Inter-American Development Bank, 2003). In addition, most youths on employment in the countries with little education have a negative awareness on the importance of unions.
The youths therefore fail to join the unions thus causing the slow development of the unions due to low membership. The wage availed to workers in the Latin America is also apparently low, making most workers to prefer satisfying their needs than donating to the unions.
Actually, this has compounded the problems of union development, which requires huge finances to run concrete union actions (Inter-American Development Bank, 2003).
Furthermore, most countries in Latin America with almost equal economy have diverse unionization rates and regulatory measures. Finally, political aspects including repression and derailment also have significant impact on the speed of unionization in Latin America.
Worker Participation in Western Europe
Worker participation is a form of workers representation in the companies, which take place when employees take part directly or indirectly in decision making in their places of work. The rise of workers participation in Western Europe resulted from issues including response to strikes (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008).
The workers interest misrepresentation during collective bargaining by union leaders resulted into some employees taking part in strikes apparently, as negotiations never qualified into addressing interests. The workers protested over poor employment conditions, methodological alterations, and coherence in wages.
The workers were taking responsibility in regulating occupation settings and rejecting employer’s plea to manage work places after strikes (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008). This continued to ensure that employees gained a considerable control of making decisions at work places through representations.
The response of the employers after strikes and employees taking responsibility entailed better deals and agreeing to workers demands of company representations and work councils. To sustain the societal order, decrees came up enlarging the authorities of unions compared to those of employers and making stable vital collective bargaining (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008).
Features of Japanese Labor Relation Systems
Japanese labor administration relations run through perpendicular outline where the corporation becomes a fatherly unit and care for its loyal employees. This system is known as enterprise unions. The close functioning rapport between the workforce and corporation strengthens the structures for worker participation and conciliation.
Enterprise unions lack authority thus collective bargaining happens in the broad company through well-harmonized approach (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008). Workers grievances are solved when corporation make enormous proceeds indicating a decentralized bargaining advance. The Japanese system also takes note of the bargaining settlements attained in the mother industries.
Remuneration gaps are mundane between managers and unskilled staff. The model of seniority becomes significant and pledges forever employment and when business fails, workforce are transferred other line companies. The business employs strategies to evade discharging workforce.
Finally, settling disputes occur through the process of shop levels (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008). The Japanese structures are not transferable to the U.S systems since they lack workplace equality. The enterprise unions manipulated by company management deny the unions independence.
The method of reconciliation of disputes through shop levels is not applicable in the U.S. in addition, the seniority approach may be disastrous to the U.S labor relations since it is unrealistic to keep workforce even during recessions (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008).
Transnational Collective Bargaining
The advancement of collective bargaining power in new business markets requires a few factors to be fulfilled (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008). The transnational firm must join the new markets labor organizations as a first prerequisite for collective bargaining. This enables the firms to bargain with the unification protecting workers in those markets.
The personnel recruited into the corporation also need to form a union to use in collective bargaining. The corporation must also abide by the national labor relations regulations in the new markets before bargaining can happen effectively. Companies also need to present its proposal on how it intends to protect workers (Holley, Kenneth & Roger, 2008).
This enables the bargainers to have an overview of the company’s mode of workers’ treatment. The company’s operations must comply with labor regulation practices in the new market including recruitment of workers, designing of payment for labor, and workers interest protections.
Canadian Labor Relation System
The Canadian labor rules have similar components as the U.S. after Canada adopted all the labor relations edicts from the Wagner Act. However, Canada has developed labor enactment with two outstanding features.
The features transferable to the U.S labor laws include separation of authority in the constitution between federal and the regional governments (Estreicher, 2011). This avails complete command over the business associations to the regions. In addition, federal law also avoids anticipation of regional rules.
Federal administration has full authority contained in the constitution to act on labor dispute concerns over few workers in industries within its jurisdiction (Estreicher, 2011). Secondly, Canada’s legislature structure of administration is also transferable.
This is where a prime minister under the federal administration and regional premier interested in altering is sure of attaining popular mass for passing bills. This ensures possible enactment of controversial edicts required for initiating innovations into labor relations (Estreicher, 2011).
References
Estreicher. (2011). Labor and Employment Law Initiatives and Proposals in the Obama Administration. New York, NY: Kluwer Law International.
Holley, W., Kenneth, M. and Roger, S. (2008). The Labor Relations Process. 8th Ed. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt College Publishers.
Inter-American Development Bank. (2003). Good Jobs Wanted Labor Markets in Latin America. Washington, DC: IDB.
Riccucci, N. (2006). Public Personnel Administration and Labor Relations. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Slater, J. (2004). Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900- 1962. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.